Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
edjr

Late term abortion Doctor, gets his own late term abortion in Church.

Recommended Posts

:pointstosky: extreme cases huh? are you people seriously retarded? was sarah brown an extreme case?

 

I have no idea who Sarah Brown is. But the overwhelming, near total majority of late term abortions are for catastrophic medical cases where the child has severe defects and very little chance of surviving or the mother's life is in danger. So I think it was pretty courageous of this guy to help people in these situations, despite being harassed and having his life threatened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no idea who Sarah Brown is. But the overwhelming, near total majority of late term abortions are for catastrophic medical cases where the child has severe defects and very little chance of surviving or the mother's life is in danger. So I think it was pretty courageous of this guy to help people in these situations, despite being harassed and having his life threatened.

 

What is that, like almost 49%? :pointstosky:

 

Link to your source for the "overwhelming near total majority" data. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is that, like almost 49%? :wacko:

 

Link to your source for the "overwhelming near total majority" data. :lol:

 

"Tiller had been the target of threats, protests and violence over many years. His Wichita clinic is one of three in the US where abortions are performed after the 21st week of pregnancy..."

 

Tiller's clinic was one of three in the country that performed late term abortions and even then under Kansas law they could only be performed if two other doctors agreed that giving birth would put the mother at risk of irreparable harm.

 

Link

 

But don't let that stop you from cheering on an act of domestic terrorism committed by the American Taliban against a legally practicing doctor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tiller's clinic was one of three in the country that performed late term abortions and even then under Kansas law they could only be performed if two other doctors agreed that giving birth would put the mother at risk of irreparable harm.

 

So what you are saying is that the "overwhelming near majority" of Tiller's late term abortions complied with Kansas law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what you are saying is that the "overwhelming near majority" of Tiller's late term abortions complied with Kansas law.

 

No, I'm saying that all of Tiller's late term abortions complied with Kansas law in that another doctor had to attest that the birth would put the mother in irreparable harm and as only one of three clinics in the US that provided late term abortions he was no doubt under a ton of scrutiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I'm saying that all of Tiller's late term abortions complied with Kansas law in that another doctor had to attest that the birth would put the mother in irreparable harm and as only one of three clinics in the US that provided late term abortions he was no doubt under a ton of scrutiny.

 

So when you say "near overwhelming majority" you actually mean "all".

 

Gotcha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So when you say "near overwhelming majority" you actually mean "all".

 

Gotcha.

 

I have no idea if it's "all." No one does, because there's this thing called medical privacy. But there are exactly three clinics that provide late term abortions in the US and Tiller's is in a state where 2 doctors have to decide that giving birth would irreparably harm the mother. So unless you have any evidence to the contrary I have to figure that was the case.

 

Do you always bend over backwards to defend terrorists who kill law-abiding Americans in their own churches? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you always bend over backwards to defend terrorists who kill law-abiding Americans in their own churches? :wacko:

 

Link to me defending this murderer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no idea if it's "all."

 

So when you just said this:

 

No, I'm saying that all of Tiller's late term abortions complied with Kansas law

 

You didn't really mean "all". :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So when you just said this:

You didn't really mean "all". :wacko:

 

Yes. Just like when you said you had me on ignore you sat there reading all of my posts anyway, idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, RP cannot resist turning a discussion into an irrelevant sematics argument based on nothing.

 

I absolutely do not care if you can find an example that turned out to be an exception. The fact remains that Dr. Tiller performed medical procedures that were legal, medically validated and necessary. He was a very strong and caring physician that did his job every day under the threat of death. He had made peace with his role and didn't deserve to be murdered in front of his wife at church.

 

I'm not interested in defending late term abortion, its a terrible cost. But it is necessary in some cases.

 

The fact remains that there is a group of people that have taken their opinion on a single topic, have developed fanatical views, and act on those in dangerous and violent ways. By bombing and murdering. If they were Muslims, we'd have rounded them up and you'd all be demanding they were waterboarded at Gitmo to find the rest.

 

Abortion is. It has been a part of the human condition since the beginning of time. No law banning it will solve this and if you speak to anyone in the older medical generation, they will tell you that legalizing abortion was a responsible decision, even if a sad one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, RP cannot resist turning a discussion into an irrelevant sematics argument based on nothing.

 

I absolutely do not care if you can find an example that turned out to be an exception. The fact remains that Dr. Tiller performed medical procedures that were legal, medically validated and necessary. He was a very strong and caring physician that did his job every day under the threat of death. He had made peace with his role and didn't deserve to be murdered in front of his wife at church.

 

I'm not interested in defending late term abortion, its a terrible cost. But it is necessary in some cases.

 

The fact remains that there is a group of people that have taken their opinion on a single topic, have developed fanatical views, and act on those in dangerous and violent ways. By bombing and murdering. If they were Muslims, we'd have rounded them up and you'd all be demanding they were waterboarded at Gitmo to find the rest.

 

Abortion is. It has been a part of the human condition since the beginning of time. No law banning it will solve this and if you speak to anyone in the older medical generation, they will tell you that legalizing abortion was a responsible decision, even if a sad one.

you are focking delusional. "caring physician" :unsure: ...i can find example after example of his "catastrophic" reasons. again, i'm in no way defending his murderer...but tiller was just as much a murderer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but tiller was just as much a murderer.

Not even close. Tiller wasn't breaking the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not even close. Tiller wasn't breaking the law.

:doublethumbsup:

 

Count One: On July 22, 2003, Tiller performed an about on a 14 year old patient who was 26 weeks pregnant, relying on a diagnosis of Anxiety Disorder Not Otherwise Specified or Adjustmen Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. This hardly constitutes a "substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."

 

Count Two: On July 22, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 29 weeks pregnant, reporting the fetus as being not viable but not having any basis for the determination. Nor was their any determonation of what health problem in the mother that supposedly necessitated the abortion.

 

Count Three: On July 8, 2003, tiller performed an abortion on a 10-year old patient who was 28 weeks pregnant. The girl had been diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Four: On July 8, 2003, tiller performed an abortion on a 28-weeks pregnant woman without determining fetal viability. There was no note of any medical condition of the mother.

 

Count Five: On July 15, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 15-year-old girl who was 28 weeks pregnant. She had a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Six: On July 15, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 28 weeks pregnant. There was no note of any medical condition of the mother.

 

Dount Seven: On November 18, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 16-year-old who was 29 weeks pregnant. She had a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Eight: On November 18, 2003, Tiller did an abortion on a patient who was 29 weeks pregnant, without any basis for the abortion documented.

 

Count Nine: On July 30, 2003, Tiller performed an abotion on a 19-year-old patient who was 27 weeks pregnant, relying on a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Ten: On July 30, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 27 weeks pregnant, diagnosing the fetus as non-viable but with no indication of how this was supposedly determined.

 

Count Eleven: On August 19, 2003, Tiller performed an aboriton on a 22-year-old patient who was 31 weeks pregnant, relying on a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Twelve: On August 19, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 31 weeks pregnant, without any documentaion of what the supposed medical justification was.

 

Count Thirteen: On August 5, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 15-year-old girl who was 26 weeks pregnant, based on a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Fourteen: On August 5, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a woman who was 26 weeks pregnant, without any documentaion of the supposed medical justification.

 

Count Fifteen: Blurred, referring to an abortion on August 5, 2003.

 

Count Sixteen: Blurred, so I can't determine the date of the abortion. The patient was 28 weeks pregnant. There was no documentation of the supposed medical justification for the abortion.

 

Count Seventeen: On August 12, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 15-year-old girl who was 25 weeks pregnant, based on Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Eighteen: On August 12, 2003, Tiller perfomed an abortion on a woman who was 25 weeks pregnant, not documeting the alleged medical justification.

 

Count Nineteen: On August 19, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 15-year-old who was 26 weeks pregnant, based on a diagnosis of Acute Stress Disorder. (A refreshing departure from the standard Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.)

 

Count Twenty: On August 19, tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 26 weeks pregnant, without documenting the supposed medical justification.

 

Count Twenty One: On November 4, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 15-year-old girl who was 25 weeks pregnant on the basis of a diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Twenty Two: On November 4, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 25 weeks pregnant, wihtout any documentation of the supposed medical justification.

 

Count Twenty Three: On August 26, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 14-year-old patient who was 25 weeks pregnant, based on a diagnosis of Acute Stress Disorder. (I guess they decided to vary the mental health diagnoses instead of using the same one again and again and again.)

 

Count Twenty Four: On August 26, 2003, Tiller did an abortion on a woman who was 25 weeks pregnant without documenting the alleged medical justification.

 

Count Twenty Five: On September 9, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a 15-year-old girl who was 25 weeks pregnant, reverting to Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode.

 

Count Twenty Six: On September 9, 2003, Tiller did an abortion on a 25 weeks pregnant woman, wihout documeting whatever her supposed health problem was.

 

Count Twenty Seven: On November 4, 2003, Tiller did an abortion on an 18-year-old patient who was 25 weeks pregnant. This one was Anxiety Disorder Not Otherwise Specified or Acute Stress Disorder, which we'd not seen for what, a year now?

 

Count Twenty Eight: On November 4, 2003, Tiller did an abortion on a woman who was 25 weeks pregnant, without documeting whatever her medical problem was supposed to be.

 

Count Twenty Nine: On Nobember 4, 2003, Tiller did an abortion on a 13-year-old girl who was 25 weeks pregnant, based on no established diagnosis whatsoever.

 

Count Thirty: On November 4, 2003, Tiller performed an abortion on a patient who was 25 weeks pregnant, stating that the fetus was not viable but not saying how this was supposedly determined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still trying to understand the legalise as to when you are allowed to have a late-term abortion and when you cannot by law. To be sure "Depression" is not a valid reason. Even Pro-Choice people must concede that during the latter half of a pregnancy there should be strict, and I mean VERY strict legal guidlines that must be met to have an abortion. Even Pro-Choicer's have to agree with that?

 

I would think this medical condition must be determined by a secondary doctor and must meet specific critera that is life threatening to the mother. Or some kind of major abnormality to the child.

 

:doublethumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still trying to understand the legalise as to when you are allowed to have a late-term abortion and when you cannot by law. To be sure "Depression" is not a valid reason. Even Pro-Choice people must concede that during the latter half of a pregnancy there should be strict, and I mean VERY strict legal guidlines that must be met to have an abortion. Even Pro-Choicer's have to agree with that?

 

I would think this medical condition must be determined by a secondary doctor and must meet specific critera that is life threatening to the mother. Or some kind of major abnormality to the child.

 

:doublethumbsup:

 

I'm pro choice, and I have no problem with outlawing abortion after viability except in cases of detrimental health to the mother. And by that I mean that delivering a child will likely kill her, not "depression" or some crap.

 

But pre viability, anything goes IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, RP cannot resist turning a discussion into an irrelevant sematics argument based on nothing.

 

 

No, MDC made baseless claims and lied through his keyboard. I simply exposed him as the liar he is.

 

HTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pro choice, and I have no problem with outlawing abortion after viability except in cases of detrimental health to the mother. And by that I mean that delivering a child will likely kill her, not "depression" or some crap.

 

But pre viability, anything goes IMO.

I agree. I'd also add that it should be acceptable if the baby will definitely be born severly crippled or extremely retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pro choice, and I have no problem with outlawing abortion after viability except in cases of detrimental health to the mother. And by that I mean that delivering a child will likely kill her, not "depression" or some crap.

 

But pre viability, anything goes IMO.

Yeah, I thought it was pretty much unheard of after say 16-20 weeks to have an abortion unless something really was wrong. After reading a little about this murder I appears as if this happens more than I thought for much less important reasons than I thought.

 

The 'when life begins' abortion arguement is not gonna change anyone's mind. I'm not talking about that.

 

But I think both sides can concede that after a certain point when the baby can actually be delivered (we see premies live after 20 weeks) then there has to be VERY strict guidelines in place. I don't think that is the case right now. I mean, "Depression" for crying out loud? :doublethumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's your baby, you should be able to abort it right after you've given birth if you don't like the looks of it, or give it up for adoption.

 

Do you have to buy a pair of shoes without trying them on 1st?

 

Do you buy a car without driving it 1st?

 

Why the fock should you have to keep a child for the rest of your life if it looks like Tikigods when it comes out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why the fock should you have to keep a child for the rest of your life if it looks like Tikigods when it comes out?

Hard to argue when you put it in those terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. I'd also add that it should be acceptable if the baby will definitely be born severly crippled or extremely retarded.

 

I think that you will find few people who will agree that late-term abortion is acceptable in any and all situations. Even staunch pro-choice advocates are queasy about it. I am in favor of exceptions for the health of the mother or if the baby will not live after birth, but reasonable restrictions should be, and are, in place. The fact that porky and his ilk can't face is that this doctor was completely within the bounds of the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that porky and his ilk can't face is that this doctor was completely within the bounds of the law.

This might not be the case. Just because he wasn't prosecuted, doesn't mean he shouldn't have been. Depression? That's a good reason to kill a viable baby? C'mon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reasonable restrictions should be, and are, in place. The fact that porky and his ilk can't face is that this doctor was completely within the bounds of the law.

Not sure if I am in porkies ilk, but I don't think reasonable restrictions are in place. Tiller may have in fact been with in the bounds of the law, but my contention is that those bounds need to be tightened. Severely tightened for late-term abortions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if I am in porkies ilk, but I don't think reasonable restrictions are in place. Tiller may have in fact been with in the bounds of the law, but my contention is that those bounds need to be tightened. Severely tightened for late-term abortions.

 

And I'm with you on that. I wouldn't want to see a viable baby aborted because the mother was depressed or some such nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no idea if it's "all." No one does, because there's this thing called medical privacy. But there are exactly three clinics that provide late term abortions in the US and Tiller's is in a state where 2 doctors have to decide that giving birth would irreparably harm the mother. So unless you have any evidence to the contrary I have to figure that was the case.

 

Do you always bend over backwards to defend terrorists who kill law-abiding Americans in their own churches? :unsure:

:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This might not be the case. Just because he wasn't prosecuted, doesn't mean he shouldn't have been. Depression? That's a good reason to kill a viable baby? C'mon...

 

No, but if under the current law, he was allowed to do that, then he wasn't committing a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh Porky?

 

"Counts"<>Convicted

 

On March 27, 2009, Tiller was found not guilty of all 19 misdemeanor charges stemming from some abortions he performed at his Wichita clinic in 2003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, but if under the current law, he was allowed to do that, then he wasn't committing a crime.

I'd venture to say that when the law was written, this not what they intended. But I wasn't there, so who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd venture to say that when the law was written, this not what they intended. But I wasn't there, so who knows.

Yeah, that is kinda what I was thinking. I really don't know either so obviously this is all speculative, but I am gonna guess the law is written to give the doctor discretion to 'make the call' if the medical condition is viable enough to warrant a late-term abortion.

 

I can see where the law can be muddled if not clearly defined. A very liberal (not in a political sense) doctor could deem almost any condition as a viable reason.

 

Of course this is just my guess. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:unsure:

 

I see Wiffleslut the cheerleader has chimed in to wallow in MDC's lies. Since MDC failed to show where I have defended this murderer mebbe you should give it a shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd venture to say that when the law was written, this not what they intended. But I wasn't there, so who knows.

 

You're probably right, and I wonder how this guy was comfortable with some of his actions. I wouldn't be. But I would also not like for the option of this procedure to be taken away in the rare instances where it is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This might not be the case. Just because he wasn't prosecuted, doesn't mean he shouldn't have been. Depression? That's a good reason to kill a viable baby? C'mon...

Depression during Pregnancy

 

Can depression during pregnancy cause harm to my baby?

 

Depression that is not treated can have potential dangerous risks to the mother and baby. Untreated depression can lead to poor nutrition, drinking, smoking, and suicidal behavior, which can then cause premature birth, low birth weight, and developmental problems. A woman who is depressed often does not have the strength or desire to adequately care for herself or her developing baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Depression during Pregnancy

 

Can depression during pregnancy cause harm to my baby?

 

Depression that is not treated can have potential dangerous risks to the mother and baby. Untreated depression can lead to poor nutrition, drinking, smoking, and suicidal behavior, which can then cause premature birth, low birth weight, and developmental problems. A woman who is depressed often does not have the strength or desire to adequately care for herself or her developing baby.

I'm not a doctor but prolly not as much harm as aborting her/him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not a doctor but prolly not as much harm as aborting her/him.

:unsure:

 

Yeah, I can somewhat get the pro-choice stance on abortion in the early term. I don't really agree, but I can understand. However if this Bishop guy is trying to tell me that it is okay to kill a baby (at late term this cannot be disputed that it is a baby) because the mother may be depressed; then he can go fock himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:unsure:

 

Yeah, I can somewhat get the pro-choice stance on abortion in the early term. I don't really agree, but I can understand. However if this Bishop guy is trying to tell me that it is okay to kill a baby (at late term this cannot be disputed) because the mother may be depressed; then he can go fock himself.

I'm just saying, how many times have you heard on the news about some mother "going nuts" and killing her baby? Is it a result of depression during pregnancy, beats me. But you asked if depression was a good reason to kill a baby, I'm just saying that it might be in very extreme cases.

 

***I'm NOT a doctor***

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that you will find few people who will agree that late-term abortion is acceptable in any and all situations. Even staunch pro-choice advocates are queasy about it.

TorridJoe supported it. His position was that the law defines a fetus as not alive until it is born, so the mother has the right to abort up to the point of birth. I'm not saying he would do it with his baby or anything. I actually respected the cleanness of his position, although not the position itself. Otherwise you get into the slippery slope of "viability."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just saying, how many times have you heard on the news about some mother "going nuts" and killing her baby? Is it a result of depression during pregnancy, beats me. But you asked if depression was a good reason to kill a baby, I'm just saying that it might be in very extreme cases.

 

***I'm NOT a doctor***

So, let's get this straight. You think in extreme cases, doctors should kill the baby before the mother gets a chance to do it herself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×