Author Topic: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law  (Read 52585 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline clockworkgirl21

  • Day In, Day Out. All the Time. Work, Work, Work
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
  • Gender: Female
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #45 on: February 18, 2012, 02:24:05 pm »
I too thought calling this rape was a stretch. I'm not saying it isn't terrible what they're doing, but rape? And anyone who agrees is a rape apologist? Give me a break. Isn't it enough that we all agree it's unnecessary and should be done away with? Do you have to agree it's rape to not be scum?

Offline Osama bin Bambi

  • The Black Witch
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10167
  • Gender: Female
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #46 on: February 18, 2012, 02:27:09 pm »
Come to think of it, how is this even constitutional? Freedom of association and all that...
Formerly known as Eva-Beatrice and Wykked Wytch.

Quote from: sandman
There are very few problems that cannot be solved with a good taint punching.

Offline MiriamM

  • Neonate
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #47 on: February 18, 2012, 02:39:27 pm »
Quote
There is no evidence at all that the ultrasound is a medical necessity, and nobody attempted to defend it on those grounds.

It is undefendable on those grounds, because we don't legislate what constitutes best practice; medical science moving on as fast as it does, and legislature as slow as it does, it would force doctors to use outdated means. However, according to my about-8-years-out-of-date knowledge, it is best practice; the idea that TVUS is not the norm for women undergoing an abortion in the US strikes me as irresponsible.

The main thing about the procedure is objectively measuring how far along the pregnancy is. Since menstruation is not an exact predictor of ovulation, and vaginal bleeding can occur in pregnancy and be mistaken for menstruation, making sure to recommend the optimal method (and not use ones not proven safe) would seem important to me. It is also the way to find out about anatomical anomalities that might be worth knowing for curettage.

That being said, it is clearly a dickish law, not intended for protecting women from quacks. And even if it was intended as benevolent, it would go about it wrong, since you don't legislate best practice. However, for its effect right now, it's like having a law that you can't have back surgery without having your spine imaged first.

Offline Osama bin Bambi

  • The Black Witch
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10167
  • Gender: Female
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #48 on: February 18, 2012, 02:41:12 pm »
Quote
There is no evidence at all that the ultrasound is a medical necessity, and nobody attempted to defend it on those grounds.

It is undefendable on those grounds, because we don't legislate what constitutes best practice; medical science moving on as fast as it does, and legislature as slow as it does, it would force doctors to use outdated means. However, according to my about-8-years-out-of-date knowledge, it is best practice; the idea that TVUS is not the norm for women undergoing an abortion in the US strikes me as irresponsible.

The main thing about the procedure is objectively measuring how far along the pregnancy is. Since menstruation is not an exact predictor of ovulation, and vaginal bleeding can occur in pregnancy and be mistaken for menstruation, making sure to recommend the optimal method (and not use ones not proven safe) would seem important to me. It is also the way to find out about anatomical anomalities that might be worth knowing for curettage.

That being said, it is clearly a dickish law, not intended for protecting women from quacks. And even if it was intended as benevolent, it would go about it wrong, since you don't legislate best practice. However, for its effect right now, it's like having a law that you can't have back surgery without having your spine imaged first.

Abortion done by a licensed doctor is one of the safest medical procedures a woman can get. It is nowhere near the severity of back surgery. This law is just a means to make it embarrassing and difficult for lower-class women to get abortions.
Formerly known as Eva-Beatrice and Wykked Wytch.

Quote from: sandman
There are very few problems that cannot be solved with a good taint punching.

Offline MiriamM

  • Neonate
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #49 on: February 18, 2012, 02:51:51 pm »
...it's like having a law that you can't have back surgery without having your spine imaged first.

Abortion done by a licensed doctor is one of the safest medical procedures a woman can get. It is nowhere near the severity of back surgery.

It's safe because it's performed according to best practice, which in my memory includes TVUS.

Granted, back surgery was an overly dramatic metaphor. Going for under-dramatic ones, it's like a law that you can't prescribe antibiotics for a sinus infection without doing a sinus ultrasound. Both are equally enforcing something that should be highly encouraged.

This law is just a means to make it embarrassing and difficult for lower-class women to get abortions.

I wholeheartedly agree that it is the lawmaker's intent, and I think I stated so in my post. I just don't think making it mandatory will change anything, since TVUS is a valid, recommendable medical procedure in the situation and is probably performed on 95% of the women already.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2012, 02:57:53 pm by MiriamM »

Offline TenfoldMaquette

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #50 on: February 18, 2012, 04:10:14 pm »
Granted, back surgery was an overly dramatic metaphor. Going for under-dramatic ones, it's like a law that you can't prescribe antibiotics for a sinus infection without doing a sinus ultrasound. Both are equally enforcing something that should be highly encouraged.

It'd be a more apt metaphor if people were arguing for the rights of the contents of your sinuses to have precedent over your rights as the owner of said sinuses, and if there were no medically rational reason to do a sinus ultrasound in the first place.

Offline Lithp

  • Official FSTDT Spokesman
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #51 on: February 18, 2012, 04:29:06 pm »
Quote
I too thought calling this rape was a stretch. I'm not saying it isn't terrible what they're doing, but rape? And anyone who agrees is a rape apologist? Give me a break. Isn't it enough that we all agree it's unnecessary and should be done away with? Do you have to agree it's rape to not be scum?

It is rape. It's coerced penetration of the vagina. It's rape. I don't know what you want me to do about it, I can't make it not rape. You know who can make Nickerson look like less of an asshole? Nickerson. I'm not covering for him, I don't particularly like the guy either. But I do like you, so I'm going to do you a favor & eplain something: "We still think it's wrong" is a cute sentiment, but what happens when you get an activist group who claims it's rape? How do you handle their concerns? Do you tell them they're full of shit because of one or more legal loopholes? Or do you concede that it's institutionalized rape by coercion? You're not going to be able to remain neutral, they're going to feel like you're making an extremely important concern into something much less important. You will be their enemy, their arguments will be made to prove you wrong. If you can't handle it here, on an internet forum, with me, who does not feel like he's been raped, then I'd hate to see how your position holds up in the real world.

Quote
Yes, everyone can call it rape if they want to.  Just like the pro-life side calls abortion murder.  They're in the same vein.  You know the one where people use words loosely so to make the other side as horrible as possible.  I know it's not possible at all for anyone to express how much they think this law is wrong without calling it rape, so you all have fun with that.

Of course you can think the law is incorrect without being rape. That doesn't make you right. It also doesn't make your analogy to abortion accurate, because there is a lot more to that issue that makes it much different to walking up & shooting a guy. You have issues with rights to bodily autonomy, the difference between a fully formed human & a bunch of cells, & Roe vs. Wade, just to name a few. But if you want to get mad, & claim persecution when people are offended by your illogical arguments & lack of tact, be my guest. All it will mean for me is that I need to go make some Pop-Corn.

Quote
Or he could be correct, under Virginia law....

This is a stupid argument. This is effectively saying that it can't be rape if it's legal. So say, for the sake of the argument, Congress somehow & for some reason legalized using rufelin to drug someone into unconsciousness & have sex with them. According to this line of reasoning, you have no right to question the law as state-sanctioned rape, because it's legal. Hey, look at the shape that argument makes! It's a circle!

People have long been arguing that the definition of rape is invalid. Do you consider man-on-man penetration to be rape? Because that's a fairly recent change to the legal definition.

With your last thing, I have to wonder if VA also does not recognize getting someone drunk, or having sex with someone who's underaged as some form of sexual assault. Because if they do, then that means you don't have to be using overt violence to be convicted.

Quote
That might be true if the doctors were the ones making that decision.  They are not.  They will be following that law.  They will not have an option to just preform the abortion.

Plus I might think that actual victims of rape might disagree that having this procedure done is rape.  Hell, lets just call routine pap-smears rape as well.  I hear those are uncomfortable.

First of all, I never said the doctors were the guilty party, so don't get smart with me when you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Secondly, you just made the "few minutes of discomfort" argument with no sense of irony. Yeah, it's not like this is the same argument used by people claiming "rape is just sex," or anything.

All I said was that it was unlikely you could make an argument that this isn't rape without using rape apology arguments. For the backlash you're getting from not only proving it, but by coming across as a belittling asshole to anyone who doesn't fit your definition of "actual rape," that's on you.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2012, 04:36:10 pm by Lithp »

Offline Meshakhad

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2205
  • Gender: Male
  • The Night Is Dark And Full Of Terrors... Like Me
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #52 on: February 18, 2012, 04:50:32 pm »
Hey... can we potentially arrest the Virginia state legislature for accessory to rape?
G-d's Kingdom Is A Hate-Free Zone

Quote from: Reploid Productions
Pardon the interruption, good sir/lady; there are aspects of your behavior that I find quite unbecoming, and I must insist most strenuously that I be permitted to assist in resolving these behaviors through the repeated high-velocity cranial introduction of particularly firm building materials.

Quote from: Meshakhad
GIVE ME KNOWLEDGE OR I WILL PUT A CAP IN YO ASS!

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #53 on: February 18, 2012, 04:55:04 pm »
First of all, I never said the doctors were the guilty party, so don't get smart with me when you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Secondly, you just made the "few minutes of discomfort" argument with no sense of irony. Yeah, it's not like this is the same argument used by people claiming "rape is just sex," or anything.

All I said was that it was unlikely you could make an argument that this isn't rape without using rape apology arguments. For the backlash you're getting from not only proving it, but by coming across as a belittling asshole to anyone who doesn't fit your definition of "actual rape," that's on you.

So it's rape, but the doctors will not be guilty.  How does that work?

If you bothered to notice my saying we should also call pap-smears rape was ridiculous, which was the point.  It stupid that same way calling a mandatory sonogram rape.  It is nothing more that verbal posturing.

As far as any activist group or groups that want to call this rape, I think they are off base as well.  If and activist group or anyone here wants to pull that "you agree with us or you are against us" so be it.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2012, 04:57:31 pm by m52nickerson »
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline Lithp

  • Official FSTDT Spokesman
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #54 on: February 18, 2012, 05:09:30 pm »
Quote
So it's rape, but the doctors will not be guilty.  How does that work?

It's not that difficult a concept if you're not a second grader. The guilty party is the party doing the coercion. If I put gasoline over a house, knowing someone in there is a smoker, they aren't guilty of arson/murder/what have you because they ignited the fire. I made it happen, they were an unwitting & unwilling tool.

Quote
If you bothered to notice my saying we should also call pap-smears rape was ridiculous, which was the point.

...What?

No, seriously, what the Hell? Do you think I am unable to tell when you're saying something stupid intentionally, to make some kind of "point," & when you're doing it unintentionally? It's not like I "missed this," or anything, it's what I was talking about when I said you made the "few minutes of discomfort" argument.

Because what makes it rape has nothing to do with it being uncomfortable, lots of things are uncomfortable. Just like not all forms of vaginal penetration are rape. Neither facet of this procedure makes it rape, it's the coercion aspect, COMBINED with the vaginal penetration aspect, that does.

Seriously, Nicky, listen to the Soup: "Those who can't approach a discussion with a basic level of intelligence & maturity shouldn't expect to be taken seriously."

Quote
It stupid that same way calling a mandatory sonogram rape.  It is nothing more that verbal posturing.

No it's not. It was just stupid by its own merits. It's like saying getting a girl drunk & having sex with her isn't rape because she consented to drink with you, & then she consented to sex. At no point did you "force her" to do anything. But obviously, that defense doesn't work.

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #55 on: February 18, 2012, 05:27:55 pm »
It's not that difficult a concept if you're not a second grader. The guilty party is the party doing the coercion. If I put gasoline over a house, knowing someone in there is a smoker, they aren't guilty of arson/murder/what have you because they ignited the fire. I made it happen, they were an unwitting & unwilling tool.

Pouring the gas would not be coercion.  Your not talking the person into lighting the cigarette.  Yes, pouring the gas would still be murder, but not by coercion.

...What?

No, seriously, what the Hell? Do you think I am unable to tell when you're saying something stupid intentionally, to make some kind of "point," & when you're doing it unintentionally? It's not like I "missed this," or anything, it's what I was talking about when I said you made the "few minutes of discomfort" argument.

Because what makes it rape has nothing to do with it being uncomfortable, lots of things are uncomfortable. Just like not all forms of vaginal penetration are rape. Neither facet of this procedure makes it rape, it's the coercion aspect, COMBINED with the vaginal penetration aspect, that does.

There is a bit more then just discomfort to pap-smears.  They are also a medical procedure.  They are also required before some other types of treatments can be administers.  Not to mention they are done only by consent.

Seriously, Nicky, listen to the Soup: "Those who can't approach a discussion with a basic level of intelligence & maturity shouldn't expect to be taken seriously."
Perhaps you and others should take that advice.

No it's not. It was just stupid by its own merits. It's like saying getting a girl drunk & having sex with her isn't rape because she consented to drink with you, & then she consented to sex. At no point did you "force her" to do anything. But obviously, that defense doesn't work.

...well it might be like that except for that whole part about getting drunk.  Impaired people really can't give consent.  Plus a women would have to consent to both the ultrasound and the abortion.
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline Eniliad

  • Sword And Shield Of The Innocent
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1265
  • Gender: Male
  • Perpetually horny cock-slave
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #56 on: February 18, 2012, 05:49:03 pm »
*Content cut to save post space*



There is a bit more then just discomfort to pap-smears.  They are also a medical procedure.  They are also required before some other types of treatments can be administers.  Not to mention they are done only by consent.



No seriously, this has nothing to do with the argument.

Anyway...

The state of Virginia is saying it wants to humiliate and brow-beat women into having their baby by forcing them to have a useless vaginally-invasive procedure against their will. That basically fits the textbook definition of rape, as the crime can be carried out with a non-penile instrument and it still qualifies.
<Miles> "If dildoes are outlawed then only outlaws will have dildoes."
Quote from: Mlle Antéchrist
Yeah, gays cause hurricanes, tits cause earthquakes, and lack of prayer causes tornadoes. Learn to science, people.
Quote from: Mlle Antéchrist
Porn peddlers peddling pedal porn? My life is complete.

Offline Lithp

  • Official FSTDT Spokesman
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #57 on: February 18, 2012, 06:11:48 pm »
Hey, I have an idea, let's replace "ultrasound" with "the doctor's penis," since that's clearly what you're having difficulty with.

Well, golly, I don't see why it's rape if she's expected to let the doctor stick his penis in her vagina. I mean, she could just opt not to have the abortion. No one's FORCING her to have a penis in her vagina. It's not rape, I'm sorry, but you guys are just overreacting to call it rape. She CONSENTED to have this penis in her vagina, just like she CONSENTED to have an abortion. The fact that having the doctor stick his penis in her vagina isn't necessary for the abortion to be successful, but she still has to do it in order to get her medical treatment, that doesn't make it rape. Why are you guys being so MEAN to me, & calling me a rape apologist? All I'm saying is that being told you have to let a man stick his penis in your vagina in order to have an abortion isn't rape.

And if you say it is, well, you're just being unreasonable. And persecuting me for my beliefs!

Yeah, I'm with Ironbite on this one. I haven't the patience for this horseshit.

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #58 on: February 18, 2012, 06:20:15 pm »
The state of Virginia is saying it wants to humiliate and brow-beat women into having their baby by forcing them to have a useless vaginally-invasive procedure against their will. That basically fits the textbook definition of rape, as the crime can be carried out with a non-penile instrument and it still qualifies.

Really what definition is that, lets have it.
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #59 on: February 18, 2012, 06:34:40 pm »
Hey, I have an idea, let's replace "ultrasound" with "the doctor's penis," since that's clearly what you're having difficulty with.

Well, golly, I don't see why it's rape if she's expected to let the doctor stick his penis in her vagina. I mean, she could just opt not to have the abortion. No one's FORCING her to have a penis in her vagina. It's not rape, I'm sorry, but you guys are just overreacting to call it rape. She CONSENTED to have this penis in her vagina, just like she CONSENTED to have an abortion. The fact that having the doctor stick his penis in her vagina isn't necessary for the abortion to be successful, but she still has to do it in order to get her medical treatment, that doesn't make it rape. Why are you guys being so MEAN to me, & calling me a rape apologist? All I'm saying is that being told you have to let a man stick his penis in your vagina in order to have an abortion isn't rape.

And if you say it is, well, you're just being unreasonable. And persecuting me for my beliefs!

Yeah, I'm with Ironbite on this one. I haven't the patience for this horseshit.

No lets not replace "ultrasound" with "the doctor's penis", because that is not my issue. Nor I'm I whining about being persecuted or being called a rape apologist.  It was a nice try.

What if a doctor required an ultra sound before they preformed an abortion.  What if they though it was for the best to make sure their were no other problems, would that be rape?  No, I don't think so.  What if the ultra sounds could be done without entering the vagina?  Doubt you will call that rape.  Oh, I get it must be that we can call rape just because it involves a doctor or nurse inserting a probe into the vagina...after a women consents to the procedure.

Well that would mean who ever did it would be rapist.  How could they not be?  A rapist is simply a person that commits rape.
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth