New Texas abortion laws

[Bogey Man]

I picked up this tidbit on Bill Maher. Texas passed legislation that requires any facility that provides abortions to meet state regulations for emergency and surgical room procedures. As a result, there are now only 8 places in Texas to get a legal abortion. If someone living in San Antonio wants an abortion, the closest place is El Paso - 520 miles away. That's one way to prevent legal abortions!!

 

[millerbleach]

Is there something wrong with making sure the "womans health" is protected? It appears only conservatives are truly concerned with the womans health.

 

[wcowherd]

Is there something wrong with making sure the "womans health" is protected? It appears only conservatives are truly concerned with the womans health.

Lol. Yeah, that's what they're concerned with.

 

[millerbleach]

Lol. Yeah, that's what they're concerned with.

Are you suggesting this doesn't protect womens health?

 

[Neutron Monster]

The state laws have nothing to do with women's health. They are all about restricting access. And they are working well.

 

[Neutron Monster]

If conservatives were interested in women's health, they would advocate for strong prenatal care, medically sound abortion laws in a world where abortion is legal by court order, and impartial regulatory oversight.

Unfortunately abortion is so politicized that this is a pipe dream.

 

[millerbleach]

The state laws have nothing to do with women's health. They are all about restricting access. And they are working well.

Are YOU saying this doesn't make the abortion procedure safer for women?

 

[millerbleach]

This does limit the number of abortions through safety requirements but if abortion providers cared about their patients, they would have access to these things.
Protecting women having abortions from dangerous health issues just happens to at the moment decrease the number of abortions. There is no reason to believe that won't change with time though. This is NOT an abortion prevention answer.

 

[Neutron Monster]

Are YOU saying this doesn't make the abortion procedure safer for women?

That's not meaningful in and of itself. We could make driving 0.000001% safer by making some crazy mandates, but that doesn't mean we should pass them. What matters is if the law supports medically necessary interventions which improve health outcomes at an acceptable cost.

Further, pregnancy/childbirth is more dangerous than abortion, so laws that cut access to abortion are promoting worse health outcomes for women who do not want to have a child.

 

[Neutron Monster]

This does limit the number of abortions through safety requirements but if abortion providers cared about their patients, they would have access to these things.
Protecting women having abortions from dangerous health issues just happens to at the moment decrease the number of abortions. There is no reason to believe that won't change with time though. This is NOT an abortion prevention answer.

To add to why the R push isn't about health - I could make colonoscopies safer by mandating they all take place in the OR of a major hospital, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. There's a cost benefit to everything. The goal of public policy isn't to eliminate risk; it's to create a set of regulations which provide for a high standard of care at an acceptable cost.

The R laws aren't about improving the standard of care - they are about closing clinics.

Abortion, as practiced in America, is extraordinarily safe and effective. Are there things we could do to make it safer that make sense? Probably. I would love for us to do those. But, the R party isn't interested in that, they are just interested in restricting access. And, to be fair, the D party isn't really interested in passing those laws, either, because the debate is too politicized.

 

[wcowherd]

Are you suggesting this doesn't protect womens health?

Not materially, no, this doesn't make women safer.