Indiana's new anti-abortion law.

[paganbaby]

13 hours ago, PennySycamore said:

@paganbaby, somebody needs to adapt that knitted uterus pattern for two circulars or the Magic Loop.  Some of us are allergic to DPNs.

I don't mind using the smaller size DPNs for socks, but I agree the larger ones are a pain unless you only have a handful of stitches on the needles, such as when making an I-cord. Otherwise, the stitches are constantly dropping off. I've never used Magic Loop, and I have enough trouble following patterns, much less writing them, but I think you could move to two circulars for the uterus once you've done a few increases. You could do the Fallopian tubes on a small circular if your allergy is really terrible.

[Black Aliss]

On 3/28/2016 at 7:33 PM, Lillybee said:

I do remember when we used to snark on a fundie who buried her sanitary napkins because she thought she had an early miscarriage. Those days are over. This is getting scary.

That was a whole different level of crazy. I almost felt bad snarking on her because she was so clearly not getting the help she needed to treat whatever mental illness she had.

On 3/28/2016 at 2:38 PM, Khan said:

As for those tiny caskets.

Fuck those manufacturers so hard.A miscarriage so early (first weeks) on does not even vaguely look humanoid. It's a blob. Easily mistaken for a clot. I'm not buying caskets or cremating every clot I pass out of fear that it might be an early stage miscarriage. 

This. I've had 7 miscarriages that I know about. In only one was I able to distinguish the fetus from the huge number of clots that I passed. I suspect another side-effect of this law will be to make pregnant women less willing to see a doctor during their first trimester. If there's no medical record, there's no pregnancy, right?

[Childless]

I just don't see how making it illegal to abort a disabled fetus can stop people from doing it.  If you have tests run at your OB/GYN and find out the fetus is going to be severely disabled, what's to stop a person from leaving that doctor's office, going to the nearest abortion clinic and terminating?  You can certainly lie and say you want to terminate due to economic or life circumstances.  How would the clinic know the truth?

[PennySycamore]

@Childless a pregnant woman could do that IF she found out that her fetus had a disability by 20 weeks.  Some of these laws outlaw all abortion beyond 20 weeks and some laws actually restrict it earlier than 20 weeks.

ETA:  There are damn few abortion clinics in the US that offer terminations past 20 weeks anyway.

As we used to say years ago, Abortion on demand and without apology!

[sawasdee]

2 minutes ago, PennySycamore said:

@clueliss, a pregnant woman could do that IF she found out that her fetus had a disability by 20 weeks.  Some of these laws outlaw all abortion beyond 20 weeks and some laws actually restrict it earlier than 20 weeks.  

I think you meant @Childless - clueliss is more clued up....runs and hides

[PennySycamore]

3 minutes ago, sawasdee said:

I think you meant @Childless - clueliss is more clued up....runs and hides

You are so right @sawasdee!  I went back and changed it.  @clueliss,  I owe you a big apology!!  I should have known that the post was unlike you!

[Mercer]

On 3/28/2016 at 10:22 PM, Lillybee said:

It bans aborting severely disabled fetuses and goes on from there.

So naturally the lawmakers in Indiana are also passing major increases in funding for services for people with disabilities and for special education, right? And obviously they're going to provide more funding for housing assistance, supplemental nutrition programs, and a welfare program with broad eligibility so that parents who are caring for children with severe disabilities are able to stay home and look after them? Surely 24/7 nursing care will be provided to children with medically fragile conditions for free or significantly reduced costs?

I can also only assume that Pence will be personally assuming guardianship for some adults with Down Syndrome who will never be able to live independently but have outlived their parents?

Because this is really about disability rights, not punishing women for having sex, right?

Yeah. Didn't think so.

[sawasdee]

Thanks, @Mercer. Exactly what I wanted to say.

The sheer hypocrisy of these sexist bigots somehow seems to escape the attention of their supporters - oh, wait. They're sexist bigots too.....And sexist bigotry has become part of the language of some 'christian' groups.

How have some churches and preachers managed to pervert the message of Xtianity into this hatefulness? There is NOTHING in the Bible about the sinfulness of using the medical knowledge that G-d has allowed to become available to prevent the suffering of non viable foetuses. Nor is there any passage explicitly forbidding abortion. But there is a passage that says a child of less than one month has no value, and nor does its life. Child, not foetus*. Not until less than 200 years ago was there any church which outright condemned abortion

The pro life, anti abortion movement  is all a recent  (in the last 25 or so years) political phenomenon, cynically used to unite the more conservative Xtians of all kinds behind one agenda, which can then be used to advance a particular political message. That the rest of that message significantly disadvantages the poorer sections of society, and benefits the super rich, in direct contradiction of Christ's message, seems to have escaped the attention of most who espouse it.

* And no, I am not supporting infanticide - I am just saying the Bible doesn't condemn it.

[pook]

re: caring for a disabled child.  lets break this down for a minute and consider a child for instance inflicted by the Zika virus on the more extreme spectrum, shall we?  I don't have a cost breakdown but consider the following extra, how shall I put this, *stuff*.  This is just what I can think of off the top of my head.

therapy almost daily:

PT, OT, speech, nursing, respite care.

transportation:

frequent appointments with specialists, emergency visits to the ER for seizures, respiratory infections, appropriate seating ie. car seats for a disabled child, modified vehicle for wheelchair, access to appropriate care and the cost of living associated with needing to live in close proximity to a children's hospital, parking, food, gas, lodging.

feeding and breathing and toileting:

feeding tube supplies and tubing, syringes, formula or if a blended diet then super healthy and expensive food items, oxygen at home with supplies, suctioning at home with supplies, diapers for a life-time, urinary catheters.

assistive devices:

standers, wheelchairs, bath lifts, specialized chairs just for sitting, safe sleeping arrangements/bed, specialized support surfaces to prevent pressure sores (bed sores) and very expensive, home modifications to accommodate assistive devices including larger door frames, walk-in wheelchair access shower.

medications:

many for seizure control that must be compounded and properly mixed since these normally come in adult doses and not all pharmacies have this capability, complimentary therapies including cannabis oils.

This is all I have for now.  I have dinner guests arriving shortly.

 

[Gobsmacked]

On 28 March 2016 at 3:33 AM, Lillybee said:

I do remember when we used to snark on a fundie who buried her sanitary napkins because she thought she had an early miscarriage. Those days are over. This is getting scary.

WHAT????

[Cleopatra7]

Anti-abortion discourse that purports to be supporting disability rights focuses almost exclusively on the types of disabilities that can be determined in-utero, especially Down's Syndrome. But there are many other types of disabilities that one can have that can't be determined in-utero or can happen at other stages in life: autism spectrum disorders, bi-polar disorder, schizophrenia, severe injuries caused by car accidents, meningitis-related injuries, learning disorders, etc. If nothing else, many people will become disabled by some aspect of the aging process, should they manage to live that long. Yet, there is little to nothing from anti-abortion groups about how to improve the lives of actually existing disabled people. For example, many disabled people can't drive for a variety of reasons, yet many ostensibly "pro-life" people are against expanding public transit services, largely because of the racialized rhetoric that accompanies discussion of mass transit (here I'm speaking specifically of discussion that have happened in my home state of Georgia). I've looked through the Culture of Life Institute's website (www.cultureoflife.org) and found a lot of articles denouncing abortion, euthanasia, and the like, but nothing about empowering disabled people to become self-advocates or help them become as independent as their circumstances allow. Quite tellingly, the CLI has an issue with the UN's Disability Convention because it says disabled people have "reproductive rights":

http://www.cultureoflife.org/2005/02/04/controversy-surrounds-un-disabilities-negotiation/

Anti-abortion activists seem to think that disabled people should just be "joys" to their caretakers without considering that they may have wants and needs that will differ from their guardians, including those of a sexual nature. Obviously, the nature and appropriateness of these needs and wants will depend on the situation, but to take the example of individuals with Down's Syndrome, it seems quite clear that they span the usual spectrum in terms of sexuality and professionals believe that they deserve the right to have appropriate intimate relationships. Yet, the type of language I see in the CLI and other such "pro-life" organizations still maintain the view that Down's Syndrome individuals are simply "big children" with no sexual feelings who only exist to make their guardians feel good about themselves. This sort of rhetoric is not only condescending, but objectifying as well, since it treats disabled individuals as things that only have worth to make other people feel better about themselves. I have found that individuals who do try to self-advocate are dismissed as being "not really disabled" presumably because if they were "really disabled" then they'd just be letting the "normal people" run the show and not complain. This is actually what happened when adults with MD first started to complain about the Jerry Lewis telethon; they were painted as "ingrates" and "malcontents" who should have been "thankful" that a big star like Lewis was taking an interest in their tragic plight. You see the same kind of attitude regarding adults with ASD and Autism Speaks today.

[Toothfairy]

5 hours ago, pook said:

re: caring for a disabled child.  lets break this down for a minute and consider a child for instance inflicted by the Zika virus on the more extreme spectrum, shall we?  I don't have a cost breakdown but consider the following extra, how shall I put this, *stuff*.  This is just what I can think of off the top of my head.

therapy almost daily:

PT, OT, speech, nursing, respite care.

transportation:

frequent appointments with specialists, emergency visits to the ER for seizures, respiratory infections, appropriate seating ie. car seats for a disabled child, modified vehicle for wheelchair, access to appropriate care and the cost of living associated with needing to live in close proximity to a children's hospital, parking, food, gas, lodging.

feeding and breathing and toileting:

feeding tube supplies and tubing, syringes, formula or if a blended diet then super healthy and expensive food items, oxygen at home with supplies, suctioning at home with supplies, diapers for a life-time, urinary catheters.

assistive devices:

standers, wheelchairs, bath lifts, specialized chairs just for sitting, safe sleeping arrangements/bed, specialized support surfaces to prevent pressure sores (bed sores) and very expensive, home modifications to accommodate assistive devices including larger door frames, walk-in wheelchair access shower.

medications:

many for seizure control that must be compounded and properly mixed since these normally come in adult doses and not all pharmacies have this capability, complimentary therapies including cannabis oils.

This is all I have for now.  I have dinner guests arriving shortly.

 

This is why I fucking hate it when the prolife movement uses children with medical problems in their propaganda. I've fostered kids with medical problems. It's hard as hell. I remember having 7-9 appointments a week seeing doctors,therapist,and specialists. It's not easy. The people who talk shit are the ones who never had to take care of a disabled child or ones with medical issues. 

5 hours ago, Gobsmacked said:

WHAT????

Who's the fundie

On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 2:00 PM, sawasdee said:

I know this sounds ridiculous, but I really cannot follow the mindset that:

a) Bans proper education about sex and birth control

Refuses to make birth control freely available

c) Demands that unwanted pregnancies are carried to term, by severely limiting, and hoping to ban, the availability of abortion.

d) Refuses to provide proper medical, social or educational provision for the resulting children.

The only way this works is if you issue and lock chastity belts on every female at age 10.

Welcome to America, where nothing makes sense. 

[PsyD2013]

This op-ed discusses the harm Indiana's new law will inflict 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-indiana-abortion-law-doctor-perspective-20160402-story.html

No woman should be forced to carry a child to term that will die before, during, or shortly after birth.  Fifteen years ago, my daughter was born with a lethal trisomy. I wanted to terminate the pregnancy, but my then very Catholic husband and his family convinced he that I should let her have a chance at life because the  doctors could be wrong.  She lived for 11 weeks and 5 days.  I can still remember her cries, she cried as if she were in severe pain. All of her care fell to me because the ex and his family were freaked out by her appearance.  This is going to sound cruel, but I was relieved when she took her last breath because she wasn't in pain anymore.

As FJer's have indicated in previous posts, there are no measures to increase funding or services for individuals with disabilities and their families once the child is born.  Funding for human services is gutted.  Severely disabled children (if they live that long) are entitled to special education services until the age of 21.  Will Indiana provide a higher budget for educational spending?  

[Childless]

18 hours ago, PennySycamore said:

@Childless a pregnant woman could do that IF she found out that her fetus had a disability by 20 weeks.  Some of these laws outlaw all abortion beyond 20 weeks and some laws actually restrict it earlier than 20 weeks.

ETA:  There are damn few abortion clinics in the US that offer terminations past 20 weeks anyway.

As we used to say years ago, Abortion on demand and without apology!

I was referring to the fact that you can find out about fetal anomaly through amniocentesis and it would still not be legal to abort the fetus due to that diagnosis.  At that point, you can simply go to the nearest Planned Parenthood and get an abortion.  So, it will not stop a woman from aborting due to disability or the potential for disability in the fetus.

As for diagnosis beyond 20 weeks, a woman can go to Illinois to abort (which I believe still allows for abortion beyond 20 weeks in cases of fetal anomaly). As someone up thread pointed out, these laws are targeted toward the poor as women in the middle and upper classes will always be able to terminate when needed by simply going to a different state or a different country.  So again, this law isn't actually going to stop most people from aborting due to a disability diagnosis.

[samurai_sarah]

51 minutes ago, PsyD2013 said:

This op-ed discusses the harm Indiana's new law will inflict 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-indiana-abortion-law-doctor-perspective-20160402-story.html

No woman should be forced to carry a child to term that will die before, during, or shortly after birth.  Fifteen years ago, my daughter was born with a lethal trisomy. I wanted to terminate the pregnancy, but my then very Catholic husband and his family convinced he that I should let her have a chance at life because the  doctors could be wrong.  She lived for 11 weeks and 5 days.  I can still remember her cries, she cried as if she were in severe pain. All of her care fell to me because the ex and his family were freaked out by her appearance.  This is going to sound cruel, but I was relieved when she took her last breath because she wasn't in pain anymore.

As FJer's have indicated in previous posts, there are no measures to increase funding or services for individuals with disabilities and their families once the child is born.  Funding for human services is gutted.  Severely disabled children (if they live that long) are entitled to special education services until the age of 21.  Will Indiana provide a higher budget for educational spending?  

Sorry you had to go through that! And thank you for freely telling your story. All those law-makers need to hear this!

[caszandra]

43 minutes ago, PsyD2013 said:

No woman should be forced to carry a child to term that will die before, during, or shortly after birth.  Fifteen years ago, my daughter was born with a lethal trisomy. I wanted to terminate the pregnancy, but my then very Catholic husband and his family convinced he that I should let her have a chance at life because the  doctors could be wrong.  She lived for 11 weeks and 5 days.  I can still remember her cries, she cried as if she were in severe pain. All of her care fell to me because the ex and his family were freaked out by her appearance.  This is going to sound cruel, but I was relieved when she took her last breath because she wasn't in pain anymore.

I am so sorry you had to go through this. What a bunch of cowardly bastards your ex and his family were. It is not and will never be cruel to be relieved that your daughter wasn't in pain anymore. You went through every parents worst nightmare and may your daughter rest in peace, thank you for being a wonderful mother to her.

This law will only hurt and scar people, money talks and the rich will just go else where while poor children and their families will be left to pick up the pieces in a system that doesn't give a rats ass about them.

[Inky]

On ‎28‎/‎03‎/‎2016 at 1:18 AM, paganbaby said:

 

When I was a teen, abortion was technically illegal in many places, but I knew several middle-class teens and women who'd had them. If you had the right connections and could afford the fee, there was always a doctor willing to perform one under cover of another procedure. If you have a good income, you can afford contraceptives, and if you have to travel to another state--or even country--for an abortion, well, it's cheaper than a college fund, right? So why speak out for the rights of the less fortunate?

That is not going to happen in the U.S.A. of today. I don't think very many doctors are going to be willing to risk the penalties and imprisonment for performing an abortion. And I don't think there is going to be a Henry Morgentaler come out and oppose the government either.

