• Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It would be more accurate to say that women are dying because the law blocks doctors from performing necessary procedures. You statement of the facts includes an unfair implication that the doctors have a realistic choice in the matter. This is not the doctors’ fault.

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Oh, so you want me to be more percise. Ok

      I haven’t seen one instance of a doctor saying “Fuck it, I’m going to save this woman’s life because that’s where my moral compass is. Come and get me.” Instead, they hide behind the health care industry, the insurance industry and state lawmakers who could never hold a medical degree.

      As far as I’m concerned the whole batch has the integrity of a slug. But, worst of all are all those citizens who, like them, could give two shits if a woman lives or dies. We seem to want to drum up a lot of sympathy in this country for people thousands of miles away, but not so much for the woman bleeding out in the parking lot of a hospital.

      How’s that

      • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Can’t wait to read your rant on cashiers not giving away food or hotel attendants not giving out rooms to homeless people or all of the selfish fucks (present 🤚) that don’t donate blood regularly and aren’t organ donors.

        • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I doubt I would ever rant about a person not being able to scan a barcode. A person bleeding out is another matter.

      • cogman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        A doctor or hospital gets to make the choice to save the life once. Once they make that call, it’s jail time, loss of license, and financial ruin.

        What doctors are doing is leaving the states with these laws. In my state, hospitals are closing down their OBGYN units because they simply can’t find doctors that will work there.

        Like, I’m sorry, I don’t expect someone to destroy their lives and family lives for a patient. Further, the jail time also hurts patients they can help with non-abortion related medical issues. These doctors taking principled stances will not impact the law makers or their constituents who pushed for the laws. The rabid anti-abortion terrorists literally celebrate the murders of doctors that have performed abortions.

        • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          It doesn’t take a specialist to treat a woman bleeding out. Any ER doc should be able to do that.

          And yes, maybe it would destroy a career. But, on the other hand the woman dies.

          • cogman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 hour ago

            And how many other patients end up dying because there are no doctors staffing the ER? What happens to a community if the state government shuts down a hospital because of repeated violations of their abortion law?

            That’s why your blame make no sense. While I’d certainly congratulate any doctor brave enough to be arrested over the law, I understand completely why they don’t and would not expect any doctor to.

            • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              First of all, I’m not blaming anyone. If I had to blame someone, I’d start with SCOTUS.

              Secondly, you seem to suggest that an innocent death is for the greater good. Sure you want to stick with that?

              • cogman@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                44 minutes ago

                Secondly, you seem to suggest that an innocent death is for the greater good. Sure you want to stick with that?

                I’m suggesting that we have a real life trolley problem. Save a pregnant person’s life, remove yourself from being able to save the life of someone that has a heart attack, stroke, or any other list of life threatening diseases.

                Yes, I want to stick with that because that is very much the situation these doctors and hospital systems find themselves in.

                And, to be real clear, many of these doctors are leaving the red states to get out of this situation. And I don’t blame them for doing that.

                • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  37 minutes ago

                  You’ll stick with the theory an innocent death is for the the greater good until it’s your innocent death.

                  You could make the same argument that someone without insurance or means should be denied access because the hospital needs only paying customers to stay in business.

                  Some people would find that to be amoral.

                  • cogman@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    38 seconds ago

                    You’ll stick with the theory an innocent death is for the the greater good until it’s your innocent death.

                    I never said the death was for good. Nor have I said that it’d be immoral for a doctor to break the law. The death is because of a horrible legal reality and a doctor that complies with the law isn’t some sort of monster. There are justifications for that decision, but you won’t respect them. I am not some moral absolutist like you appear to be. Things can be murky.

                    You could make the same argument that someone without insurance or means should be denied access because the hospital needs only paying customers to stay in business.

                    I could, but I’m not making that argument. In fact, I argue strongly that the entire healthcare industry should be nationalized and paid by taxes. Just because that’s my desired outcome doesn’t mean that I turn around and shame doctors and nurses for working for more than minimum wage. Which is effectively what you are saying “These doctors are making healthcare expensive for all because of their salaries. They should work for free!”

                    In the exact same vein, I argue that abortion should be legal and highly available. But that’s not the environment I or doctors find themselves in. So, sorry, I’m not going to fault doctors for not playing hero.

      • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        This is a really strange take. If one of those cowardly doctors does what you suggest, and they lose the ability to practice medicine, what happens to all those patients they could’ve treated in the future? Should the next patient die without treatment because the doctor decided to risk it?

        No, doctors are most certainly not the problem here. And what a weird group to target.

        • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          I didn’t say doctors were the problem. We all know what the problem is.

          A doctor is supposed to treat what.is in front of them, and that’s obviously not what’s happening.