524
submitted 8 months ago by alphanerd4@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

There needs to be exactly two groups involved in deciding to terminate a pregnancy: The pregnant person, and their medical team, with the pregnant person's choices taking precedence over everyone else's. If they want an abortion, they get one. If the doctors believe that the pregnancy is non-viable or carries an extreme risk to the parent, then the decision to terminate should be made only by the pregnant person.

It would be similar to the self-defense laws in many red states, they’re so loose that charges almost never stick if there’s any possibility that it was self defense.

And the doctors now risk getting arrested and having their mugshot published for everyone to see, having to go to court to fight it, possibly spending time in jail while waiting for trial. There's a saying "You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride".

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -2 points 8 months ago

If they want an abortion, they get one

I agree, but only for the first half of the pregnancy.

If the doctors believe that the pregnancy is non-viable or carries an extreme risk to the parent, then the decision to terminate should be made only by the pregnant person.

Also agree. Abortion for medical necessity should be allowed for the entire pregnancy.

And the doctors now risk getting arrested

Only if they violate the above. Doctors can already get arrested for malpractice, and I see this as essentially euthanasia of an unwilling patient. Police would need to prove intent to violate the law.

I think it's incredibly unlikely that doctors would actually be arrested unless they're knowingly doing a lot of illegal abortions.

this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
524 points (97.6% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7209 readers
392 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS