| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Papa Jack" |
| Date: |
12 May 2004 05:44:43 PM |
| Object: |
Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 58(1):67-79, January 2003.
Long-Term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences of Induced
Abortion: Review of the Evidence by Thorp, John M. Jr., MD *;
Hartmann, Katherine E. MD, PhD +; Shadigian, Elizabeth MD ++
http://www.obgynsurvey.com/pt/re/obgynsurv/abstract.00006254-200301000-00023.htm;jsessionid=AiiFTbjVNrqxMGLPuNyxdN8FSB3NhUe0ohvfugL6e0IS0U8w2R0J!-385403038!-949856031!9001!-1
_____________________________________________________________________________
Abstract:
"Induced abortion is a prevalent response to an
unintended pregnancy. The long-term health con-
sequences are poorly investigated and conclusions
must be drawn from observational studies. Using
strict inclusion criteria (study population >100
subjects, follow up >60 days) we reviewed an array
of conditions in women's health. Induced abortion
was not associated with changes in the prevalence
of subsequent subfertility, spontaneous abortion,
or ectopic pregnancy. Previous abortion was a risk
factor for placenta previa. Moreover, induced abor-
tion increased the risks for both a subsequent pre-
term delivery and mood disorders substantial enough
to provoke attempts of self-harm. Preterm delivery
and depression are important conditions in women's
health and avoidance of induced abortion has poten-
tial as a strategy to reduce their prevalence. Only
review articles including the single published meta-
analysis exploring linkages between abortion and
breast cancer were relied upon to draw conclusions.
Reviewers were mixed on whether subsequent breast
neoplasia can be linked to induced abortion, although
the sole meta-analysis found a summary odds ratio of
1.2. Whatever the effect of induced abortion on breast
cancer risk, a young woman with an unintended preg-
nancy clearly sacrifices the protective effect of a
term delivery should she decide to abort and delay
childbearing. That increase in risk can be quantified
using the Gail Model. Thus, we conclude that informed
consent before induced abortion should include infor-
mation about the subsequent risk of preterm delivery
and depression. Although it remains uncertain whether
elective abortion increases subsequent breast cancer,
it is clear that a decision to abort and delay preg-
nancy culminates in a loss of protection with the net
effect being an increased risk.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Papa Jack comments:
Many abortion centers don't screen for risk factors
which could result in negative reactions to abortion.
In an effort to keep costs down, the "assembly-line"
technique is common -- with abortionists going from
woman to woman to maximize the numbers of abortions
done in a given time.
Thus, there is no time programmed for the sort of
risk screening used in many other medical procedures.
There is seldom time for any face-to-face counseling
or personal exams by the abortionists.
In Missouri, a new law mandates abortionists to
evaluate patients:
"...for indicators and contraindicators,
risk factors, including any physical,
psychological, or situational factors
which would predispose the patient to or
increase the risk of experiencing one or
more adverse physical, emotional, or other
health reactions."
A similar bill was introduced in Mississippi.
However, I'll predict the Pro-Aborts will fight against
such precautions.
.
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
12 May 2004 08:22:45 PM |
|
|
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote in message
news:6f9e1b49.0405121444.14100a7b@posting.google.com...
Papa Jack comments:
Many abortion centers don't screen for risk factors
which could result in negative reactions to abortion.
$ How about all the risk factors of carrying for 9 months and giving birth?
Any Dr's screening for that?
In an effort to keep costs down, the "assembly-line"
technique is common -- with abortionists going from
woman to woman to maximize the numbers of abortions
done in a given time.
$ And still more women survive abortion than they do giving birth. Imagine
that!
Thus, there is no time programmed for the sort of
risk screening used in many other medical procedures.
There is seldom time for any face-to-face counseling
or personal exams by the abortionists.
$ In what 3rd world nation? I never heard of a clinic where a woman walks
in, gets on the table and gets an abortion... then hops off the table and
leaves. Are you talking about Umgabungaland Africa?
