Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Doctors must tell women of abortion risk, court says

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 07:57 AM
Original message
Doctors must tell women of abortion risk, court says
The Florida Supreme Court upholds a nine-year-old abortion informed-consent law.

BY MARY ELLEN KLAS
meklas@MiamiHerald.com

TALLAHASSEE - A state law that requires doctors to tell women about the risks of an abortion before performing the procedure is constitutional, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In a unanimous opinion that overturned two lower courts, justices said the ''Women's Right to Know Act'' does not violate a woman's right to privacy, guaranteed under the Florida Constitution. The decision revives the 1997 law, which had been successfully challenged by the Presidential Women's Center, a West Palm Beach-based women's clinic, before it ever took effect.

The center has 15 days to ask for a re-hearing or Florida will join 20 other states with active ''informed consent'' laws aimed at abortion providers, said Bebe Anderson, staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York and an attorney in the case.

The law, passed when Lawton Chiles was governor, requires a doctor to inform patients of the probable gestational age of her fetus and the medical risks of the abortion or of carrying the fetus to term. The patient must then give voluntary, written consent to the abortion before the doctor can perform it.

more: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/14283838.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AllieB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. I had a friend who died giving birth to her third child
they don't tell you about those risks, do they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalnurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. That would require
the physician to be in the room when conception was preformed......:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-08-06 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. Are you saying only doctors are allowed to watch porn?
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abluelady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
13. Exactly
And what about all the risks to the fetus. This is so bogus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susanna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-08-06 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
23. On edit, never mind...
Edited on Sat Apr-08-06 01:11 AM by susanna
the law does allow for informed consent on continuing a pregnancy. Sorry, my bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
2. docs always inform of medical risks, but now giving gestational age --
well, ...this is bantering women I think! and I suspose that was the purpose-make them feel terrible-potential for second thoughts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalnurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I disagree.....
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 08:03 AM by liberalnurse
They have, the pregnant clients, have a damn good idea how far along they are to begin with.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
susanna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-08-06 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
24. Not always...
...and as a nurse I am surprised you do not realize this. Many, many women suffer from seriously irregular cycles and have no idea they might be pregnant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyesroll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
5. I do not have a problem with docs giving MEDICALLY ACCURATE risks
So, in other words, if a doctor is required to say "you have an X percent chance of a perforation and Y percent chance of an infection and a point-Z risk of death from an abortion, and here are the same figures for childbirth," fine. If these risks vary by gestational age, then share that information too. Isn't disclosure standard procedure for most elective medical procedures? (I know I had to listen to the risks of anesthesia and infection when I got my wisdom teeth out...and I think my parents signed some "you may get infected" document when I got my ears pierced at Claire's when I was in junior high.)

If the doctor has to say "risks include fetal pain, breast cancer, regret, shame and shunning by your community," well, then, no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaRa Donating Member (705 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. Exactly
it's all too important HOW this information is given. When I had my first ob visit with this pregnacy (over 35 so "high risk"), I had to listen to a huge list of statistics that could scare even the greatest optimist. But it was all data and then I moved on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #5
15. Precisely. There is a difference between accurate info and intimidation
and scare tactics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:07 AM
Response to Original message
6. Do they also give the risk of carrying the fetus to term?
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 08:08 AM by fasttense
If you are going to require that risks for abortion be quantified for the patient, shouldn't the risk of carrying the fetus be quantified as well? That way women would have a comparison number to make a valid decision. But of course they don't really want the mother to make a decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. The Actual Act says yes:
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 05:56 PM by happyslug
See my post below for a Copy of the Court Decision which sites the statute in question in full.

Here is the Statute in question:

(3) CONSENTS REQUIRED.--A termination of pregnancy may not be performed or induced except with the voluntary and informed written consent of the pregnant woman or, in the case of a mental incompetent, the voluntary and informed written consent of her court-appointed guardian.

(a) Except in the case of a medical emergency, consent to a termination of pregnancy is voluntary and informed only if:

1. The physician who is to perform the procedure, or the referring physician, has, at a minimum, orally, in person, informed the woman of:

a. The nature and risks of undergoing or not undergoing the proposed procedure that a reasonable patient would consider material to making a knowing and willful decision of whether to terminate a pregnancy.

b. The probable gestational age of the fetus at the time the termination of pregnancy is to be performed.

c. The medical risks to the woman and fetus of carrying the pregnancy to term. :


The statute itself see:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0390/SEC0111.HTM&Title=-%3E2005-%3ECh0390-%3ESection%200111#0390.0111
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:07 AM
Response to Original message
7. Risk of full term pregnancy is greater.
Those who have given birth, and especially those of us who had complicatins, can attest to that!!

But of course you don't see anyone demanding court orders for doctors to tell women about that.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. Yes. Giving birth is far higher risk than abortion.....
Go figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
8. I'd be surprised if no "informed consent"...
Is signed before an abortion takes place. There ARE some health risks--even if, as mentioned, the risks of pregnancy & childbirth are greater.

But let's be sure that the risks mentioned are real--not lies cooked up by the anti-choice crowd. And let's be sure that no delay is involved. In Texas, the patient must make a clinic visit, then wait 24 hours before the abortion. This can be a real problem if the clinic is a long distance from home--as is often the case in Texas. And if the women has job and/or family responsibilities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
9. Doctors take an oath
That should be enough.

I was told of pregnancy risks all three times I had a baby, I don't get it. I had nine and ten pound babies... the doctors never got gestational age right, always saying they were older than they really were and then tried to convince me that the 9 pounder with a full head of hair and ultra long fingernails was premature. Brother!

Government shouldn't be in the uterus business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Generally I agree with that n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
10. I've seen actual aborted fetuses - up close and personal
Yeah, they're gross. Yeah, it's messy. Yeah, it's sad.

Guess what? I still support abortion - cause I support women.

The other day I signed a consent form declaring that I understood that I could start to hemorrhage during a surgical procedure - but as the medical procedure was important to my overall health, there was no hesitation in signing.

So for all those assholes that think their intimidation tactics are going to work? Fuck you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. I would not choose it for myself
In fact, I hate the mere thought of abortion. But I support a woman's right to choose.

There are too many "good" reasons to have an abortion that would most likely never be heard if abortion is made illegal again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karmakaze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
16. This is GOOD, not bad!
People read this article closely! I am sure no one is arguing that medical procedures should be carried out without the patient knowing the risks of that procedure. So I will ignore that argument for now.

If you look at what the article says, you will see that the ruling has basically defined what the law means - informed consent of the MEDICAL risks! What is wrong with that? In fact that is no different from any other medical procedure.

Lewis noted, however, that as the case evolved through two trial courts and two appeals challenges, the state changed its position on how to interpret what risks it considered relevant for a doctor to discuss with a patient. Lewis noted that in oral arguments the state ''conceded'' that the law applies only to medical risks.

That concession was enough to persuade Chief Justice Barbara Pariente to write a concurring opinion that took the state to task for its failure to make the position known earlier.


In other words, this ruling has GUTTED any anti-abortion stance to this law. The only risks that are legally REQUIRED to be told to the patient are MEDICAL risks. Not social risks, MEDICAL risks. In other words, NOTHING HAS CHANGED. The judge has forced the government to define the risks to be told to the patient as medical only, and even chastised the government for not making that clear from the beginning.

Now the law can NOT be used to force abortion providers to inform of any other kind of risk than they already were, and it is not just a law anymore, but case law as well! This means that it would be basically impossible to argue in front of a judge that the law extends to any other kind of risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
18. Here is the Decision (In PDF Format)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Triana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
20. Are they required to tell women the risks of childbirth, too?
If not, why not? It's at LEAST as risky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Under the statute, yes they do have to warn of taking the child to term
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 11:52 PM by happyslug
See my post below for a Copy of the Court Decision which sites the statute in question in full.

Here is the Statute in question:

(3) CONSENTS REQUIRED.--A termination of pregnancy may not be performed or induced except with the voluntary and informed written consent of the pregnant woman or, in the case of a mental incompetent, the voluntary and informed written consent of her court-appointed guardian.

(a) Except in the case of a medical emergency, consent to a termination of pregnancy is voluntary and informed only if:

1. The physician who is to perform the procedure, or the referring physician, has, at a minimum, orally, in person, informed the woman of:

a. The nature and risks of undergoing or not undergoing the proposed procedure that a reasonable patient would consider material to making a knowing and willful decision of whether to terminate a pregnancy.

b. The probable gestational age of the fetus at the time the termination of pregnancy is to be performed.

c. The medical risks to the woman and fetus of carrying the pregnancy to term. :

The statute itself see:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0390/SEC0111.HTM&Title=-%3E2005-%3ECh0390-%3ESection%200111#0390.0111
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC