Texas Supreme Court rules against woman who sued to get abortion due to medical emergency (436 views, 38 replies)
senior guru
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont extends invitation to Texas mother denied abortion access
Gov. Ned Lamont publicly invited a Texas mother to obtain an abortion in Connecticut on Monday, after courts in the woman’s home state blocked her efforts to end her pregnancy due to a fatal fetal abnormality.
The governor's comments weighed in on the legal battle surrounding Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two from Dallas, whose requests to obtain an abortion despite Texas’ strict ban on the procedure have drawn national scrutiny. Before news of Lamont's invitation was made public, however, Cox's attorneys announced that she had already left Texas....
www.stamfordadvocate.com/connect...
@CitizenD This is a legal and medical clusterf**k of epic proportions. You have the doctors who know the extreme likelihood of death to the fetus and the danger to the mother but who on account of this abortion ban will not risk a lawsuit and/or criminal repercussions from the state.
Then you have the supreme court which will not act upon an exemption unless having a "good faith belief" from the doctors, which translates into 100% certainty of death rather than 99% probability of death. And instead of the court seizing the opportunity to provide implementing rules on the ban, they just turned down the case altogether.
Personally, I think the doctors are chickensh*ts and the supreme court judges are a shame to the legal profession. Everywhere else in the world, a medical opinion on medical matters trumps a legal opinion on medical matters.
@JudgeDredd I don't understand why the docs been chikshait. It's the law that won't allow criminal abortion. I assume they have to make up a new protocol for decisions in these cases. Unfortunately docs have to construct protocols and act upon the given frame of state law and good practice. Near death and borderline decisions in such cases is something that would correspond to what you said of not staying in pace and respect with the modern medical and social realities and progress. It contradicts with the good medical practice. I can add that a criminal abort with such a large fetus is something that makes even the most liberal docs feel nauseous and they also seen how these women get affected thinking parts of the babies been extracted or the process of killing it and forcing it out. It haunts them for years.In her case, things wouldn't been easy in both cases / having or not the abort. ...
Read more
@Nasos The doctors are chickensh*t for not standing behind their medical opinions. In this case, the entire argument rests between certainty and probability. The law requires certainty while the medical profession in its entirety is based on probability. In the eyes of the medical personnel, a 99% probability equals to a 100% certainty. But instead of sticking to their guns and insist on the procedure on account of the extremely dangerous complications to the health of the mother and the fetus, they simply raise their hands by saying they cant do anything as they cant provide the 100% certainty required by the law. The problem here is that science in any field NEVER provides for 100% certainty. But nobody argues that point. The female judge that first granted permission to the abortion saw that argument for what it was. The idiots in the supreme court argued the verbatim interpretation of the law which really doesnt leave any possibility of exemption save when the patient is pretty much already dead. ...
Read more
@JudgeDredd You do have a point. Fair. But let's think that exactly the opposite was happening. The state freely accepts abortion and the woman don't wants this. It's the docs that have to forcibly abort her? This means putting her hands in cuffs etc. Another simple example if a Jehova witness has lost blood and requires something more than usual blood liquids/ for example a woman bleeding a lot in her birth and the whole Jehova family is around, plus their Jehova lawyer also in the waiting room, should the docs for example restrain them or beat them and forcibly make the proper med practice? I am pro abort , as I have spoken in the past. But as for example I didn't had argument when one wants not to get vaccinated I also don't have arguments for this too. This why I have spoken for protocols etc, this in some parts includes WHO directives and International courts of human rights perhaps. ...
Read more
@Nasos Well, in the case that abortion is allowed and the woman doesnt want this, there is a protocol in place and its called AMA (Against Medical Advice). Upon signing that, all liability for the doctors regarding their obligation to the preservation of life, is extinguished and the patient can do whatever she wants, assuming at the same time the entire liability for her actions. The exception to that is if she is deemed to be of diminished responsibility, in which case she is prevented from taking such decisions that adversely affect her health. Another exception to the AMA protocol is the Public Health criterion which came in play during Covid. If her decision will likely affect and endanger other people, then the courts can actually force her to have the recommended therapy or isolate her in quarantine to prevent public endangerment.
In the case of Jehova's witnesses, the law is crystal clear. Religious beliefs trump medical advice BUT these beliefs must be well documented and explicitly prescribed in the religious dogma. That however does not include personal beliefs unrelated to a religion.
...
Read more
@JudgeDredd It's dirty for sure. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes in this case, because practice is much worse even with crystal clear laws. I hope people there find their ways in terms of Democracy, it's 21th century after all.
senior master
This is a stressful experience for the woman (and indeed the whole family) so needs to be done as early and sympathetically as possible to minimise damage.
These politicians have forgotten their function to do what is best for their country.
@Buttless Taking into account her overburdened medical past, stressful is an understatement. This is a life and death situation for her. And even going as far as to argue that point in court is a travesty of justice.
master
@(⌐■_■) Its not an issue of politics here. Its an issue of society. The judges around the world are bound by the law BUT have the capacity to exercise judicial discretion in the implementation and interpretation of the law.
I remember a case many many years ago in the UK where an elderly man was arrested for possession of cannabis. The man argued that he is suffering from lung cancer, in the 4th stage and that cannabis was the only painkiller that actually had an effect for his condition. The defence attorneys issued a call to the medical community to support that argument and everybody, the cream of the crop of the medical community worldwide, appeared in court to support it. Professors from Harvard Medical, Johns Hopkins, Yale and pretty much any university in the top 10 list for medicine came forward and testified to the validity of cannabis as a pain relief for that particular condition. The judge after hearing this avalanche of expert testimony, issued a decision by saying to the defendant (this is not verbatim but to the best of my recollection): "I understand the seriousness of this condition and the grave prognosis it carries. I also fully understand the medical justification for this but the law is clear. In its current form possession of cannabis is illegal and as such I have to find you guilty of the specific offense. For that offense I have to convict you to a fine of 1 Pound Sterling, payable in 6 monthly installments."
...
Read more
senior guru
If you are strongly pissed off by this news, you can express your displeasure by sending your stool sample to Chief Justice Nathan Hecht. Hecht is of German descent according to his last name, for which I apologize.
Judge Douchebag (They know who is meant there:)
The Supreme Court of Texas
Supreme Court Building
201 West 14th, Room 104
Austin, Texas 78701
His phone number is: (512) 463-1312.... just in case.
@CitizenD And, if you are afraid of them possibly identifying you by your stool sample from DNA or something, there are a couple of services that will send a big box of animal crap to the address of your choice, anonymously.
Like www.poopsenders.com/
and
www.sh*texpress.com/
P.S. change the * in the above address to i and you should be golden. ;)
senior guru
The time has come. For all friends of backside hygiene; you can now have your butt cleaned by Nathan Hecht. 
Rub it in!
senior guru
If she doesn't get it done; there's a high chance she won't be able to have kids again. And the baby most likely going to be born dead. So it's heartbreak after heartbreak.
master
master
This is why religion is supposed to be separate from politics. Yet, it always pops up when most unwanted.
Like 90% of the religious fanatics and far right idjits who fight against all abortion, no matter what, if they were raped and pregnant at 15, would totally change their tune. Or dying and needed one to survive. Or the baby was going to be born deformed and die, and/or possibly cause fatal complications. Incest. Even mistakes. No one should be able to tell someone else what to do with their own body. Period. An army of hypocritical morons, is what they are.
@tyetoes That's why I live in NY. We may have terrible winters some years, and a list of other problems, but we don't currently have people like Desatan in charge.
senior guru
Let me introduce you - this is Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
Paxton asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the case after a judge granted a 14-day temporary restraining order against the state's abortion ban so Cox could legally terminate her pregnancy.
From Wikipedia: After Biden won the presidential election and Donald Trump refused to concede while making false claims of election fraud, Paxton aided Trump in his efforts to overturn the result.
He spoke at the rally that immediately preceded the attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Paxton was indicted in 2015 on state securities fraud charges relating to activities prior to taking office; he has pleaded not guilty. The case was delayed over various procedural issues, but in October 2023 his trial was scheduled for April 2024. In October 2020, several high-level assistants in Paxton's office accused him of "bribery, abuse of office and other crimes."
...
Read more
@CollideDuhScope Oh WOW! 
I assume you got your expert opinion from a pack of chewing gum?
senior guru
guru
There have only been 2 women that have responded to this post. One I have blocked, it must be Olivia and the other Mizz Sunglasses.
Be careful all you manly men.
Be aware that we are watching and reading 
@CollideDuhScope Oh please. Do you seriously consider us in the 15-25 age range? Most if not all of us are or were married at one point or another. We know all about the Ninja ways of the female kind. We have been around the block enough to know that the greatest threat to mankind (special emphasis on the man part) is a woman in silence. The second greatest threat is a woman who responds in just three words: "I am fine". This three word sentence instills more fear than Charles Manson ever dreamed of.
@JudgeDredd I'm not a ninja kind of woman lol.. anyway I'm not participating in this realm of damned if you do and damned if you don't.. just simply said that people are following this thread xxoo JD
master
Similar forum topics
- Joy Official Trailer #1 (2015) (8 years ago)
- Joy Official International Trailer #1 (2015) (8 years ago)
- Suspiria (2018) Trailer (5 years ago)
- American Pickers and Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (UK) (3 years ago)
- Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (UK) Celebrity Special 2020 1 & 2 (3 years ago)
- Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (UK) Season 36 (3 years ago)
- Flag Day Trailer #1 (2021) (2 years ago)
- Can God speak on Mother’s Day? (5 years ago)
- The Boy Official Trailer #1 (2016) (8 years ago)
moderator
Oh Wow!!!!! Idiocracy at its finest
