MennoNet.com

MaxPC wrote:This is why NY added the clause in their hideous legislation that abortions can be performed by non-doctors.

i’m confident members here will recall how tough it was/is for MIDWIVES to be recognized, the AMA was/is (?) disapproving. There were different discussions on MD about it.

today, in Europe, midwives have been pressured to provide abortion services; completely anathema to their core purpose. the U.S., on the fed level, and in states, will have to decide. i’m unsure of Canada, which, i believe, has no restrictions on abortion (??)

legislation is expected to continue to be proposed in the U.S.

of course, some medical professionals, doctors, nurses, midwives, leave their work rather than comply.

MD held different discussions that would now have added historical value, as FB, google, youtube, others, play havoc with their content.

temporal1 wrote:

MaxPC wrote:This is why NY added the clause in their hideous legislation that abortions can be performed by
non-doctors.

yes. “authorized” is quite a word in this context:

.. authorized health care practitioner for whom abortion is within their scope of practice.“

odd how the AMA, usually so territorial about their professional skills/services, would allow this.

the (cough) love reflected herein of mothers and their babies is (perhaps, an “expanded” modernized definition of love). not a definition i can understand or appreciate.

For the record, that sort of verbiage is being inserted in all sorts of regulation, likely Nurse Practitioners and PA's did not exist when the regulations were originally written.

We were the beneficiaries of just such a regulation, allowing us to do things that were clearly within our scope of practice, but verbiage in the nursing practice regulations implied only they could do things that we had done for decades, and nurses generally did not do. The story I got was some liability lawyer noticed it.

Hence the need for such verbiage.

J.M.

Judas Maccabeus wrote: For the record, that sort of verbiage is being inserted in all sorts of regulation, likely Nurse Practitioners and PA's did not exist when the regulations were originally written.

We were the beneficiaries of just such a regulation, allowing us to do things that were clearly within our scope of practice, but verbiage in the nursing practice regulations implied only they could do things that we had done for decades, and nurses generally did not do. The story I got was some liability lawyer noticed it.

Hence the need for such verbiage.
J.M.

it would have been interesting to read your perspective on the MD threads on midwives+doulas.
there were various first person experiences of mothers who used them, and, some were closely related.
there used to be new babies added throughout the year, often with pictures.
not many pictures on MN.

temporal1 wrote:

Judas Maccabeus wrote: For the record, that sort of verbiage is being inserted in all sorts of regulation, likely Nurse Practitioners and PA's did not exist when the regulations were originally written.

We were the beneficiaries of just such a regulation, allowing us to do things that were clearly within our scope of practice, but verbiage in the nursing practice regulations implied only they could do things that we had done for decades, and nurses generally did not do. The story I got was some liability lawyer noticed it.

Hence the need for such verbiage.
J.M.

it would have been interesting to read your perspective on the MD threads on midwives+doulas.
there were various first person experiences of mothers who used them, and, some were closely related.
there used to be new babies added throughout the year, often with pictures.
not many pictures on MN.

Doulas are not healthcare practitioners, so I won't comment.

As to midwives, it depends on what KIND of midwife you are talking about.

J.M.

Virginia, Page 5 “Easier to kill babies, harder to kill worms?” ..
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... 961#p53961

Similar in Ireland:
Pages 3+4, “Meawhile, in Ireland”
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... 962#p53962

“Federal judge rules that Virginia must allow non-doctors to commit first-trimester abortions”
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/feder ... -abortions

..

.. Abortion through birth isn't enough for the abortion industry,” Family Foundation of Virginia president Virginia Cobb responded to the news. “Now it wants to increase its profit margin by not having to pay for doctors to do surgery."

The remaining questions over the ultrasound and waiting period provisions is slated for May 20, the Associated Press reported.

Virginia’s government is currently presided over by Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam, one of the most infamously pro-abortion politicians in the country due to his defense of a bill that would have effectively allowed infanticide. But unfettered abortion-on-demand continues to receive pushback from Republican lawmakers, who last month blocked Northam’s budget proposal that would have restored taxpayer funding of abortion.

Evidently, Gov Northam weathered his recent political storms and remains in office.

Page 5 / 2019 / Northern Ireland / abortion, ssm
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... 830#p70830

temporal1 wrote:Page 5 / 2019 / Northern Ireland / abortion, ssm
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... 830#p70830

Just came back from there. The devolved assembly at Stormont is completely deadlocked, so ultimately then UK law will prevail, since the devolved assembly can't seem to agree on a government.

You DO know that any UK citizen could hop on a ferry, and have any medical care legal in the UK in the remainder of the UK? And have it paid for by the NHS as well?

It is sad, but the ferociously anticatholic DUP seems the most at fault in the deadlock. Ironic, no?

J.M.

Page1. May 2018:

Hats Off wrote:Individuals living abroad are paying thousands of dollars just to go home and vote yes.

It seems to me that government legislation mandating "no" isn't going to solve the issue.

I don't believe I could vote "no" on an issue like this;
the people will do what they want regardless of how I would vote.

What are the chances of a child having a good life or learning the way of Jesus when he/she was brought into the world because mother wanted an abortion but did not have the resources?

What kind of life will an unwanted child have?

i’ve been mulling this over. more than a year.

At the time, this from Hats Off surprised me. i first had to think about the differences in Canada and the U.S., if i understand, Canada allows (and exports) abortion, and may be more “liberal” on euthanasia, as well? i’m not clear.

i’ve been thinking about abortion a lot recently, so wanted to revisit.
Because i value Hats Off’s perspective so much, i wanted to think this through.
Here’s where i am:

IF the question were MERELY about what is legal in secular government, THEN, i would probably be inclined to agree with HO. However, in today’s reality, it’s not just a matter of what’s legal.

The horror is, once these things are made legal, then,
VOILA’! - OPEN WIDE THE PUBLIC TREASURY TO PROMOTE AND FUND THEM.

Gov is now literally selling abortions to children and helping them lie to their parents about it.
Children don’t pay, taxpayers do.

This is where it goes from being “not criminal” to being normalized and promoted.
Gov FUNDING worsens problems exponentially. Gov has no conscience.

Another part that is ignored in these types of debates is:
REMOVE CONVENIENCE, people change their habits. Even toddlers learn not to touch hot stoves.

When people look at the vast numbers of abortions, then, understandably, think,
“What to do with all these babies?!” -
well. chances are, in pretty short order, the numbers would substantially decrease.
after all, this is not rocket science. don’t want a baby? - there are many effective choices that can be made BEFORE conception.

would bad things happen? yes. bad things have never stopped happening,
gov promoted abortion has made most of them worse.

i’m not sure when gov legalizing anything immediately translated to,
“ok. now it’s legal, open up the public treasury to fund it.” ka-ching.
that translation has turned into a NIGHTMARE.

profiteers, big corporations, “get” the message. fortunes are GUARANTEED by gov mandate.
This is seriously twisted.

So, Hats Off.
If not for how governments work these days, possibly, i could agree with you.
Gov interference/funding radically skews the outcome.
People are hurt, lives are lost, cultures destroyed. Everyone pays the price.

All with the best of intentions.

2022 / Ireland
A friend asked if i’d heard about this, i had not.
i’d like to hear the original sermon/homily .. (controversial?!)

Fr Sean Sheehy on his controversial sermon in Listowel | Kerry Today / -27min

IVOR CUMMINS / .. “Did You Realize What's Being Passed into LAW? Truly Shocking” / 10:27min

Description:
Right guys this is really nuts, and follows on the dystopian heels of the Covid Corporatocracy power grab!
Have a look - it's nuts! Oh and take action - for Irish people here's the links for complaining to your politicians: ..