In Missouri, a new law mandates abortionists to
evaluate patients:
"...for indicators and contraindicators,
risk factors, including any physical,
psychological, or situational factors
which would predispose the patient to or
increase the risk of experiencing one or
more adverse physical, emotional, or other
health reactions."
A similar bill was introduced in Mississippi.
$ Nothing wrong with that. How about the same evaluation for women who want
to carry to term? Maybe we'd have less mothers killing their babies,
toddlers and older children.
However, I'll predict the Pro-Aborts will fight against
such precautions.
$ I think you predicted wrong as long as the same evaluations are given to
BOTH groups of women equally. There are too many Susan Smith's out there.
--
FPower.......
But look what your Jehovah god said in his bible:
Psalm 137:9
"Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the
stones." (Infanticide approved by god)
======================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Papa Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
13 May 2004 11:05:29 AM |
|
|
"Flower Power" <freeBuds@garden.net> wrote in message
news:<ouGdnUhf6d0oUj_d4p2dnA@heartoftn.net>...
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
======================================================================
Papa Jack comments:
Many abortion centers don't screen for risk factors
which could result in negative reactions to abortion.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ How about all the risk factors of carrying for
9 months and giving birth?
Any Dr's screening for that?
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
Yep, they're called OB/GYNs. When a woman is
pregnant in America, she normally goes thru a
series of pre-natal medical tests and examina-
tions. Some of the tests are quite sophisticated
these days, and are able to warn of possible risks
to either the unborn child or to the mother.
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
In an effort to keep costs down, the "assembly-line"
technique is common -- with abortionists going from
woman to woman to maximize the numbers of abortions
done in a given time.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ And still more women survive abortion than they do
giving birth. Imagine that!
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
We don't know that for sure, Flower. You're depending
on the old CDC stats -- and I've previously posted the
reasons several times why those are not reliable.
But, even if they were reliable, so what? Are you
suggesting abortion centers should not screen for risk
factors? Why?
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
Thus, there is no time programmed for the sort of
risk screening used in many other medical procedures.
There is seldom time for any face-to-face counseling
or personal exams by the abortionists.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ In what 3rd world nation? I never heard of a clinic
where a woman walks in, gets on the table and gets an
abortion... then hops off the table and leaves. Are you
talking about Umgabungaland Africa?
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
Oh the girl/woman is seen by the counselor who pre-
tends to counsel her. And, she's seen by the person
who takes her money. But, all too often she doesn't
see the doctor until s/he walks in the room to per-
form the abortion. Go to:
http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/everett.htm
Carol Everett, was a manager and owner of several
abortion clinics in Dallas. She tells us, in part:
"...This girl doesn't know they have an appoint-
ment book and each counselor has to schedule
their appointments an hour apart so she has
plenty of time to spend being their "friend"
while they're there. She takes them back; she
does the pregnancy test; it doesn't really
matter. If there's any way they can convince
this girl she's pregnant, she's going to be
pregnant. But they go through this test anyway.
She tells her she's pregnant,...
[...]
"She is taken back to the procedure room, put
on the table, and draped. Her chart is put in
the door. Each chart in our clinics was handled
with a little coupon on the front. The coupon
was for the doctor, because when he walks up to
that door for the first time -- if you have two
or three doctors working, you don't know which
one is going to do the abortion..."
[...]
"As I said earlier, I have seen doctors walk out
after three hours work and split $4,500 between
them on a Saturday morning. More, if you go longer
into the day, of course. The doctor walks in, SEES
THE PATIENT FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME, pats her on
the leg, says, Hi, baby, how are you? You call
them "baby" so you don't have to remember their
name. And she says, Oh, I'm scared, or, I'm cold.
Never anything positive. And he doesn't really ask
her any questions. It's just get the abortion done.
If he discovers that she may be farther along than
anyone thought she was, they stop right there, col-
lect the money, and then finish the procedure."
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
In Missouri, a new law mandates abortionists to
evaluate patients:
"...for indicators and contraindicators,
risk factors, including any physical,
psychological, or situational factors
which would predispose the patient to or
increase the risk of experiencing one or
more adverse physical, emotional, or other
health reactions."
A similar bill was introduced in Mississippi.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ Nothing wrong with that. How about the same
valuation for women who want to carry to term?
Maybe we'd have less mothers killing their babies,
toddlers and older children.
======================================================================
Papa Jack remarks:
What makes you believe pregnant women who carry
to term aren't given pre-natal exams by doctors.
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
However, I'll predict the Pro-Aborts will fight against
such precautions.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ I think you predicted wrong as long as the same
evaluations are given to BOTH groups of women
equally....
======================================================================
Papa Jack asks:
Why? This isn't an affirmative action program.
We're talking about pre-natal treatment for
normal pregnant women as compared to screening
by abortion clinics for those women who want
to pay to haver their unborn child killed.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
There are too many Susan Smith's out there.
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
How many Susan Smiths are out there?
I agree there are too many, but you're trying
to mix apples and oranges. The challenges of
identifying and helping women who might go
"postal" after having a child is quite different
than the challenges at abortion clinics.
I assume you will now demand that no abortion
clinic be allowed to use screening techniques
until we can ensure NO WOMAN will ever kill her
own child folllwing normal childbirth.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
13 May 2004 10:03:04 PM |
|
|
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote in message
news:6f9e1b49.0405130805.739ba0c5@posting.google.com...
"Flower Power" <freeBuds@garden.net> wrote in message
news:<ouGdnUhf6d0oUj_d4p2dnA@heartoftn.net>...
"Papa Jack" <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
======================================================================
Papa Jack comments:
Many abortion centers don't screen for risk factors
which could result in negative reactions to abortion.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ How about all the risk factors of carrying for
9 months and giving birth?
Any Dr's screening for that?
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
Yep, they're called OB/GYNs. When a woman is
pregnant in America, she normally goes thru a
series of pre-natal medical tests and examina-
tions.
** And if the Dr. finds her UNFIT to be a mother for some reason he suggest
she aborts the fetus? Or he can somehow FORCE her not to become pregnant?
Some of the tests are quite sophisticated
these days, and are able to warn of possible risks
to either the unborn child or to the mother.
** And if he finds her unfit mentally and/or physically he can STOP her from
having children? I don't think so.....
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
In an effort to keep costs down, the "assembly-line"
technique is common -- with abortionists going from
woman to woman to maximize the numbers of abortions
done in a given time.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ And still more women survive abortion than they do
giving birth. Imagine that!
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
We don't know that for sure, Flower.
$$ The statistics have been posted in several NGs over the years. Birth is
the most "dangerous" thing a women can experience in her life, especially
poor women and women in 3rd world nations.
You're depending
on the old CDC stats -- and I've previously posted the
reasons several times why those are not reliable.
$$ Why are they not reliable? Also, if a women is willing to take the risk
who are we to stop her or advise her?
But, even if they were reliable, so what?
$$ "So what?" you ask? That's how little the LIFE of a women means to
you?
Are you
suggesting abortion centers should not screen for risk
factors? Why?
$$ Of course they should screen for health issues in the women before
administering anesthesia. Why not?
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
Thus, there is no time programmed for the sort of
risk screening used in many other medical procedures.
There is seldom time for any face-to-face counseling
or personal exams by the abortionists.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ In what 3rd world nation? I never heard of a clinic
where a woman walks in, gets on the table and gets an
abortion... then hops off the table and leaves. Are you
talking about Umgabungaland Africa?
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
Oh the girl/woman is seen by the counselor who pre-
tends to counsel her. And, she's seen by the person
who takes her money. But, all too often she doesn't
see the doctor until s/he walks in the room to per-
form the abortion. Go to:
http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/everett.htm
$$ What difference does THAT make since he/she would have the women's
records right there?
Carol Everett, was a manager and owner of several
abortion clinics in Dallas. She tells us, in part:
"...This girl doesn't know they have an appoint-
ment book and each counselor has to schedule
their appointments an hour apart so she has
plenty of time to spend being their "friend"
while they're there. She takes them back; she
does the pregnancy test; it doesn't really
matter. If there's any way they can convince
this girl she's pregnant, she's going to be
pregnant. But they go through this test anyway.
She tells her she's pregnant,...
## What has this got to do with anything? If the women wants to abort she
gets the abortion. She's not there to socialize with the staff or Drs.
"As I said earlier, I have seen doctors walk out
after three hours work and split $4,500 between
them on a Saturday morning.
## Again:.....What has this got to do with anything? If the women wants to
abort she gets the abortion. She's not there to socialize with the staff or
Drs. nor to worry about how much money they make. Why would she care?
More, if you go longer
into the day, of course. The doctor walks in, SEES
THE PATIENT FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME, pats her on
the leg, says, Hi, baby, how are you? You call
them "baby" so you don't have to remember their
name.
## Why would the women care what the Dr calls her????
And she says, Oh, I'm scared, or, I'm cold.
Never anything positive.
## This is utter nonsense. :-) First anyone undergoing ANY MEDICAL
procedure is scared and probably cold since they keep these areas cool due
to bacteria.
And he doesn't really ask
her any questions.
## My surgeon (broken leg - had to have knee surgery 2 years ago) didn't say
much to me either that morning. Why would he? Are you claiming abortion
Dr's have some secret code where they don't speak to the women or girl? The
women I know who had abortions have never made THAT claim. All talked about
how nice everyone was, how concerned, warm and caring. I don't know where
you're getting your info from. All of them claimed they felt *relief* once
on the "table." None claimed any feelings of guilt or shame.
It's just get the abortion done.
## What else would it be - a tea party? Come on,... I've had surgery
several times in my life and I KNOW what happens in the OR before surgery,
and in recovery afterward.
If he discovers that she may be farther along than
anyone thought she was, they stop right there, col-
lect the money, and then finish the procedure."
## So? As long as she gets her abortion.....
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
In Missouri, a new law mandates abortionists to
evaluate patients:
"...for indicators and contraindicators,
risk factors, including any physical,
psychological, or situational factors
which would predispose the patient to or
increase the risk of experiencing one or
more adverse physical, emotional, or other
health reactions."
A similar bill was introduced in Mississippi.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ Nothing wrong with that. How about the same
valuation for women who want to carry to term?
Maybe we'd have less mothers killing their babies,
toddlers and older children.
======================================================================
Papa Jack remarks:
What makes you believe pregnant women who carry
to term aren't given pre-natal exams by doctors.
## I KNOW there is no psychological exams given. NONE, to see if she's
emotionally and psychologically ready for motherhood.
======================================================================
Papa Jack wrote:
However, I'll predict the Pro-Aborts will fight against
such precautions.
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ I think you predicted wrong as long as the same
evaluations are given to BOTH groups of women
equally....
======================================================================
Papa Jack asks:
Why?
## What of the women wants a child but isn't FIT either emotionally,
psychologically or physically to be a mother?
This isn't an affirmative action program.
We're talking about pre-natal treatment for
normal pregnant women as compared to screening
by abortion clinics for those women who want
to pay to haver their unborn child killed.
## They're not paying to kill an unborn child. Don't project your feelings
and beliefs on them, as they see it differently. Wouldn't it be better to
find a women UNFIT Before she gives birth, then kills her toddler or older
children as so many do these days?
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
There are too many Susan Smith's out there.
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
How many Susan Smiths are out there?
## There was just another one who butchered her 5 kids with a knife in
Texas. You don't watch TV or read the papers?
I agree there are too many, but you're trying
to mix apples and oranges.
## No I'm not. That's what happens when kids are NOT WANTED or there are
too many and the women gets stressed out to the breaking point.
The challenges of
identifying and helping women who might go
"postal" after having a child is quite different
than the challenges at abortion clinics.
## Well perhaps the anti-choicers should spend their time and money to stop
these women for killing their children, and help them in some way.... even
paying for a tubal ligation for them, and providing free baby-sitting.
I assume you will now demand that no abortion
clinic be allowed to use screening techniques
## Why would I do that? But be fair,... give psychological testing to all
women before becoming pregnant if they want a child, before giving birth if
pregnant, and before getting an abortion. Don't leave anyone out. Don't
single out any one group.
until we can ensure NO WOMAN will ever kill her
own child folllwing normal childbirth.
## You will never stop the Susan Smiths of the world from killing unwanted
children until all women have access to, and can afford to get, an abortion.
--
FPower.......
But look what your Jehovah god said in his bible:
Psalm 137:9
"Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the
stones." (Infanticide approved by god)
======================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
13 May 2004 11:34:44 AM |
|
|
Papa Jack wrote:
"Flower Power" <freeBuds@garden.net> wrote in message
news:<ouGdnUhf6d0oUj_d4p2dnA@heartoftn.net>...
======================================================================
Flower Power wrote:
$ And still more women survive abortion than they do
giving birth. Imagine that!
======================================================================
Papa Jack replies:
We don't know that for sure, Flower. You're depending
on the old CDC stats -- and I've previously posted the
reasons several times why those are not reliable.
But, even if they were reliable, so what?
So the "reasons" you posted why they aren't reliable wasn't even enough
to convince yourself.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
14 May 2004 11:44:00 AM |
|
|
Papa Jackass <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
"Flower Power" <freeBuds@garden.net> wrote in message
$ How about all the risk factors of carrying for
9 months and giving birth?
Any Dr's screening for that?
Yep, they're called OB/GYNs.
I don't see ANY state forcing women to get screened by a doctor before
being allowed to give birth to a child. Why aren't you demanding such
laws?
Why are you trying to prevent women from getting the truth?
$ And still more women survive abortion than they do
giving birth. Imagine that!
We don't know that for sure, Flower.
Yes, Jackass, we do.
You're depending
on the old CDC stats -- and I've previously posted the
Jackass has been provided evidence countless times and still he
trots out his lies.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
13 May 2004 01:03:38 PM |
|
|
(Papa Jack) wrote...
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 58(1):67-79, January 2003.
Long-Term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences of Induced
Abortion: Review of the Evidence by Thorp, John M. Jr., MD *;
Hartmann, Katherine E. MD, PhD +; Shadigian, Elizabeth MD ++
http://www.obgynsurvey.com/pt/re/obgynsurv/abstract.00006254-200301000-00023.htm;jsessionid=AiiFTbjVNrqxMGLPuNyxdN8FSB3NhUe0ohvfugL6e0IS0U8w2R0J!-385403038!-949856031!9001!-1
There's number of smoking guns in this article:
"Moreover, induced abortion increased the risks for
both a subsequent pre-term delivery and mood disorders
substantial enough to provoke attempts of self-harm."
Unsubstantiated by current research.
"Only review articles including the single published
meta-analysis exploring linkages between abortion and
breast cancer were relied upon to draw conclusions."
"Single published meta-analysis" translates as "Joel's Brind's
hopelessly flawed and many-times refuted meta-analysis". BUSTED!
"Whatever the effect of induced abortion on breast
cancer risk, a young woman with an unintended
pregnancy clearly sacrifices the protective effect
of a term delivery should she decide to abort and
delay childbearing."
These guy are blowing methane out their asses. There is no causual
link between abortion and breast cancer:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancerinfo/ere-workshop-report
The only organizations that claim that a link exists between abortion
and breast cancer are right-to-lie groups. No reputable doctor,
scientist or medical research organization recognizes such a link,
because THE DATA ISN'T THERE.
[...]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MyTwoAngels" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
13 May 2004 06:29:38 AM |
|
|
On 12 May 2004 15:44:43 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 58(1):67-79, January 2003.
Long-Term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences of Induced
Abortion:
There are more risks associated with full-term pregnancy and
childbirth. But, since when does that kind of thing concern you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
13 May 2004 10:10:38 PM |
|
|
"MyTwoAngels" <illlovemy2angels4life@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6tm6a0piivvvm5usu7413bk2plba3ugaov@4ax.com...
On 12 May 2004 15:44:43 -0700, (Papa Jack) wrote:
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 58(1):67-79, January 2003.
Long-Term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences of Induced
Abortion:
There are more risks associated with full-term pregnancy and
childbirth. But, since when does that kind of thing concern you?
================================
He said the statistics aren't reliable and "So what?" if they are. This
shows he couldn't care less about women dying or having complications giving
birth.
We almost lost my daughter-in-law when she had my grandson. She had a very
difficult delivery and became infected with a very resistant bacteria - the
one that causes childbed-fever. We were worried sick for 2 weeks since all
the bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics. Had she died and left
the motherless infant, people like PapaJack would claim it was "God's will,"
and give not a thought to the motherless baby and the effect to rest of the
family.....
She wisely decided to have NO MORE children.
I know of no women who suffered from this infection after an abortion.
--
PQ....
"We look at the ancient Greeks with their gods on a mountain top throwing
lightning bolts and say, 'Those ancient Greeks. They were so silly. So
primitive
and naive. Not like our religions. We have burning bushes talking to people
and
guys walking on water. We're ...sophisticated.'"
-= Paul Provenza =-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Lont-Term Consequences of Abortion |
12 May 2004 09:18:23 PM |
|
|
Papa Jackass <papajack@stic.net> wrote:
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 58(1):67-79, January 2003.
Long-Term Physical and Psychological Health Consequences of Induced
Abortion: Review of the Evidence by Thorp, John M. Jr., MD *;
Hartmann, Katherine E. MD, PhD +; Shadigian, Elizabeth MD ++
Jackass lies by omission.
http://www.obgynsurvey.com/pt/re/obgynsurv/abstract.00006254-200301000-00023.htm;jsessionid=AiiFTbjVNrqxMGLPuNyxdN8FSB3NhUe0ohvfugL6e0IS0U8w2R0J!-385403038!-949856031!9001!-1
_____________________________________________________________________________
Abstract:
"Induced abortion is a prevalent response to an
unintended pregnancy. The long-term health con-
sequences are poorly investigated and conclusions
must be drawn from observational studies. Using
strict inclusion criteria (study population >100
subjects, follow up >60 days) we reviewed an array
of conditions in women's health. Induced abortion
was not associated with changes in the prevalence
of subsequent subfertility, spontaneous abortion,
or ectopic pregnancy.
Let's repeat that:
Abortion was NOT associated with ... subsequent subfertility,
spontaneous abortion, or ectopic pregnancy.
Previous abortion was a risk
factor for placenta previa. Moreover, induced abor-
tion increased the risks for both a subsequent pre-
term delivery and mood disorders substantial enough
to provoke attempts of self-harm.
But so does childbirth.
[...]
Thus, we conclude that informed
consent before induced abortion should include infor-
mation about the subsequent risk of preterm delivery
and depression.
With the caveat that childbirth also includes such risks.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Many abortion centers don't screen for risk factors
which could result in negative reactions to abortion.
So what? Why do you continue to insist that women should be
treated like children?
In an effort to keep costs down, the "assembly-line"
technique is common -- with abortionists going from
Demonization and lies.
As usual.
[...]
In Missouri, a new law mandates abortionists to
evaluate patients:
"...for indicators and contraindicators,
risk factors, including any physical,
psychological, or situational factors
which would predispose the patient to or
increase the risk of experiencing one or
more adverse physical, emotional, or other
health reactions."
A similar bill was introduced in Mississippi.
It's a 5-minute Q&A session with a trained medical professional.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
