An Alaskan journalist's perspective on local and national issues

It isn’t often that one can point to something that the government of America has done and talk about how it is beyond foul.  In the world of right-wing insanity, this has got to be a step up.  It really doesn’t get much better than this.  In Arizona, there has been a new law that has been passed that say a doctor can lie to a patient about their own child.

You see, despite all the anti-choice propaganda, a lot of these women are having abortion for the reason of sparing a child from having to live a life that would be nothing but suffering.  Whenever it is found that children have birth defects, the mother gets to have the option to abort, and save both herself suffering, and the fetus’ suffering.

It is called the “Wrongful Birth” law.  It effectively allows a doctor to withhold information about a woman’s fetus if birth defects are found, in the interest of preventing her to have an abortion.  This even includes if the defects are so serious that they could kill the mother.  This law allows doctors to completely ignore the Hippocratic Oath.

This is going to be a short and sweet post.  Arizona law-makers, thank you for sending a “Screw You” message to women everywhere, along with to decency.  The levels of selfish conceit here I are blinding.  It cannot be argued that this is a law that is attacking women.  They will dress it up as protecting babies, but it is entirely done to take the choices away from women.

And this leads to the ultimate truth about the “pro-life” movement.  For the most part, it isn’t “pro-life.”  If they are against capital punishment, and the wars, then one can accept that they are pro-life.  However, for the most part, it is simply anti-choice.  They are against the fact that women in this country are able to choose for themselves how to conduct their lives.  Since the Republican base has now transformed almost entirely into middle-aged to elderly white men, then it makes a lot more sense why this is so.  These people have always been against women.

However, as with all the laws that these conservatives insane-asylum rejects have put out, it ignores the true consequences of its reach.  Prenatal care is for more than just the problems, like birth defects.  It exists to help find out if there are life-threatening complications, such as ectopic pregnancy, which can kill a mother if she doesn’t abort.

But given other bills, like the ones that say that there should be no abortion even in the instance to save the mother’s life, it is no surprise the Republicans went down this road.  Women, you have to take action.  Get as many as you can, and tell them all – do NOT support a Republican vote.  Even if you are a conservative, these people are beyond that.  They have gone into the realm of your typical insane asylum, and it needs to stop.

Peace out,

Lefty

Advertisements

Comments on: "Arizona effectively legalizes doctors lying to patients" (19)

  1. …and of course the phrase “war on women” is totally unjustified. [/sarcasm]

  2. WTF?! I’m so happy I don’t live in Arizona now…

    • Yeah, this law is beyond bullshit. This is outright sick. I am starting to think that the Republicans don’t even want to win anymore. They just want to do as much superficial damage as they can before their base (middle-aged and elderly white men) die off.

  3. P Meyers said:

    The only lying going on here is people who tell you this law sanctions lying.
    The Bill is 4 sentences long. The 4th sentence states:

    D. This section does not apply to any civil action for damages for an intentional or grossly negligent act or omission, including an act or omission that violates a criminal law

    Lying is an intentional act and is excluded from the shield of this law. That is lying is intentional unless you are a lefty who wants to mislead to make something into fuel for a non-issue for this presidential election in which case it gets a leftypass and repeated as if it is the truth.

    Read the bill – it’s 4 sentences long. It states nothing like is purported here.

    • If it’s only four sentences, why not just list them all? That sounds fishy to me, your point of view, without the rest. Stand tall, if you think you’re right, and give it all.

      • Oh, and it would help if you put a link to this proof you have, so we can see that you aren’t just making this 4 sentence schtick up.

      • P Meyers said:

        Yeah I suppose this would be a good time to do your due diligence – never too late huh? Or is it better late than never? Something should have smelled fishy way before I got here: Anyway: http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/50leg/2r/bills/sb1359s.htm&Session_ID=107

        12-718. Civil liability; wrongful birth, life or conception claims; application

        A. A person is not liable for damages in any civil action for wrongful birth based on a claim that, but for an act or omission of the defendant, a child or children would not or should not have been born.

        B. A person is not liable for damages in any civil action for wrongful life based on a claim that, but for an act or omission of the defendant, the person bringing the action would not or should not have been born.

        C. This section applies to any claim regardless of whether the child is born healthy or with a birth defect or other adverse medical condition.

        D. This section does not apply to any civil action for damages for an intentional or grossly negligent act or omission, including an act or omission that violates a criminal law.

      • Dude, it’s right there in A. If they don’t tell the parents something, they aren’t liable for it. I guess reading legal documents isn’t your forte.

    • Either you’re naive or have incredible faith in Arizona courts. The law is purposefully written to be ambiguous. It says whatever the Arizona courts interpret it to say. Given the state’s treatment of women, I have zero faith in the justice system so I do read it to say that doctors can lie to women without consequences so long as the courts interpret the lie as not being “grossly negligent act or omission, including an act or omission that violates a criminal law.” In Arizona, lying to a woman to prevent an abortion may very well not be considered a “grossly negligent act,” etc. Time will tell.

      • Couldn’t agree more. But apparently, that’s a “Lefty” thing to see possible loopholes and call a spade a spade. According to Meyer, anyway.

  4. P Meyers said:

    So we have gone from the headline of “Arizona effectively legalizes doctors lying to patients” to “If they don’t tell the parents something, they aren’t liable for it” which is quite different.

    … sorry for making that a long sentence for you….

    You’re wrong. Lying is prohibited specifically in D, It is a plain distinction – it could not be any plainer.

    And for the last 25 years I have made my living reading (and writing) legal documents.

    • I love how the people who think that they are so clever use this language, but it’s all right there. They are saying that a person cannot be sued for neglecting to give information that led to somebody being born who shouldn’t have been, but says that “deliberate” omission is wrong. Yes, because no doctor could lie in court and say that they weren’t deliberately not telling the truth. It does legalize lying, it just gives a VERY clever cover for it.

      • P Meyers said:

        The term you used “neglect” is not in the bill is it? Tell the truth, you’d love to have it in there wouldn’t ya?

      • It is saying that if the doctor is lying, he can be liable, but not if he just forget to say something. That’s the bill in a nutshell. And people lie in court all the time. It’s the easiest thing in the world to do, because the courts don’t care. This bill was just a convenient way to give doctors a nice excuse, and you put up all the evidence to support that, and are now defending it too. Thanks for that. Helps me make my case.

    • If you’ve made your living reading, and writing legal documents, then surely you know that they are subject to interpretation. Otherwise you and a lot of other lawyers would be out of a job and we could abolish the civil law system. I agree with other posters here that the line in question is highly subject to interpretation…by Arizona Courts…that seem to hate women. It may not specifically sanction lying, but it doesn’t explicitly forbid it.

  5. P Meyers said:

    You want me to believe bill isn’t what it is, Doctors are liars and the Courts don’t care.

    ~yet~

    you give the blatant lies proffered in the above opinion piece a crown of integrity because it suits your agenda.

    Leftyworld at its finest.

    • I don’t care what you believe. I know that doctors lie and courts don’t care. This bill is giving them an easy way around it, and you have proven it. Call it lies if you want, but that’s what it is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: