Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

niyad

(113,518 posts)
Wed Feb 4, 2015, 12:22 PM Feb 2015

Michigan Lawmakers Want to Create Even More Extraneous Requirements for Abortion Providers

(and yet, these same cretins foam at the mouth about any thought of regulating businesses)


Michigan Lawmakers Want to Create Even More Extraneous Requirements for Abortion Providers

Lawmakers in Michigan have introduced this month yet another reporting requirement for physicians performing an abortion, with the specific aim of increasing the number of reported complications from abortion.




State Bill No. 27 is an amendment to a current abortion reporting law requiring physicians to report instances of infection, perforation, and other physical complications from abortions provided in the state. SB 27 would add “allergic response” and “anesthesia-related complications” to the list of complications that physicians performing an abortion must report to the state.

Anti-choice group Right to Life of Michigan claims the bill is necessary, citing the 2014 reported rate of complication as “unrealistically low” at 0.008 percent. Significant research has shown that very few women face medical complications resulting from an abortion. (AND WE SIMPLY CANNOT HAVE THAT!!)

Amber Truehart, a family planning fellow at the University of Chicago, says that adding allergic reactions and anesthesia complications will not increase the rate of complication by much as all. She says that politicians are unaware that it will increase the rate of complication, as allergic reactions and anesthesia complications are “very rare and very minor”, and this proposed bill “just speaks to the fact that [politicians] don’t understand the procedure.”

Other concerns about the bill include patient confidentiality. The existing bill states that the patient’s name or other “common identifiers” are not to be included in the report; however other personal information about the patient, such as age, race, marital status, town of residence, number of children, and more must be included.

http://feminist.org/blog/index.php/2015/02/03/michigan-lawmakers-want-to-create-even-more-extraneous-requirements-for-abortion-providers/

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Michigan Lawmakers Want t...