posted
I'm not for decreased safety, but I am for women having accurate information on safety when they go in for a procedure, and I do believe if that information were accurate, that some of the 90+ % of women who abort for socio-economic reasons might make a different choice.
I also think football should be illegal. I don't think it's worth all the injury and occasional death young people go through for the highly questionable result of glorified ritual violence. I'm less certain about ballet dancing, though I'm pretty sure I'd discourage any of my children from going into a sport where eating disorders are fostered. Just so people get an idea of what I mean when I say X should be illegal.
Or a better analogy is that I think SUVs should be illegal. There are some cases where I think ownership of an SUV is justified, but for the most part they are purchased for stupid reasons, considering the negative impact they have on both the environment and the demand (and hence price) of gasoline.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I'm not for decreased safety, but I am for women having accurate information on safety when they go in for a procedure, and I do believe if that information were accurate, that some of the 90+ % of women who abort for socio-economic reasons might make a different choice.
I, too, wish more women who choose to undergo abortion procedures had accurate safety information, particularly the rate of type of complications associated with the particular provider they will be working with.
If it's bad news, it should be out there, and if it's good news, it should be out there -- so long as it is accurate information. And patients accessing that information should be the default before all medical or surgical procedures, not the exception.
posted
Yeah, I was very brave about consumerism when I was reading my Bradley method book but my resolve to get figures wilts pretty fast once I've gotten in to see the doctor. (I'm speaking of 8 years ago when I was having my middle child).
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are (I think) both unusual and to be commended.
I think it's particularly difficult to do when you have an unsympathetic physician. I also think some of the training of physicians on how to interact with patients at some medical schools is absolutely horrifying. Did I ever mention how I was trained to deal with "difficult patients" in a role-playing scenario?
(I talk about it often, I may well have brought it up many times here. If not, I will talk about it again.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not so much magic missle, although power in general played a strong role.
We spent one day working through role-playing scenarios with standardized patients (trained actors) in situations that identified them as "difficult patients." I thought most of these situations were appropriate, incredibly useful, and quite thought-provoking in a positive way: patients with whom we did not share a common language (either verbal or ASL), unconscious patients, patients caught up in overwhelming situations provoking extreme grief or extreme anger.
However, one scenario gave me particular pause, as it did one of my colleagues another year. (We were officemates in the philosophy department, and we discussed the ups and downs of training together through the years.) This was the scenario of the "overly informed" or"overly involved" patient (I can't remember the exact wording).
This patient comes to the office having researched his or her condition very thoroughly and has copies of ongoing research studies, national protocols, etc. in hand. I believe the patient was considered to be "difficult" because he or she was likely to take up a lot of time, challenge the physician on facts, and/or present the physician with information that he or she had not seen before.
The specific advice was something like: "What you should do is take the materials out of the patient's hands a soon as possible and say, 'Let me have my nurse photocopy this so that I can go over it more carefully.' Then, once the written information is out of the room, it is harder for the patient to control the situation because he or she won't be able to remember the details and ask you questions about them in an organized way. And when the patient leaves, then you give back the information into the patient's hands."
Well. I have taken to encouraging people I come in contact with to bring multiple copies of such things to the clinic office, should they wish to ask questions about them.
The construction of the "difficult patient," the one-sided and self-serving deliberate manipulation of power dynamics, the likely long-term effects of such physician behavior on patents' trust and willingness to to seek help and advice -- all of it seems quite nasty to me, especially as a standardized protocol to teach in training.
Mind you, the times when I had this reaction in my training were few and far between: maybe 3 or 4 times, total. But as a standardized part of training, used year after year? We can and should do much, much better than this. Perhaps other medical schools do -- I do not know their details of training in this manner, and I can only speak to the one.
But no wonder that there is sush widespread and growing suspicion and contention in the relationship between physicians and the general public, if this is indeed standard.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:as someone very active in the pro-life community I find it very hurtful that anyone would suggest people who advocate for an end to abortion would welcome increased complication rates
I think it's roughly equivalent to suggesting that people who protest the war in Iraq want us to lose.
posted
I read about a study saying that a woman is less likely to have an abortion if her mother had an abortion while pregnant with said woman. I think it was in The Onion.
Good analogy about Iraq war protesters. Maybe they don't want us to lose, but don't they expect us to lose?
Actually, the more I think about it; don't they want us to lose? I mean, they want us to leave, and that would constitute a surrender, would it not?
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He was pushing a particular medication on me, and I asked him about specific side effects that I, personally, find very unacceptable. I told him that I would be doing my own research before I filled any prescription he gave me. He said the likelihood of that side effect was only 5%. I told him that I was very uncomfortable with even that much of a possibility, but he wouldn't stop pushing this one medication. So I told him that he could write the prescription because he wouldn't be quiet about it.
When I looked up the clinical trials online, it turned out that 1 in 5 patients on the drug experienced that side effect.
I called up that health clinic and told them that I'd never be coming in again.
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: We spent one day working through role-playing scenarios with . . . "difficult patients." However, one scenario gave me particular pause, . . . This was the scenario of the "overly informed" or"overly involved" patient. This patient comes to the office having researched his or her condition very thoroughly and has copies of ongoing research studies, national protocols, etc. in hand. I believe the patient was considered to be "difficult" because he or she was likely to take up a lot of time, challenge the physician on facts, and/or present the physician with information that he or she had not seen before.
The specific advice was something like: "What you should do is take the materials out of the patient's hands a soon as possible and say, 'Let me have my nurse photocopy this so that I can go over it more carefully.' Then, once the written information is out of the room, it is harder for the patient to control the situation because he or she won't be able to remember the details and ask you questions about them in an organized way. And when the patient leaves, then you give back the information into the patient's hands."
But no wonder that there is sush widespread and growing suspicion and contention in the relationship between physicians and the general public, if this is indeed standard.
Hey CT. As a mom of a medically fragile child, who has been systematically daring to challenge medical practictioners by *gasp -- god forbid* doing my own research, asking the hard questions, pushing the boundaries, and relentlessly advocating for my child, I want you to know what a relief it is to know that medicos are trained to treat us "problems people" so -- and thank YOU for not ascribing to that!!!!
It's relieving because I thought it was just a poor reaction medical personnel had to me personally. *shrug*
I guess what really irks me about it is that everytime I have been sluffed off by a provider about my child's medical needs, I've ended up RIGHT. But because of the extra hoops to jump through to get the what he needs, he gets the short end of the stick.
I'm so very very very tired of it all.
Unfortunately, the same thing seems to happen in the public schools, as well.
Everyone sqwawks about how parents aren't involved enough -- but as soon as we open our mouths we're either "shot down" or branded as troublemakers the rest our kids' natural born days.
posted
pH, you may want to get your funny bone examined.
I do tend to be an overinformed patient, and I get handled all the time, which is why I just stay away from doctors if I can help it. It's incredibly ironic, since the reason I'm over-informed is because a lot of my relatives are doctors. But it's probably also in my tone of voice and stuff like that.
Though I didn't think having a birth plan was such a revolutionary idea. But this guy was pretty old school. I have not recollection of why I chose him. Probably because we were on this major medical insurance, and even though we'd be paying for everything anyway, if anything major went wrong, we had to be in the plan.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT, that's appalling that a medical school would teach that way of dismissing an informed patient.
This YouTube video may or may not be illuminating to the previous discussion of the implications of a pro-life agenda, and how some fraction of pro-life advocates don't know/don't want to know/don't care/refuse to think about some intended and/or unintended consequences of that agenda.
quote: What anti-abortion demonstrators said when asked what the punishment should be for women who got abortions if abortion became illegal.
--from the YouTube page
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:This YouTube video may or may not be illuminating to the previous discussion of the implications of a pro-life agenda, and how some fraction of pro-life advocates don't know/don't want to know/don't care/refuse to think about some intended and/or unintended consequences of that agenda.
This is a two-way street, to be sure. There's a whole lot of don't know/won't think about potential unintended consequences going on in both sides of the issue. Honestly, though? The potential not-thought-about consequences on the pro-choice side are much, much bigger than they are on the pro-life side of things. This doesn't mitigate, though, that plenty of pro-lifers seem tied to an easy committment to life, that of being pro-life, and not very much for the long haul.
---------------------
Unsurprisingly I noted in my newspaper an article headlined something very much like the title of this thread, without the appropriate clarification.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The potential not-thought-about consequences on the pro-choice side are much, much bigger than they are on the pro-life side of things.
How so?
My perception as a pro-lifer is that just as medical complications of abortion are unreported, there is an agenda to suppress research into psychological impact of abortion.
Unless she meant on a personal level.
The punishments for people in a hypothetical illegal abortion state probably depends a great deal on how people view abortion. Since I see it as an extreme form of child abuse rather than murder, I'd naturally be horrified by those who feel women who abort should suffer as murderers. I'm sure there are those who espouse various "punishments that fit the crime." Considering we have such regularly suggested here on Hatrack for crimes such as rape and drunk driving, I don't take them too seriously.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's what I thought. But I don't think that you can say the potential medical and psychological impact of abortion is much, much bigger than the not-thought-about consequences on the pro-life side.
---
Pretty much an aside, but I think many of the pro-life advocacy groups should consider that there is a distinct possibility that the way they go about things actually increases the number of abortions performed over that of a legal but rare approach.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Please note that I'm using the word potential here. It's very important to avoid messy arguments.
One potential consequence of a pro-life position is that women will be endangered by desperation to seek abortions that might be more dangerous than they are currently to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
One potential consequence of a pro-choice positon is simply that the aborted fetus is, in fact, alive and human and thus abortion is infanticide.
Simply looking at the numbers involved, the one potential consequence is quite a lot bigger than the other.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:One potential consequence of a pro-choice positon is simply that the aborted fetus is, in fact, alive and human and thus abortion is infanticide.
How is that a not-thought-about consequence? Do you really think that pro-choice groups haven't considered that?
I think you may be mixing up "disagrees with me" with "haven't thought about this".
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:How is that a not-thought-about consequence? Do you really think that pro-choice groups haven't considered that?
The same can very easily and truthfully be said about pro-life groups and dangerous abortions, Mr. Squicky. That was a part of the point I was making.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
One potential consequence of a pro-life position is that women will die from having illegal abortions due to lack of training of those giving abortions.
One potential consequence of a pro-choice position is that the fetus is, in fact, alive and human, therefore we are killing it.
...
I'm pretty sure that a lot of people on both sides have weighed the consequences and both think their side is "quite a lot bigger than the other".
I, personally, have not figured out which is "bigger".
Posts: 944 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure how. You were responding to a post that showed that people in pro-life groups didn't think about that.
Do you any reason to believe that pro-choice groups haven't thought about their opponents position? It seems extremely unlikely to me.
That they have come to a different decision on whether abortion is killing a human being than is not cause to say that they haven't thought about the issue at all.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jaiden, I can see people considering that consequences and giving different weights to them. I've got no problem with that.
But here we have a case where Rakeesh is asserting that people haven't even thought about the consequences, which I don't think is warranted.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do you any reason to believe that pro-choice groups haven't thought about their opponents position? It seems extremely unlikely to me.
Wait, so we're down to guessing then? Then why is it acceptable for one to guess that pro-lifers (some, obviously) haven't thought about things entirely, but not OK to do the same in the other direction?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because it's not guessing on the part of the pro-lifers. You just saw proof of this.
Also, guesses aren't all equal, especially when you are using them to impute negative characteristics to a group. I don't believe it is reasonable to believe without proof that pro-choice groups haven't considered that consequence. Do you have proof that they do, or are you just speaking from prejudice?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm pretty sure that a lot of people on both sides have weighed the consequences and both think their side is "quite a lot bigger than the other".
...
I think assuming that the other side hasn't thought things through because they disagree with you is presumptuous at best. People can be given the same facts and come up with different views/sides that are both valid.
Posts: 944 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, unless those numbers are clarified as far as what data is included, you could have a heck of a lot of mis-miscarriage procedures included, for instance, making things look much worse.
As CT responded to my earlier post, It isn't SO unlikely that my wife's mis-miscarriage procedure counted. After all, she "elected" to go through the procedure rather than the other options that are available to remove an inviable embryo, one of which includes just hoping nature takes it's course.
Which isn't to say that there aren't more than enough truly elective abortions, but if leaning on the sheer quantity to support your current argument (which isn't to say that is your true, full argument) then the numbers may not be "quite a lot bigger".
quote:I think assuming that the other side hasn't thought things through because they disagree with you is presumptuous at best. People can be given the same facts and come up with different views/sides that are both valid.
I completely agree.
edit: The thought struck me (and then it stole my wallet). Do people think that I am saying that all pro-life people have not considered the dangerous abortion thing or other non-obvious consequences of their position. I'm not.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: The punishments for people in a hypothetical illegal abortion state probably depends a great deal on how people view abortion. Since I see it as an extreme form of child abuse rather than murder, I'd naturally be horrified by those who feel women who abort should suffer as murderers. I'm sure there are those who espouse various "punishments that fit the crime." Considering we have such regularly suggested here on Hatrack for crimes such as rape and drunk driving, I don't take them too seriously.
I'm not sure if this puts me in the camp of people you don't take too seriously, but I would certain advocate jail time for parents who commit "extreme child abuse".
edit to add: bearing in mind insanity type defenses, and so forth, which might mitigate that.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Because it's not guessing on the part of the pro-lifers. You just saw proof of this.
What do you mean, proof? You're saying that there is proof that some pro-lifers haven't thought about that, but not proof that some pro-choicers haven't thought about things entirely?
This conversation is getting a bit strange to me. Perhaps I came into it too late and missed something. I'm not saying that all pro-choicers simply haven't thought about what I suggested, I was saying that some of them have not. Just as some pro-lifers have not fully considered the consequences of outlawing abortion entirely.
It's been bandied about in this conversation that some pro-lifers don't think about what would happen if abortions were illegal, and I don't object to that assertion. I don't understand at all why if that assertion is reasonable, mine is not.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Pretty much an aside, but I think many of the pro-life advocacy groups should consider that there is a distinct possibility that the way they go about things actually increases the number of abortions performed over that of a legal but rare approach.
How so?
I don't see how a pro-life person could ignore the coat-hanger shorthand for abortion safety.
Even with abortion being legal, there are still many instances of people being too young, people waiting too long for their jurisdiction, and other situations that force people into desperate measures. And the pro-choice people tell us that it is "our" fault for feeling abortion is wrong in the first place, moreso than it being the fault of what man impregnated her.
I could easily enrage you with my thoughts on how the fathers of aborted children should be dealt with.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Any discussion of what all pro-lifers and all pro-choicers think or don't think is doomed to be specious and disingenuous. Just sayin'.
P.S.
quote:I'm not sure if this puts me in the camp of people you don't take too seriously, but I would certain advocate jail time for parents who commit "extreme child abuse".
Well, there was a case of a couple whose interpretation of a behavioral intervention resulted in the death of a foster child. One parent was jailed, the other was let off with counseling. I'm not sure if part of the decision included the necessity that the remaining six children not be thrown into the foster care system. I take it from your response that you do not believe women who abort (if it were illegal) should ever be jailed. I'm not sure how it would go.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was a text discussion of the contents of the link underneath it.
And also, you not being able to conceive in something that has occurred I think isn't, to me, a particularly good reason to believe that it doesn't occur.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:There was just a link to a video posted that established that this occurs.
Is that really all it takes? Then I have a hard time understanding why you're being critical of me on this, Mr. Squicky.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm being critical because you are trying to characterize pro-choice people as not ever thinking about whether or not abortion is killing a human being without any justification. You are pushing an unjust prejudice.
There are plenty of things that you could reasonably say that many don't consider. That does not appear to me to be one of them. But, hey, if you have some evidence that they don't actually consider it, please feel free to share it.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I implied that I thought all pro-choice people felt that way, it was a mistake. I should perhaps have been more clear.
I don't think that all pro-choice people think that. I do know for a fact that some pro-choicers don't think about it at all, though. I can't speak to large groups of pro-choicers, but I can speak to pro-choicers I have known personally.
So when I say that, I'm not pushing an unjust prejudice, I'm making a statement about what I've observed.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I know it for a fact as much as one can know anything for a fact when it's based on a conversation and words and expressions. In the past I've discussed/argued about abortion with people. Most people are pretty reasonable about it, whether they agree with me or not. Some, though, have seemed genuinely baffled when I suggested the possibility that a fetus might be alive and a human, and they were pro-choice.
You're saying you've never spoken with anyone like that? It's not a remotely sophisticated opinion about abortion, but it is certainly out there, just as the pro-coathanger opinion is on my side of the fence.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't see how a pro-life person could ignore the coat-hanger shorthand for abortion safety.
There was just a link to a video posted that established that this occurs.
Could you point to the part that video that demonstrates pro-life people not thinking about the possible harm to women from unsafe abortions (which I assume is what the coat-hangar reference is about)?
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: There was a text discussion of the contents of the link underneath it.
And also, you not being able to conceive in something that has occurred I think isn't, to me, a particularly good reason to believe that it doesn't occur.
The text says nothing about the coat-hangar issue.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
*shrug* Alright. Without being critical (this is just a statement), I'll just note that it's not very common for you to refrain from pointing out flaws in other people's arguments or tone, and point out that I don't understand what was so offensive* to you.
*I'm assuming it was offensive, else you wouldn't be inclined to take a disrespectful route.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to clarify: I also think some fraction of pro-choice advocates don't know/don't want to know/don't care/refuse to think about some intended and/or unintended consequences of that agenda.
People who are pro-life have no monopoly on this.
How big are those fractions? I have no idea, and I think it would be impossible to even give good estimates in the case of abortion. Polling cannot answer all questions, and this is such a charged issue I think accurate, unbiased polling of it's nuances is all but impossible.
Also, I agree with CT here:
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: Moreover, I have continued to emphasize that I myself hold positions which have negative foreseeable outcomes, and that I do not look down on people merely for holding such a position. In fact, I find it both admirable and important to be aware of the foreseeable negative consequences to one's positions, and to keep those firmly in mind as we carry through on decisions we make for those positions.
At least when people acknowledge negative risks in their agendas they have the courage of their convictions, and can be respected for that even when you disagree with specific opinions.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: CT, that's appalling that a medical school would teach that way of dismissing an informed patient.
This YouTube video may or may not be illuminating to the previous discussion of the implications of a pro-life agenda, and how some fraction of pro-life advocates don't know/don't want to know/don't care/refuse to think about some intended and/or unintended consequences of that agenda.
quote: What anti-abortion demonstrators said when asked what the punishment should be for women who got abortions if abortion became illegal.
--from the YouTube page
That was a pretty interesting video. My guess is some of the protesters interviewed would have had a more definite answer if the question had been "Do you think there should be a punishment for doctors who perform abortions?" instead of "women who get abortions." Still, it seems weird to see people say they've spent years working toward making something a crime without ever even considering what the punishment for the crime should be.
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: I'm so sorry, Shan.
I am, too, CT, and mostly for Nathan's sake -- but YOU give me hope that things will eventually change!
I'll just continue advocating, pushing boundaries, and moving in the direction of doctor-patient full partnerships! Knowing that there are those medical professionals out there that recognize the validity of those partnerships.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
As a mom of a medically fragile child, who has been systematically daring to challenge medical practictioners by *gasp -- god forbid* doing my own research, asking the hard questions, pushing the boundaries, and relentlessly advocating for my child, I want you to know what a relief it is to know that medicos are trained to treat us "problems people" so -- and thank YOU for not ascribing to that!!!!![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
