Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4
Heeeeerrrrre's Nancy!
Topic Started: Nov 9 2006, 09:16 AM (816 Views)
apple
one of the angels
Frank_W
Nov 9 2006, 02:43 PM
apple
Nov 9 2006, 11:08 AM
no need to be grossly insulting as we discuss politics.

I couldn't agree more. There was a time when differences in political and spiritual outlooks were debated and discussed with some modicum of respect. How interesting and wonderful that was.

Lately? :no:

we could start a moderator vs individual freedom war, but i'm afraid it would just contribute to the cacophony.

it behooves me to behold
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DivaDeb
HOLY CARP!!!
It's not been that long, Dave, I remember when things were quite different in that regard. I'm old, but not that old...surely you remember when people at least had the good grace to have some manners. Now, when you turn on the TV, they just simultaneously fillibuster, it's absurd. Message boards are not that different, nobody listens, it's just 'yack yack yack' and the bozo that yacks longest pats himself on the back and declares himself the winner.

(not talking about anyone in here, particularly, I participate and read a lot of political internet debate outside of piano forums)

It's pretty entertaining sometimes, in a sick sort of way, to watch just how much of their personal dignity people are ready to part with in the attempt to win an argument with someone whose name they don't even know.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
"Ten of the specialists said that in some cases a "partial birth procedure" is necessary to prevent hemorrhaging, organ failure or infertility."

First, if we call it "partial birth procedure" instead of "partial birth abortion" what difference does it make.

Second, I heard right. "is necessary to prevent ...infertility".

You stab the baby in the back of the neck as it is being born to prevent infertility?
Someone needs to go back to the drawing board and think about this one.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
apple
Nov 9 2006, 11:50 AM
Frank_W
Nov 9 2006, 02:43 PM
apple
Nov 9 2006, 11:08 AM
no need to be grossly insulting as we discuss politics.

I couldn't agree more. There was a time when differences in political and spiritual outlooks were debated and discussed with some modicum of respect. How interesting and wonderful that was.

Lately? :no:

we could start a moderator vs individual freedom war, but i'm afraid it would just contribute to the cacophony.

Nawwwww... I would never advocate that sort of thing. I was just making an observation.
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
George K
Nov 9 2006, 11:47 AM
How many here have seen an abortion?

How many here have seen a partial birth abortion?

I know of one person.

To prevent hemorrhage? Bullsh*t. I've been doing this for 30 years, and never have I heard that as an excuse.

I'm not taking a stand for or against abortion here, but you should know what you're talking about.

I've seen a caesarian section birth, and on that basis, I suggest we outlaw it. There's so much blood and other fluids flowing to and fro, it's disgusting.

It doesn't matter what it looks like. If it's legal to have an abortion, it should be legal to use the procedure deemed best by the patient's doctor.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DivaDeb
HOLY CARP!!!
I've witnessed three C-sections (my own)


everybody lived
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
DivaDeb
Nov 9 2006, 11:51 AM
It's not been that long, Dave, I remember when things were quite different in that regard. I'm old, but not that old...surely you remember when people at least had the good grace to have some manners. Now, when you turn on the TV, they just simultaneously fillibuster, it's absurd. Message boards are not that different, nobody listens, it's just 'yack yack yack' and the bozo that yacks longest pats himself on the back and declares himself the winner.

(not talking about anyone in here, particularly, I participate and read a lot of political internet debate outside of piano forums)

It's pretty entertaining sometimes, in a sick sort of way, to watch just how much of their personal dignity people are ready to part with in the attempt to win an argument with someone whose name they don't even know.

Deb:

I'm thinking about the era of yellow journalism in the 19th Century, when no one hesitated to call an opponent a bastard (in the true meaning of the word), and no reporter would hesitate to print it along with his own commentary. It was a colorful time, when the truth was at an even greater premium than it is today.

That said, I completely agree with you about the current tone. We should be able to do better.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
DivaDeb
Nov 9 2006, 11:57 AM
I've witnessed three C-sections (my own)


everybody lived

My point is that one shouldn't talk about a medical procedure based on how it looks, which is what George did. What it looks like is irrelevant.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DivaDeb
HOLY CARP!!!
Dave, I think you may be taking the word "seen" a little too literally in regard to what George was saying. Not that the good doctor can't talk for himself, he is more than capable (sorry George, I should keep my mouth shut)

Keep in mind when reading the posts on abortion that you may assume that you know someone's views on it, but several of us who tend to lean right have specifically stated that our views on this subject are not what you might assume given our views on other issues. Having said that...partial birth whatever you want to call it? I will go on record as having said 'no freaking way'.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 02:54 PM
I've seen a caesarian section birth, and on that basis, I suggest we outlaw it. There's so much blood and other fluids flowing to and fro, it's disgusting.

It doesn't matter what it looks like. If it's legal to have an abortion, it should be legal to use the procedure deemed best by the patient's doctor.

That has to be the silliest thing I've read in a long time, Dave. I understand you're being sarcastic, but my response was to Daniel's comment about what 'expert's use as a justification for partial birth abortion. I've been in practice in this location for 18 years, and at a university for 10 before that. In all that time, having taken care of hundreds of gyne patients, I've never heard those arguements used to justify partial birth abortion.

Interestingly enough, in all those years, I've only seen one. In 1974.

If this were a procedure that were necessary for the reasons that Daniel outlined, don't you think that just maybe, I'd have seen more than just one in 32 years?
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
DivaDeb
Nov 9 2006, 12:03 PM
Dave, I think you may be taking the word "seen" a little too literally in regard to what George was saying. Not that the good doctor can't talk for himself, he is more than capable (sorry George, I should keep my mouth shut)

Keep in mind when reading the posts on abortion that you may assume that you know someone's views on it, but several of us who tend to lean right have specifically stated that our views on this subject are not what you might assume given our views on other issues. Having said that...partial birth whatever you want to call it? I will go on record as having said 'no freaking way'.

And I go on record saying it is none of our business. It is a procedure with a legitimate purpose that is taught in medical schools. It should not be banned by a bunch of politicians in Washington, depending on which bunch is in power at the time. Each person has the right to reject such treatment. But if you (or your daughter) needed it, and your doctor thought this was the best thing to do under the circumstances, would you want him to hesitate because it was illegal? My guess is that the hypocratic oath would overrule the law, and the doctor would perform the illegal procedure anyway. Then I'd like to see the career of the attorney general who hauled him into court.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
I understand the AMA will not even endorse the procedure.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 01:40 PM
Quote:
 
Bushwa.

Jolly: The courts have not found evidence supporting your view or the "facts" on which Congress based its law. Aren't you a conservative? Why do you think it's appropriate for Congress to decide what medical procedures can and can't be used? What business is it of politicians of any stripe to decide this instead of doctors and their patients? Bushwa indeed.

Then I take it you are also a proponent of active euthanasia?
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
George K
Nov 9 2006, 12:04 PM
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 02:54 PM
I've seen a caesarian section birth, and on that basis, I suggest we outlaw it. There's so much blood and other fluids flowing to and fro, it's disgusting.

It doesn't matter what it looks like. If it's legal to have an abortion, it should be legal to use the procedure deemed best by the patient's doctor.

That has to be the silliest thing I've read in a long time, Dave. I understand you're being sarcastic, but my response was to Daniel's comment about what 'expert's use as a justification for partial birth abortion. I've been in practice in this location for 18 years, and at a university for 10 before that. In all that time, having taken care of hundreds of gyne patients, I've never heard those arguements used to justify partial birth abortion.

Interestingly enough, in all those years, I've only seen one. In 1974.

If this were a procedure that were necessary for the reasons that Daniel outlined, don't you think that just maybe, I'd have seen more than just one in 32 years?

George:

It is a rarely used procedure, so it's not surprising you haven't seen it but once. But the large majority of experts in this field want to keep it legally available for those rare times when it is the best procedure to use.

I don't know what your speciality is, George, so you'll have to help me here. Is there a rarely used procedure in your field? What if politicians in Washington told you couldn't use it for whatever reason? Would you feel that it was none of their business? Would you appreciate them questioning your medical opinions from behind their safe desks thousands of miles away?

I'm not a doctor, but I know how I'd feel about it.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 01:59 PM
DivaDeb
Nov 9 2006, 11:57 AM
I've witnessed three C-sections (my own)


everybody lived

My point is that one shouldn't talk about a medical procedure based on how it looks, which is what George did. What it looks like is irrelevant.

Dearest knothead,

He's not talking about what the procedure "looks like", he's talking about the actual procedure...the man has M.D. behind his name in the first place. In the second place, he's most likely one of the guys in the suite when the procedure is done.

He's not blowing smoke out his rearend, but arguing from a point of knowledge.
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 02:15 PM
George K
Nov 9 2006, 12:04 PM
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 02:54 PM
I've seen a caesarian section birth, and on that basis, I suggest we outlaw it. There's so much blood and other fluids flowing to and fro, it's disgusting.

It doesn't matter what it looks like. If it's legal to have an abortion, it should be legal to use the procedure deemed best by the patient's doctor.

That has to be the silliest thing I've read in a long time, Dave. I understand you're being sarcastic, but my response was to Daniel's comment about what 'expert's use as a justification for partial birth abortion. I've been in practice in this location for 18 years, and at a university for 10 before that. In all that time, having taken care of hundreds of gyne patients, I've never heard those arguements used to justify partial birth abortion.

Interestingly enough, in all those years, I've only seen one. In 1974.

If this were a procedure that were necessary for the reasons that Daniel outlined, don't you think that just maybe, I'd have seen more than just one in 32 years?

George:

It is a rarely used procedure, so it's not surprising you haven't seen it but once. But the large majority of experts in this field want to keep it legally available for those rare times when it is the best procedure to use.

I don't know what your speciality is, George, so you'll have to help me here. Is there a rarely used procedure in your field? What if politicians in Washington told you couldn't use it for whatever reason? Would you feel that it was none of their business? Would you appreciate them questioning your medical opinions from behind their safe desks thousands of miles away?

I'm not a doctor, but I know how I'd feel about it.

And tell me when are those rare times when it should be used?

The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 03:10 PM
And I go on record saying it is none of our business. It is a procedure with a legitimate purpose that is taught in medical schools. It should not be banned by a bunch of politicians in Washington, depending on which bunch is in power at the time. Each person has the right to reject such treatment.

Aren't you killing a baby who does not have the power to reject such a treatment?

How do you feel about killing old people who have lost their faculties? Is that any of our business?

The problem with the abortion debate is that people take such extreme and entrenched views that all thought seems to go out the window. Killing a baby that can survive is so obviously and clearly not the same as disposing of a 4 week old fetus, and yet both sides of this debate seem to believe that this is the case. I honestly don't get it.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
So, my doctor thinks a .45 slug through the forehead is a necessary if rarely needed procedure. Why should a bunch of people safely ensconsed in Washington tell him any different?
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 03:10 PM

And I go on record saying it is none of our business. It is a procedure with a legitimate purpose that is taught in medical schools. It should not be banned by a bunch of politicians in Washington, depending on which bunch is in power at the time. Each person has the right to reject such treatment. But if you (or your daughter) needed it, and your doctor thought this was the best thing to do under the circumstances, would you want him to hesitate because it was illegal?

You're right, an abortion is not my business. I am questioning the assumption that it is a legitimate medical procedure. It was NOT taught in my medical school. As I said, I have seen one, only one, in 32 years in the OR. If it were a legitimate procedure, with no alternatives, don't you think it would be more common?

No obtetrician I have ever spoken to has given me a reason for "partial birth" abortion. It's a smokescreen.

Quote:
 
My guess is that the hypocratic oath would overrule the law, and the doctor would perform the illegal procedure anyway. Then I'd like to see the career of the attorney general who hauled him into court.


The hypocratic (sic) oath is subjective, and not a matter of law. "First do no harm" means you have to know what harm is, to whom, and weigh the consequences of not doing that. Is euthanasia included when you see someone suffering? I won't commit that crime, regardless of what oath I may have taken in medical school.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
JBryan
Nov 9 2006, 12:12 PM
I understand the AMA will not even endorse the procedure.

Here's what the AMA said in a 1997 letter to Rick Santorum from the AMA:

Quote:
 
First, the bill would allow a legitimate exception where the life of the mother was endangered, thereby preserving the physician's judgment to take any medically necessary steps to save the life of the mother. Second, the bill would clearly define the prohibited procedure so that it is clear on the face of the legislation what act is to be banned.


Text of AMA letter

That law was struck down several years ago. Do you have any evidence that the AMA supports the new law? I don't believe the AMA supports this version because the procedure is not clearly defined.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
JBryan
Nov 9 2006, 12:19 PM
So, my doctor thinks a .45 slug through the forehead is a necessary if rarely needed procedure. Why should a bunch of people safely ensconsed in Washington tell him any different?

I didn't know this was a medical procedure taught in medical school. And I thought doctors had an oath to do no harm.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DivaDeb
HOLY CARP!!!
Dave Spelvin
Nov 9 2006, 02:57 PM
DivaDeb
Nov 9 2006, 11:51 AM
It's not been that long, Dave, I remember when things were quite different in that regard.  I'm old, but not that old...surely you remember when people at least had the good grace to have some manners.  Now, when you turn on the TV, they just simultaneously fillibuster, it's absurd.  Message boards are not that different, nobody listens, it's just 'yack yack yack' and the bozo that yacks longest pats himself on the back and declares himself the winner. 

(not talking about anyone in here, particularly, I participate and read a lot of political internet debate outside of piano forums)

It's pretty entertaining sometimes, in a sick sort of way, to watch just how much of their personal dignity people are ready to part with in the attempt to win an argument with someone whose name they don't even know.

Deb:

I'm thinking about the era of yellow journalism in the 19th Century, when no one hesitated to call an opponent a bastard (in the true meaning of the word), and no reporter would hesitate to print it along with his own commentary. It was a colorful time, when the truth was at an even greater premium than it is today.

That said, I completely agree with you about the current tone. We should be able to do better.

I have NO problem whatsoever with utter frankness. (you may have um...gathered as much from my posts :ph43r: ) I don't mind colorful language either...I drive, therefore, I cuss (occasionally).

I do, however, think we're onto some agreement here that the level of political discourse in the last few years has deteriorated to playground stuff. Food fight...it's just so stupid I can't believe it (I can believe, I wish I couldn't!) Every single day, you turn on the tube and you get live feeds of people who are supposed to be the world's best and brightest acting like complete IMBECILES, just yammering on, refusing to answer posed questions, as if all those listening are so stupid that they can give a non-responsive response and no one will even notice...neither do they even have the courtesy to allow another person to complete a sentence. I find it beyond idiotic. It's a demonstration of the sort of base stupidity and total lack of consideration for anyone that is the troubling part about it. The behavior demonstrates an arrogance that gives me little hope for frutiful dialogue between sides. I am talking about both sides, you know. The television is 24/7 asses and jerks running off at the mouth.

Maybe our small world, microcosmic, forum board goal could be to generate a working model for how reasoned debate ought to be conducted. The way argument is handled now is, in most cases, totally antithetical to progress, persuasion, compromise, or concensus. Which makes it 100 percent pointless. Unless people are willing to *listen* to varying statements and have the integrity to do their own homework, and their own thinking, all this argument is just a bunch of kids with their fingers in their ears, singing LA LA LA as loud as they can, so they can't hear anything they might not want to hear.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Sorry for the two in a row:

Let me tell you about the partial birth I saw.

It was in 1974, and the fetus in question had hydrocephalus. Because of the size of the head, there were two things obvious:

1) The child was not viable - there was no brain left
2) The size of the head would not permit it to fit down the birth canal.

The child could have been delivered via cesaeran section, only to die within hours of birth, or a craniectomy (crushing the skull) could be performed, killing the fetus in utero, and letting the mom deliver vaginally. Option 2 was chosen, for the risks of a section were greater than a vaginal delivery, especially considering a non-viable fetus.

Was it gross? Yep.
Was it necessary? Probably.
Was the right thing done? In my opinion, yes.

I cannot imagine any other condition that would demand such a prodedure. As I said, if it were necessary, I would have seen more than one in 32 years.

If someone can point me to a situation that necessitates a partial birth abortion, I'd love to read the specifics, especially why no alternative exists - for a viable fetus.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
apple
one of the angels
if it comes down to the life of the mother vs the life of a child.. the mother is always chosen unless she would not live anyway.

it's always been that way.

- were mothers so polite.





it behooves me to behold
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Sorry for the two in a row again.

AMA letter.
Quote:
 
a legitimate exception where the life of the mother was endangered


That's more than a little different from doing it to prevent infertility, don't you think?

Dave, I am an anesthesiologist. I work in the operating room, with gynecologists and obstetricians. Every day. My experience is not unique. It is simply not done that much.

Why?

Because it is hardly ever necessary. To save a mom's life, or the case I described in my experience is fine, in my opinion. However, the rest is a smokescreen.

Quote:
 
What if politicians in Washington told you couldn't use it for whatever reason? Would you feel that it was none of their business? Would you appreciate them questioning your medical opinions from behind their safe desks thousands of miles away?


Happens all the time. Medicare tells me what drugs I can and cannot use. Medicare tells the orthopedic surgeon when to fix a hip, and when to boot the old lady out of the hospital. It is here and now, and going to get worse.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 4