People are going to have to find and elect representatives that put forward policies they agree with.

[Cleopatra7]

14 minutes ago, Inky said:

That is not going to happen in the U.S.A. of today. I don't think very many doctors are going to be willing to risk the penalties and imprisonment for performing an abortion. And I don't think there is going to be a Henry Morgentaler come out and oppose the government either.

People are going to have to find and elect representatives that put forward policies they agree with.

Given how rich people can easily get drugs and get caught with said drugs and not spend a second in jail while poor people languish in prison for decades for having the exact same drugs, I don't see why abortion would be any different. There has always been a separate standard of justice for the rich and the poor, whether it comes to abortion, drugs, or anything else.

It's also worth remembering that the current Republican position on abortion is far from conservative. In the pre-Roe v. Wade era, abortion existed in a sort of legal and moral grey area, where it was technically illegal, but a lot of people knew when and where it was happening and turned a blind eye to it, sort of like they might with the local red light district. When illegal abortionists were arrested, they certainly weren't treated like the mass murderers anti-abortion activists paint them as, and didn't receive sentences that were anything like what one would give a murderer. Oftentimes, they just got fines. If one honestly believes that abortion kills a unique human being, then the government would have to be vastly expanded to reflect this reality. There would have to be Fetal Protection Units deployed to make sure that pregnant women aren't possibly endangering their fetuses. Any female of childbearing age, which could be anyone from nine year old girls to fifty year old women, would have to be subjected to regular invasive exams to ensure that they weren't hiding a secret miscarriage or abortion (this actually happened in communist Romania when birth control and abortion was outlawed). Miscarriages would have to be investigated as potential homicide scenes, and heavy periods would have to receive full burials. This situation is hardly conservative, no matter how you define the term.

[BamaBelle]

On March 28, 2016 at 5:47 AM, RoseWilder said:

Wow, I used to be proud to be from Indiana. Now it's starting to get embarrassing. Between the anti-gay laws, the way our public school systems are being ruined, and the stupid law they just made where we're required to get out of the way when someone is speeding our WE'RE the ones breaking the law, it was already bad enough. It's starting to feel like there's a goal to make us into the most backwards, ignorant state in the country. 

You've got a long way to catch us here in Bama. 

[Inky]

16 minutes ago, Cleopatra7 said:

Given how rich people can easily get drugs and get caught with said drugs and not spend a second in jail while poor people languish in prison for decades for having the exact same drugs, I don't see why abortion would be any different. There has always been a separate standard of justice for the rich and the poor, whether it comes to abortion, drugs, or anything else.

 

What you said is true, but years ago, Doctors weren't being charged and convicted for performing abortions the way they could be in the near future. I'm sure some doctors were caught and charged for performing back room abortions, but I'm thinking of when there was (at least one) doctor murdered for performing abortions, in the past 10 years, those opposing abortion weren't too upset about it - implying he got what he deserved. Not all of course, but that was the way it read.

The rich will always find a way but it may be harder to find a doctor in the U.S. - they may have to go to other countries. No hardship for them.

It is scary what is happening. I do feel sorry for young women today getting caught up in all of this. I knew a couple of girls in H.S. (1970's) who had abortions. It was the right decision for them, but as I remember it - one of the girls went to Buffalo for her abortion (I'm not sure why as I don't know exactly what the laws and availability in Ontario were at the time). Her family was catholic so maybe that had something to do with it.

[RoseWilder]

Two of the people who helped write this bill lost in the primary!!!  

I hope the other politicians of Indiana are paying attention

[Alicja]

Have these people heard of the Ceausescu regime?

[artdecades]

I am just gonna C&P my comment from the other post because every one of these laws is the same damn thing.

 

Sigh, another blatantly unconstitutional law passed by people who know it will be overturned using tax dollars and time that could be spent making laws that do something for the people of the state.

How much more tax dollars will then be used to fight for this BS, unconstitutional law, when the federal courts rule it unconstitutional? And republicans claim to be the fiscally responsible ones.