If Men Could Be Pregnant Do You Think Abortion Would Be Legal

You are obviously correct.

Leftists simultaneously say that fetuses are just clumps of cells and that a fetus knows in the womb whether it is transgender.

Woke mind virus at work.

 

It's not an either-or situation; it can be both.

Protecting the rights of a fetus also results in controlling women. Human beings don't like to be controlled or told what to do.

 

I think....

If men can be pregnant, but not women: If women has power, it would be the same. Right of the fetus and controlling men. If men has power, they wouldn't restrict themselves. Right of those in power and you can trust us.

If both can be pregnant. You can trust us, no need for control.

 

(This is beside your question and just a small detour, but I'm putting it here anyway.)

Technically, 'men' can be pregnant (extremely rare). There are women with XY chromosomes (so genetically, they are men). Some of them can give birth.

XX, while genetically female, can result in a male due to how genes are expressed or how the body responds to the genes.
XY, while genetically male, can result in a female due to how genes are expressed or how the body responds to the genes.

 

I think that the obvious answer is that the Extreme Right should monitor all women/girls who are of child bearing age. They should not only track their periods but which men sex them up. At first the sign of a missed period, all men who carelessly left their manly deposits behind should start paying child support for the next 21 or so years.

Also if a pregnant woman gets an abortion or miscarries, both the child's parents should face the exact same consequences.

 

Save the world. Outlaw pregnancy.

 

(Genetically men)

As I said, it's not related to your main point in this thread, so I'm not going to derail anymore. I've already replied to your point separately.

 

I see you're a "childless cat lady" too

 

If pregnancy effected men the same it would 100% be legal.

 

Of course it would be legal. It wouldn't even be a topic of conversation. Abortion pills would be as readily available as condoms.

 

As a childful dog man, I am ok with childless cat lady.

 

OK Captain Underpants!

 

It's about the hierarchy of reproductive right
Women are the #1 priority
Then the baby
and then the father

No one cares about the baby . . . until the woman says its ok to care about it
Her whims and choices trumps everyone involved

Rocket River

 

If men got pregnant, the entire course of human history would be fundamentally altered, so asking how it would affect American 21st century abortion policy seems trivial. Somehow a smaller hypothetical leap would ask how would policy be different if American society was matriarchal instead of patriarchal.

As for the question of whether this is about control of women or protection of the fetus, I would say both of those options are mere rhetorical devices so I don't much care. But the outcome of the debate is determined by the relative bargaining power of people with a self-interest in pregnancy autonomy and of those with a moral interest in restraining that autonomy. I think it should not be controversial (but probably will be) to say that mostly women have that self-interest in autonomy and that women have less bargaining power in our society than men. If roles were reversed, freedom of choice would be a slam dunk. As it is, pro-choice is hanging on because there are also a lot of men who do ascribe to it and lend their political strength to it. If all men generally opposed choice, it wouldn't stand a chance in our society. By that token, if women had that kind of socio-political power instead of men, it'd be a done deal.

 

If you ever seen those seahorse docs, the father carries the pregnancy to term.

If that were the case for people, I imagine our culture of life and how we practice war would evolve considerably differently.

 

Two women have filed federal complaints against Texas hospitals they say refused to treat their ectopic pregnancies, leading both women to lose their fallopian tubes and endanger their future fertility.

Texas law allows doctors to terminate ectopic pregnancies, a condition in which the fertilized egg implants in the fallopian tubes, instead of the uterus. Ectopic pregnancies are always non-viable and can quickly become life-threatening if left untreated.

Despite these protections, these women say they were turned away from two separate hospitals that refused to treat them. The complaint alleges that the doctors and hospitals are so fearful of the state’s abortion laws, which carry penalties of up to life in prison when violated, that they are hesitating to perform even protected abortions.

The complaints were filed with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, a federal statute that requires hospitals to provide stabilizing medical care to anyone who shows up. That rule has long been interpreted to include medically necessary abortions, which has run up against state bans, including in Texas.

Typically, federal EMTALA complaints are investigated by state health agencies, but the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the complaint, is asking for it to instead be handled by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS.

“CMS should not rely solely on a state agency’s assessment of the facts in reaching its determination because of Texas state officials’ hostility toward interpreting EMTALA as requiring hospitals to provide pregnancy termination to pregnant patients experiencing emergency medical conditions,” they wrote in the complaints.

The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year declined to say that Idaho’s abortion ban trumps the EMTALA requirement, but a federal appeals court in New Orleans has found that Texas hospitals cannot be required under EMTALA to provide life-saving abortions.

Similar diagnoses, similar results
Kyleigh Thurman says in the complaint that she went to Ascension Seton Williamson Hospital in Round Rock, north of Austin, with a tubal ectopic pregnancy.

She says the hospital initially discharged her without treating the ectopic pregnancy, but she returned three days later with vaginal bleeding and worsening symptoms. Despite her doctor’s orders, the hospital refused to give her methotrexate, a common treatment that stops an ectopic pregnancy from continuing to develop.

“Infuriated, Ms. Thurman’s OB-GYN met Ms. Thurman at Ascension Williamson to plead with the medical staff to give her methotrexate,” the complaint says. They eventually agreed. But it was too late; the ectopic pregnancy had grown too large, and ruptured. Thurman nearly bled to death and had to have her right fallopian tube removed.

A spokesperson for Ascension declined to discuss the specifics of the case, but said in a statement that they are “committed to providing high-quality care to all who seek our services.”

Kelsie Norris-De La Cruz had a similar experience at Texas Health Arlington Memorial Hospital, outside Dallas. An emergency room physician diagnosed her with a tubal ectopic pregnancy and said she should get an injection of methotrexate or have surgery to remove the pregnancy.

She chose surgery, but once the on-call OB/GYNs arrived, the complaint alleges, the hospital refused to treat her and told her to come back in 48 hours.

“Ms. Norris-De La Cruz’s mother asked if the hospital’s refusal to provide care had anything to do with Texas’s abortion bans but received no response,” the complaint says. “As the conversation became more heated, the OB/GYN confirmed it was possible that Ms. Norris-De La Cruz could rupture over the next 48 hours and subsequently stormed out of the room.”

Texas Health did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Norris-De La Cruz eventually found an OB/GYN through a friend who agreed to perform an emergency surgery to remove the ectopic pregnancy. By then, the mass had grown so large that it required also removing her right fallopian tube and 75% of her right ovary.

“I ended up losing half of my fertility and if I was made to wait any longer, it’s very likely I would have died,” Norris-De La Cruz said in a statement. “These bans are making it nearly impossible to get basic emergency healthcare. So, I’m filing this complaint because women like me deserve justice and accountability from those that hurt us. Texas state officials can’t keep ignoring us. We can’t let them.”

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/0...utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook,twitter

 

Abortion bans complicate risky pregnancy care

In Texas, where doctors face up to 99 years of prison if convicted of performing an illegal abortion, medical and legal experts say the law is complicating decision-making around emergency pregnancy care.

Although the state law says termination of ectopic pregnancies is not considered abortion, the draconian penalties scare Texas doctors from treating those patients, the Center for Reproductive Rights argues.

“As fearful as hospitals and doctors are of running afoul of these state abortion bans, they also need to be concerned about running afoul of federal law,” said Marc Hearron, a center attorney. Hospitals face a federal investigation, hefty penalties and threats to their Medicare funding if they break the federal law.

The organization filed two complaints last week with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service alleging that different Texas emergency rooms failed to treat two patients, including Thurman, with ectopic pregnancies.

Another complaint says Kelsie Norris-De La Cruz, 25, lost a fallopian tube and most of an ovary after an Arlington, Texas, hospital sent her home without treating her ectopic pregnancy, even after a doctor said discharge was “not in her best interest.”

“The doctors knew I needed an abortion, but these bans are making it nearly impossible to get basic emergency healthcare,” she said in a statement. “I’m filing this complaint because women like me deserve justice and accountability from those that hurt us.”

Conclusively diagnosing an ectopic pregnancy can be difficult. Doctors cannot always find the pregnancy’s location on an ultrasound, three separate doctors consulted for this article explained. Hormone levels, bleeding, a positive pregnancy test and ultrasound of an empty uterus all indicate an ectopic pregnancy.

“You can’t be 100% — that’s the tricky part,” said Kate Arnold, an OB-GYN in Washington. “They’re literally time bombs. It’s a pregnancy growing in this thing that can only grow so much.”

Texas Right to Life Director John Seago said the state law clearly protects doctors from prosecution if they terminate ectopic pregnancies, even if a doctor “makes a mistake” in diagnosing it.

“Sending a woman back home is completely unnecessary, completely dangerous,” Seago said.

But the state law has “absolutely” made doctors afraid of treating pregnant patients, said Hannah Gordon, an emergency medicine physician who worked in a Dallas hospital until last year.

“It’s going to force doctors to start creating questionable scenarios for patients, even if it’s very dangerous,” said Gordon. She left Texas hoping to become pregnant and worried about the care she’d get there.

Gordon recalled a pregnant patient at her Dallas emergency room who had signs of an ectopic pregnancy. Because OB-GYNs said they couldn’t definitively diagnose the problem, they waited to end the pregnancy until she came back the next day.

 

Whatever it is now, Texas would still ban it.