Montana abortion bill would make doctors try to save fetus

[Eugene]

Source: Associated Press

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — Montana lawmakers pushed forward with a measure Thursday that would effectively ban all abortions after 24 weeks of pregnancy, regardless of the medical risks to a woman, by requiring doctors to deliver the fetus and try to save it.

Critics of the bill said it could be among the most extreme anti-abortion laws in the nation, even as other states consider their own proposals that would reduce the window for legal abortions.

Montana already outlaws late-term abortions, unless the life of the woman is at risk — but the proposal would further restrict abortion rights. It would require doctors to deliver a fetus at six months or later by inducing labor or performing a cesarean section.

Once the fetus is removed, doctors would be required to try to resuscitate the baby. Doctors who violate the law could be charged with a felony.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f8997d9569b14498a99e922f714add61/montana-bill-effectively-bans-all-abortions-after-24-weeks

---

By BOBBY CAINA CALVAN
Feb. 23, 2017 9:06 PM EST

[greymattermom]

1. I suppose that the state will pay for NICU days too

At a huge cost.

[NurseJackie]

7. It doesn't end there.

It's a lifetime of extra care, medical issues, potential learning disabilities, special needs.

Whatever fantasy they imagine will not become reality.

Sad.

[Docreed2003]

12. Exactly this....

[Grins]

27. "NMP!!!"

NMP = Not my problem!

Costs of post-delivery care? NMP!
Costs to hospitals? NMP!
Costs "...regardless of the medical risks to a woman"? NMP!
Costs to surviving family should the mother die? NMP!
Lifetime costs should the fetus survive? NMP!
Costs to the community that has to provide those services? NMP!
Costs, emotional stress, family problems, community problems when you interfere in the lives of others? NMP!

I remember when I was about 10 years old and at Sunday school (Catholic) and this came up: When you have to make a choice of the life of the mother or the life of the child - It's the child. Always. No exceptions.

I thought that (I'm 10 years old..!) was crazy. If it came down to me or my mother, my father had to OK my mother's death? Even if she could have more children? The church got to make that decision?

Later I read some article that offered that the reason the church would favor the child was because represented more money to the church (a longer life of giving) than a mother who already had 20-40 years on her.

[cstanleytech]

2. I see the Repugnants are working hard at keeping that capital R in Repugnant. nt

[Warpy]

3. Uh, ASSHOLES, they already do

24 weeks gestation is the lowest limit of viability. After that, they're premature births, not abortions, and doctors try to save any viable fetus. Expecting them to waste their time on severely deformed, nonviable infants is wasteful, ridiculous, and torture to the infant.

[bucolic_frolic]

4. The state can order a cesarean section?

Can they order tattoos too?

[Ilsa]

9. I see where you're going. Smart. NT.

[bucolic_frolic]

11. What?

State mandated cutting of one's body is not very popular.

Funny how Republicans want the government off our backs until they want
to dictate to our bodies, then new regulations are fine! Deregulation is only
for corporations so they can pollute more.

[Mc Mike]

22. Repugs hate 'intrusive big government'.

They're against 'jackbooted government thugs'.

They're outraged about 'big government take over of medical care', too.

[Ilsa]

23. I was thinking the same thing as Wounded Bear,

the other reply to your reply. It was a smart reply making a superb point and reference.

[BumRushDaShow]

24. Unless it's done to POC

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/unwanted-sterilization-and-eugenics-programs-in-the-united-states/

[Wounded Bear]

18. Sure...

[Bayard]

29. Next comes the sterilization orders...

[NanceGreggs]

5. Save the fetus ...

... and if it survives, refuse to spend a penny to house it, feed it, clothe it, or educate it.

We know the drill.

[dhill926]

6. yep....and of course...

regardless of the medical risk to a woman. Jesus christ what assholes...

[Bettie]

8. I'm betting that

their rules say to save the fetus above the life of the mother.

And yes, refuse to do anything afterward, except present the mother with a bill she'll spend the rest of her life paying.

[Doreen]

20. After it is out of the woman they do not care what happens to it.

Their true agenda is to control women and put us in our respectful place.....way way way beneath men. Second class citizens again. You know? When America was great.

[RedWedge]

10. This is so ignorant as to be monstrous.

[SCVDem]

13. You will believe

in their beliefs!

You will be assimilated!

What part of freedom don't they understand? Sick fucks!

[Chemisse]

14. I thought this already was a law, in general.

That abortions are legal, prior to 24 weeks, and after that a doctor could be arrested for failing to save a baby who is delivered. There was a doctor arrested for this in California, decades ago.

I'm not sure I can imagine a situation in which a viable fetus being delivered and medically assisted would be problematic, unless the mother were critically injured or ill, and delivering the baby right at that time would cause the mother's death. But does the bill say that the baby's life must be chosen over the mother's?

[MontanaMama]

15. JFC.

I thought I'd have a Friday off but now I am calling my legislators all damned day. These fuckers are NOT going to take us further back Than we already are.

[BluesRunTheGame]

16. Montana's Governor is a Democrat.

Do the extremists have enough votes to override a veto?

[MontanaMama]

28. They might. I'm looking into that now

before I spend the day calling these assholes. I live in a blessed blue part of MT. It is so very red most other places.

[BigDemVoter]

17. OMG

Isn't the point of an abortion--the DEMISE of the fetus?

[jmowreader]

19. Let me guess...

The title of this bill either is or should be "The Planned Parenthood of Spokane Enrichment Act."

From what I remember, there are basically four reasons someone in her third trimester would seek abortion care.

The first reason is the fetus is already dead.
Second, the fetus is dying.
Third, it has a birth defect that will kill it shortly after birth.
And finally, the pregnancy is killing the mother.

From what I see here, Montana's Republicans have decided that if a woman presents with a dead fetus going septic inside her, instead of using the least intrusive means to get it out (the description of which is horrific, but not nearly as horrific as conducting a funeral for a woman who died of Living In A State With Too Many Republicans) her doctor has to perform an expensive C-section and try to revive the poor thing.

I haven't read the bill and don't think I have the strength to, but I assume there's a section in it that makes "handing a patient the keys to your car, your Conoco credit card and a map of the route to Spokane" a hangin' offense.

[Buckeyeblue]

21. How many elective abortions happen this late

Don't most- - if not all- - abortions at 24 months and after happen because of a medical issue? It's like when the repugs were saying the late term abortions were elective. They had no examples of that but continued to run around saying it.

[dembotoz]

25. as a liberal christian i feel i am being persecuted by these zealot assholes

[Hortensis]

26. WHO PAYS ENORMOUS BILLS? This would backfire badly.

At that stage, a few babies might live after months of incredibly intensive care and others die only after extremely expensive efforts failed, but the lives saved would tend to create a mandate to continue --- life v money.

Very importantly, if this kind of thing were adopted in Montana and beyond, it would inevitably lead to further medical advances that could save more lives earlier, creating a mandate to pay for it. And I'd be among those believing because we could we should.

It would also, of course, create a mandate to alter the trimester system abortion laws are based on. That might seem a victory for the right. But as we know, the commitment to "life" of a significant number of anti-abortion conservatives is no real commitment at all, they're just running with their team, while their objection to being taxed to care for others is very strong and visceral.