The Arizona Senate passed a bill this week that allows doctors to withhold from pregnant women information regarding prenatal problems because disclosing that information might lead to an abortion.
Seriously.
From Addicting Info:
It’s called a “wrongful birth” bill and it’s all about preventing women from having an abortion, even if it kills them. The Arizona Senate passed a bill this week that gives doctors a free pass to not inform pregnant women of prenatal problems because such information could lead to an abortion.
In other words, doctors can intentionally keep critical health information from pregnant women and can’t be sued for it. According to the Arizona Capitol Times, “the bill’s sponsor is Republican Nancy Barto of Phoenix. She says allowing the medical malpractice lawsuits endorses the idea that if a child is born with a disability, someone is to blame.” So Republicans are banning lawsuits against doctors who keep information from pregnant women so as to prevent them from choosing to have an abortion.
is this where we are as a country? We’re withholding medical information from women because that information might lead to abortions while simultaneously passing bills in state after state with such pithy names as “Right to Know” or “Right to Know and See” or “Informed Consent” the claimed purpose of which is to make sure women are fully informed? And not only are we withholding information, but we’re immunizing doctors from liability?
What the hell?
[via Addicting Info]
[cross-posted at ABLC]
Shari
We’re becoming a forced birth nation
Svensker
They have lost their fucking minds.
Rhoda
Motherfuckers, they want to see if they can get 14% support from women as they do Latinos I guess.
Martin
Wanna bet? That’s a straight up civil rights violation. Doctors have to disclose all medical information to men, but can withhold it from women?
burnspbesq
Somebody explain to me how this doesn’t get wiped out as an undue burden under Casey.
To your question, yes, it is where we are. A large chunk of the population has decided to stop thinking or behaving rationally.
You sound surprised. Why?
Roger Moore
Of course. Women are too excitable and hormonal to make informed decisions anyway, which is why doctors and state legislatures have to decide who should and (mostly) shouldn’t be allowed to have abortions. Next up on the agenda is taking back their foolishly granted ability to vote. /wingnut
Martin
Does Scientology have a militant wing?
g
Wait, so we’re compelling women to undergo unwanted medical procedures so that they will be confronted with information, yet at the same time we’re allowing doctors to withhold information from their female patients?
Is this the Onion?
wrb
@Martin:
No problem. They can withhold information from pregnant men.
John Cole
This is insane.
dmsilev
Modern Republicans, among their many other failings, regard ‘1984’ as an instruction manual rather than a cautionary tale.
(and not just the Newspeak either. I think we’re about a month or two away from the GOP advocating the formation of the Junior Anti-Sex League.)
Kathy in St. Louis
I am absolutely certain that along with this bill, the folks on the right who come up with this crap also voted in a provision adding lifetime medical care for a child born with a horrendous birth defect that the mother wasn’t told about in advance. Wait, what? They didn’t add that. Then let me see if I understand this. If a doctor withhold information conerning a serious birth defect that could financially break or emotionally destroy a family, then it’s just tough luck for that family and the other children who could be very negatively affected by such a decision. These legislators really want to take us back at least 50 years and deny the advances in medicine that could prevent such tragedies. I am at a loss to understand the why of all this. It doesn’t even make sense.
Mattminus
The really scary part is that Arizona is the 10th state to pass such a law.
wrb
Women shouldn’t be allowed to know what we’ve planted in them. It would spoil the surprise.
/satan
Nutella
If I were running an obstetrical malpractice insurance company in Arizona I sure wouldn’t want to depend on this law staying in effect long enough to cover all potential court cases. Their rates are going to go through the roof.
Poopyman
Too bad the Hippocratic Oath isn’t legally binding.
The Other Chuck
If women actually voted their interests, there wouldn’t be a Republican Party. Republicans of any gender are a particular breed of cruel who will gleefully be ground under the toe of the iron boot as long as everyone else gets the heel.
wasabi gasp
This may also help reduce the income tax burden on wingnut christianist doctors.
sherifffruitfly
Clearly the proper response would be to “teach Obama a lesson” again in 2012! amirite?
Brachiator
If you are a woman in Arizona, you are allowed to know only what the state wants you to know. The Republicans call this “liberty” and “limited government.”
At least the Republicans got a woman to sponsor this bill. No one can claim that uninformed men are taking a woman’s rights away, when another woman is doing the dirty work.
Oh yeah, and the Hippocratic Oath: “Do No Harm.” Fuck that shit. If the woman or the child is even harmed further, no medical malpractice worries, apparently.
alex milstein
And what kind of doctor would do that? Certainly not a good one.
And these are the same people worried about Sharia law?
MikeJ
If you can’t sue the doctor for withholding information you’ll just have to sue the state of Arizona.
JGabriel
@burnspbesq:
That’s a totally unfair assessment: it slanderously implies that they may have ever previously thought rationally in the first place.
.
Poopyman
@Mattminus: Yeah, scary because we haven’t heard about it ten times from the media.
I wonder what they think their jobs are supposed to be?
Loneoak
Any doctor that does this would be promptly removed from all national licensing groups and censored by a bajillion ethics boards. The law is outrageous, but medical professionals are covered by more than state laws.
pragmatism
fucking hell.
Nutella
@Mattminus:
What are the other 10 states?
redshirt
FREEDOM!
cathyx
So in other words, you must not know that you may be giving birth to a severely deformed baby.
Nutella
@cathyx:
But you must listen to its heartbeat and look at its ultrasound image. Priorities!
Mike Lamb
Do people actually sue (successfully) just because his/her child is born with a disability that wasn’t anyone’s fault? Are there any reported cases where the cause of action was medical malpractice on the grounds that if I had known “X”, I would have aborted? I’m just not seeing the malpractice if the doctor didn’t contribute to the defect…
The Ancient Randonneur
@Mattminus:
Whoa. THAT really is news. I didn’t realize nine others had enacted such legislation.
BTW does this mean they’ve also increased state aid to help families of lesser means care for these children? Oh, wait, life starts at conception and ends at birth. Got it!
Shinobi
Fuck Arizona.
PeakVT
@alex milstein: They oppose Sharia over specific details, not on principle.
here4tehbeer
Build the dang fence. Around the entire state, please.
Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.)
One out of every four of my fellow citizens is a psychopath. That’s nice.
Poopyman
@Shinobi:
That’s the new state motto, if I’m not mistaken.
jl
@The Other Chuck:
” If women actually voted their interests, there wouldn’t be a Republican Party ”
It takes time for a major US political party to commit suicide. Let’s see how the GOP does in the election.
TBogg made a joke that all medical care should be withheld from women of childbearing age, since otherwise they could survive to have abortions.
Looks like the GOP saw that joke and made it a plank in their platform.
Time to just tell your friends and family, anyone you bump into, that the GOP is pursuing policies that will kill women, kill kids, and maim kids. All in the name of a crazy doctrine that a viable full fledged life begins as soon as an egg and spermatozoon find each other, which is a crazy doctrine, unworkable, ignorant, and something that our olde tymey very moral and self reliant forebears never tried to do. Because it is so crazy, and so counter to the natural way of things, that even those ignorant olde tymey people knew it was crazy.
But here we are, in 2012, and the GOP tries to sell this murderous nonsense.
JGabriel
Moderated. Re-posted below.
Schlemizel
@Mike Lamb:
I know there have been cases brought over “wrongful birth” I don’t know if any were ever successful or what the origins of the suits were. But it is pretty obvious that this is not the intent of this bill.
These bastards want to go all Clockwork Orange and force women to see and hear things if they might have an abortion but they don’t want them to hear or see everything, only the things the GOP wants. These are some sick mofakies thats for sure
redshirt
@Shinobi: “I urinated on the state while I was kicking this song”
Poopyman
In other news,
Men With Microphones, Part I:
Men With Microphones, Part II:
Barney Frank Gets Benched After House Floor Spat With GOP (VIDEO)
mhh
It is not even necessary to invoke civil rights. If a doctor withholds medical information from a patient and something bad happens, it is a malpractice time, complete with lawsuit and huge settlement or high profile trial followed by huge penalty. There are decades if not centuries of case law here, to say nothing of the Hippocratic Oath and professional accountability standards. No doc in his/her right mind would dream of going this route, and if they did, they would lose their license either quickly and cheaply or a slowly after a few million in legal fees. Remember how the courts (with GOP appointed judges) treated political interference with the Schiavo case, which was No Standing for You and/or Your Evidence is Bullshit. If Arizona puts this in force, they can say goodbye to their obstetricians.
JGabriel
g:
Dear State of Arizona,
As a doctor in our great state, I have a perplexing problem. I am giving my patient a state mandated ultra-sound against her will, but it shows that the baby has three legs — or two legs and a very large p3n1s — one arm, and no head.
As the lack of a head may induce my patient to go through with an abortion, do you have any advice on how I can manipulate the transvaginal probe device to conceal the fetus’s headlessness?
It is urgent that you respond quickly, as I am uncertain as to how long the restraints will hold against the patient’s struggles. Thank you so much for your time and your prompt attention to this matter.
Very Truly Yours,
Dr. Republican Quackenbush
.
Schlemizel
@PeakVT:
not even the details just the supposed source. There is not a thing covred by Sharia that the Christofacists are not also on board with. If it were a Word doc all you would have to do is CTR-H, Find: Allah, Replace: God and hit Replace All.
They’d be OK with that
jibeaux
We don’t know what the other states’ laws on wrongful birth suits is, though. IF they bar a cause of action based on “you should have recommended X genetic testing or amniocentesis” or a similar negligence argument but don’t bar a cause of action based on withheld information, then that’s a different animal.
Jay in Oregon
@cathyx:
Because apparently it’s better that both the mother and the baby die than just the baby. Pro-life!
Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.)
@Poopyman:
Oh, man, is that true? That’s great! I’d have paid to hear that. Is there a link to it or anything?
Linnaeus
Fascism. Just say it.
gelfling545
@Mike Lamb: I’m guessing that it would be because the Doctor, in choosing not to give information s/he had to the parents, has signed these people up for a lifetime commitment they feel unable to handle and might have decided to forgo had they been informed that this was the case.
swbarnes2
Under that logic, you could also refuse to tell a pregnant woman that her health was endangered by a perfectly healthy fetus, because she might decide to abort for her own health.
Hell, if a woman with some health issues asks her doctor “what are the possible health consequences should I get pregnant”, couldn’t the doctor just lie to her and say she’ll be fine, for fear that she’ll get an abortion someday if he tells her that pregnancy is dangerous?
Davis X. Machina
Self-delete. Not only a cial*s reference, but a cut-and-paste error….I’ll try again de novo.
Mike Lamb
@Schlemizel: Right. That’s the unbelievable disconnect, as it’s so clearly not about the mythical med-mal boogeyman.
JC
What is WRONG with these people?
piratedan
TY Arizona for putting the R back into stupid.
Poopyman
@Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.): Edited to include links on both segments.
Martin
@Poopyman: I was pleased to discover the Girl Scouts pull their ads from Limbaugh’s show. I was, however, vastly more dismayed to discover that the Girl Scouts had been advertising on Captain Feminazi’s show to begin with.
kindness
You’ve become a hot commodity ABL. I’ve seen links to your site over at Sully’s and a couple others.
Good for you.
Ben Cisco
@dmsilev: Also, A Handmaid’s Tale.
burnspbesq
Unless Congress rewrote Title 28 while I wasn’t looking, decisions of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona are still appealable to the hippiepinko Ninth Circuit. Not a chance that this legislation ever goes into effect.
Let ’em have their fun. Then build your outreach to women voters around this abomination.
Shinobi
@Poopyman: Oh I thought it was “Fuck, Arizona”
Davis X. Machina
@Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.): You’re an optimist. I’m rocking with Robert Owen, pre-Marx ur-Socia1st: ‘All the world is queer save thee and me, and even thou art a little queer’.
(Often attributed to an anonymous Quaker…)
Poopyman
Men With Microphones, Part III (Gold-Plated Version):
This one’s a little more on-topic than Barney Frank.
John PM
@Mattminus: @Mike Lamb:
Do people actually sue (successfully) just because his/her child is born with a disability that wasn’t anyone’s fault? Are there any reported cases where the cause of action was medical malpractice on the grounds that if I had known “X”, I would have aborted? I’m just not seeing the malpractice if the doctor didn’t contribute to the defect…
Violet
Wow. I don’t even know what to say. I feel like I’m living in a fascist state. Appalling.
The Dangerman
@Loneoak:
This.
This law is little more than wingnut masturbation.
scav
They’ll kill mother/child and any handy bystanders to keep their morals pure. But after that fundamental and stark abomination, what the fuck are they doing putting restrictions upon the workings on the free market like that? Isn’t the right to sue exactly the tool we’re supposed to use instead of all those unduly burdensome government regulations? Oh, silly me, logic logic logic, so commie.
Nutella
Not to worry. Ezra says gene technology will push us into single payer soon.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
You may think I’m all wet, or even a tad nuts. But I think it is Obama tinkering with the minds of wingnuts, causing them to do and say really, super really stupid shit. He may have even discovered sekret formula for this mind control to wing the election with the “Gawd Particle”. I bet that’s it, and worked like a charm on Rush, Komen, and now Arizona. Never mind he’s using this gawd particle in sub atomic ways and means to play dice with the universe, or at least the GOP. Double dare never mind.
PS – and you gotta admit it’s rather diabolical how the wingnut mind works, If you don’t want abortions, just make doctors pretend you ain’t pregnant. See how that works? Pig ignorant and mean, but diabolical. fer sure.
Violet
So a woman in Arizona, if she knows about this law, could ask her doctor, “Are you withholding any information from me regarding this pregnancy?” and the doctor could lie and say, “No” and he or she would not suffer any repercussions? Fucking unbelievable.
JGabriel
burnspbesq:
How does one get standing to oppose it, if they don’t even know that their doctor concealed information from them, much less what information was concealed?
.
burnspbesq
@scav:
Where did you ever get the silly idea that Republicans like free markets? They only like markets that are rigged so that they always win.
Mattminus
@Nutella:
I got the number from teh linked to article. When I did a little googling to find out, I found another source that says it’s 12:
Idaho, Utah, South Dakota, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia
http://www.mmplegal.com/newsletters/medical-malpractice/wrongful-birth/
No surprises there.
Now, IANAL, so I don’t know if they all go the same extent. I can imagine a case where it’s fair to say we don’t want a doctor to be sued because a child had an undetected birth defect. I don’t know that they all allow a doctor to deceive and still receive immunity, but, given the states in question, I wouldn’t be surprised.
This one’s a real twofer. “Tort reform” and forced pregnancy. Awesome!
harlana
sigh…
here’s how it goes, i’ve said it time and again
we need more wage/debt slaves, people!
Birthmarker
So we are ratcheting up from withholding treatment or prescriptions or OTC meds due to the medical personnel’s personal feelings to withholding information for the same reason?
Is this wackadoodle enough to wake somebody up?
burnspbesq
@JGabriel:
It’s unconstitutional on its face, as an undue burden on access to abortion. Any pregnant woman would have standing.
Chief Justice Roberts’ preference for as-applied challenges isn’t the law just yet.
MobiusKlein
@wrb:
They can withhold information from the father as well as the mother.
Problem solved!
TooManyJens
Fucking insanity. To prevent abortions of children with disabilities, instead of providing information and support so that people can handle parenting children with disabilities, we’ll just let the parents be surprised at birth! Because mothers are their children’s enemies. I hate this shit.
Mattminus
@Violet:
Making the doctor tell you the truth about your health would be a violation of HIS religious freedom.
jrg
The first time this actually occurs, we’ll get to hear a chorus of hick voices howling “Teh gubbermunt can’t do nothin’ right!”
Soonergrunt
I got nothing.
AkaDad
I’m starting to think that the Republicans are waging a war against women.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero):
And no I ain’t drunk, just struck silly for the day, and maybe week. Personal induced semi coma so the sun storm and wingnuts don’t fry my circuits. live wit it.
Calouste
@JGabriel:
Get a second opinion from another doctor. Preferably one in a same state of course. If whatever issue there is is obvious (say an ectopic pregnanacy), the Arizona doctor can either admit to lying or serious malpratice.
Arclite
Shorter AZ Lawmakers: It’s only a woman, who cares?
elmo
Doctors in AZ are no longer required to tell their patients that they have gestational diabetes? Pre-eclampsia? holy crap – tubal pregnancy?
JGabriel
@burnspbesq: Thanks.
shortstop
At what point do Arizona women start fleeing to Mexico to have their pregnancies there?
scav
@burnspbesq: Never believed they were for really free markets (other than the free to do whatever the hell they want without consequences markets). Just assumed the sarcasm font was initiated. Pointing out their essential hypocrisy in both their spiritual and economic religions.
Mattminus
@burnspbesq:
What are we to make of this?
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2003/02/03/gvsb0203.htm
Violet
@Calouste:
For poor women, getting to and affording one doctor is a challenge. Two is a ridiculous burden.
I am just seething with rage over all of this stuff. I feel like I’m being attacked from all directions because I’m female.
rikyrah
GOP WAR ON WOMEN
period
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
@shortstop:
They can come to New Mexico, but will have to swear allegiance to Zia and Earth Mother. And bring their own weed.
JGabriel
@elmo:
If the bill passes. Presumably it still needs to go through the Arizona House and be signed by the Governor.
.
jl
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero):
Stuck, the plan was to flush out people who doubted Nobama’s special mind powers, so he could smite those among his minions who have gone bad. Now, you’ve wrecked it, you wretch.
Also too, I cannot see how this law will ever have any effect. Nevertheless, it is a big deal, and it is a big deal in every state that passes one, even if all them are so crazy they will never take effect.
It shows the lengths to which the crazy deranged GOP reactionaries will go to. Every law this crowd passes, everyone they appoint to write regs, to oversee regs will operate on the basis of this mindset. And some of all that will come into effect. And it will get women and children killed and maimed.
So it is a big deal, and people should make a big fuss about it, and spread the word: GOP on national and state level is in favor of policies that will kill and maim women and children. Period. Full Stop. End of Story.
beltane
@elmo: Exactly. What this bill really does is outlaw prenatal care altogether, or at least permit wingnut doctors to maliciously withhold prenatal care. Under this law, women with the more dangerous forms of pregnancy complications such as placenta previa or placenta abrubtio will be simply allowed to die with their fetuses.
ACOG should yank the board certification of any “doctor” whose religious beliefs promote the butchery of women. Likewise, insurance companies should also blacklist these butchers.
Quaker in a Basement
is this where we are as a country?
Not yet. But these people are sure trying their level best to take us there.
Steve
@burnspbesq: I don’t understand your Casey argument at all. You seem to be saying that if a doctor fails to give a patient information, the state is obligated under Casey to recognize a right of action or else the right to abortion is being unduly burdened. I don’t really get that. Plenty of states ban the “wrongful birth” cause of action and I don’t know of any bans that have been successfully challenged under Casey.
You’re making a very strong assertion here, not just that you think there is a colorable argument under Casey, but that this law would be routinely struck down as a facial matter, no question about it. I don’t understand where you get this certainty from. Are you aware of any federal court cases that actually say a state is required to recognize a wrongful birth cause of action?
shortstop
I have to say, it’s been at least a month since any 20-something women looked at me like I was crazy or melodramatic when I mention that no, it’s not paranoid, the GOP really does want to have total control over their ladystuff. So there’s that.
JGabriel
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero):
What the hell? NM’s like the fifth least dense state in the country. You got plenty o’ room to grow it per capita, and you can’t share your fuckin’ weed?
Bogarts.
.
beltane
@JGabriel: I have no faith in either the Arizona House or their miserable witch of a governor. The effluvia that has been seeping out of that shithole of a state has been doing nothing but stinking up the rest of the country for some time now.
JGabriel
@beltane: Nor I. Just pointing out that it’s not law yet.
.
Calouste
@Violet:
Of course. My comment was purely an answer to JGabriel on how any (presumably well off) woman could get standing to take this to court.
Poor women are going to be screwed, but that’s the goal of the Republicans.
shortstop
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero): They best stay out of Clovis. But see, the joke was: people are always saying Mexican mothers are running to the U.S. to have children, so I thought it would be funny to have pregnant Arizona women seeking a better life and more freedom in Mexico. It’s possible that I’m not as funny as I think I am.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
Cole was right, for a change. Crystal Clear, the choices. And the battle lines. All personal leave is hereinby canceled. smoke em if you got em. This here is war.
MikeJ
The article refers to “withholding information” which sounds passive. I can’t see how it would ever happen without the doctor actively lying. the patient isn’t someone who goes in wanting an abortion, it is a woman who is pregnant and willing under some circumstances to give birth. Isn’t this woman going to ask about the health of the embryo?
While I don’t believe that doctors should passively withhold information, taking the affirmative step to lie to a patient should never be protected.
Rafer Janders
Because as we all know, one of Christ’s main messages was to only care for those who agree with you. When helping the poor, a Christian’s duty is to always stop and first consider “is this needy person in complete ideological agreement with me?”
shortstop
@beltane: I have several pals in AZ who keep encouraging me to visit (it’s been a while). At this point I just forward headlines like this instead of responding. They play on our team, so they just shake their heads and apologize.
Schlemizel
You people seem to think there is something wrong about a woman dieing because of complications from pregnancy. It seems to the GOP that if this happens it is because it is what God wanted. Who are we to disagree with God?
A wingnut (now ex)friend once told me that America started going wrong when we put science above jesus & we had to elevate God back up over science or we would suffer. Looks like AZ is well on the way
elmo
@Violet: @Violet:
Right there with you. And I’m 45 years old and gay, so never ever going to be pregnant, and still blinking at all of this in disbelief and horror.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
@shortstop:
sounded funny to me.
Currants
No wonder Margaret Atwood gave me the creeps in the 80s.
shortstop
@elmo: I save my most significant contempt for the female Republicans who are down with all this. They hate us more than they love themselves.
redshirt
Laws like this are the reason everyone here should donate to the ACLU as well. I’m a card carrying member in excellent standing!
piratedan
@Schlemizel: yeah, that was us turning the tide in WWII when we unloaded thousands of men on the beaches of Normandy armed with clubs and bows and arrows…..from those floating wooden rafts and canoes of liberty….
beltane
@MikeJ: Why would “pro-life” doctors take part in prenatal testing at all? If they believe abortion is worse than the death or injury of the mother, they have no business being an obstetrician in the first place. A woman is better off getting care from a faith healer than from a phony ob/gyn because at least she will know what she’s getting (or not getting).
Is there a list of these phony ob/gyns anywhere? If so, they need to be given the Fred Phelps treatment, hounded by a pack of angry women wherever they go.
elmo
@shortstop:
Now see, I don’t. To me, the men are worse — because how can you presume to judge, and regulate, something at such an intimate level that you can never, ever experience? The women have the (worthless, meaningless) excuse that they at least know what pregnancy is like (at least most of them). But the men? How does any man not throw up his hands, back away from the whole subject, and say, “I can’t decide that for you.”
Schlemizel
@beltane:
If we truly put Jesus above science they would have walked across the channel clad only in the armor of righteousness & the Nazis would have fallen down deaf & blind!
Another Halocene Human
@Loneoak: I wish. I don’t think MDs self-govern well. Most states have cronied up boards and they’re not even effective at fighting off the creep of chiropractors and other woo-woo mechanics edging into their territory. (They want the right to write scrips. Nothing like getting your back-crack patient on the pain pill treadmill… you know, the ones where if you go cold turkey you get REBOUND PAIN?)
Losing the right to sue is really killer because no matter what voluntary association ethical doctors form it is not going to be legally binding when it matters for the patient.
I wish there was a clear way to get more effective policing of the profession because from what I’ve seen (Consumer’s Union reports and so on) part of the rise in healthcare costs is due to medical boards not censuring or delicensing practitioners who are making mistake after mistake.
It’s like have a labor union take over all hiring and firing. I’m not saying you can’t work collaboratively with management or even go employee-owned (like in Norway, or Japan, or in a number of shops in the US) but it would be ridiculous to have the shop steward, who is supposed to defend employees who get into trouble, be the gatekeeper to firing… conflict of interest much? Sure, they’ll jettison people who have political problems (even if what they did wasn’t that bad), but will keep protecting someone who recklessly endangers the public because “he’s such a nice guy, and everyone likes him, and we all screw up sometimes, and he’s got a sick kid in the hospital and really needs this job.”
That’s kind of how a lot of state medical boards actually work.
Linnaeus
@Violet:
If folks like the Arizona Goopers have their way, we will be in a fascist state. That’s what they want. Let’s name it for what it is.
RSA
This NY Times Magazine article says that
Just half? Wow.
shortstop
@Another Halocene Human:
Yes, if the reports are accurate, it’s a relatively small number of bad actors piling up most of the malpractice. The profession could significantly bring down insurance and litigation costs and improve patient outcomes if it would just stop circling the wagons around repeat offenders.
Schlemizel
@elmo:
I’m 60, white, straight and can pass for Christian yet I feel they are coming after me too. They just have to do it over the bodies of those who are not like me. That the attacking army looks more like me than it does like those others is just one more embarrassment I have with my species.
Comrade Colette Collaboratrice
I dunno, are women people? Who gets to decide? ‘Cause if we’re not, then we certainly shouldn’t have the power to make that decision, and if we are, well, we’re certainly too biased and self-interested to make that decision. Such a dilemma!
Another Halocene Human
@Mike Lamb: What if the doctor lied and the woman died?
I’m thinking LAWSUIT!
JGabriel
via Rafer Janders:
Odd. I don’t remember Jesus telling any parables about the evil Samaritan socia1ist who should be shunned for helping people.
.
Another Halocene Human
@PeakVT:
Yes, and the detail is the branding. “Go team, bury that other team” but they’re playing the same game.
Another Halocene Human
@Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.): But they’re contingent psychopaths.
Your problem is that you’re not part of the in-group.
D. Mason
It looks to me like the Republicans are trying to instigate a revolution.
stratplayer
If you’re one of those “I’m fiscally-conservative-but-socially-liberal” Republicans who have been enabling these dangerous kooks for decades on the assumption that they’d never be able to deliver on their threats and you’d still get your taxes cut, this is all your fucking fault!!!!!
gnomedad
@Nutella:
This. Absolutely. This is the elephant just about to enter the room. Thanks for the link.
Steve
@elmo: No, none of this is actually true. A woman can still sue for any damage to herself that occurs because of a doctor’s negligence or nondisclosure of material facts. Likewise, if the doctor’s negligence actively causes the birth defect or injury, there can still be a lawsuit.
The only scenario where a lawsuit is barred by this law is where a baby is born with a defect and the parent says “if you had told me about this defect, I would have chosen to abort, so now you need to pay me for the costs of raising this child.” Maybe that’s a perfectly valid legal theory, but all I’m saying is that it’s a very specific theory. It’s not like the doctor can just let a woman die from an ectopic pregnancy and bear no liability.
Churchlady320
@Martin: You know, that is purely disgusting.
PurpleGirl
Shit like this makes me think that these f**ktards are using Nicolae Ceaușescu as their role model.
Tone In DC
@JGabriel:
LULz.
Marcellus Shale, Public Dick
fuck this, we need IUEDs
scav
It’ll be harder and harder for anyone to trust a doctor to be working in their best interests, given that the MDs may be acting otherwise because of hospital or personal policy. The relationship of just about anyone but especially women in what has to be a personal (as physically-based) relationship is simply being poisoned.
Brachiator
@Nutella:
Now, I’m really worried.
This kind of thing from Ezra is little more than wishful thinking in place of honest analysis.
gumbo
Where in the hell are the AMA, the American College of OB/GYN? etc. in all of this? The eerie silence on the part of the medical profession during this assault on their patients’ rights and health is another horrific aspect of this whole cluster f*ck
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
@JGabriel:
I realize you’re being snarky, but there’s truth here.
None of the GOP madness of the past few weeks is anything new, at all. It’s just that they’re being so upfront and public about it now.
For nearly two decades, Republican Friends and family used to look at me like I was nuts when I’d point out that the truly crazy positions the GOP held, and vote for them anyway. Call it the Stealth Wingnut principle, if you like.
Now? Not even the low-information voters have any excuse to pretend anymore. If you vote GOP, you’re essentially voting for theo-fascists and/or neo-feudalists.
Ironically, I see this new openness as progress: Though I don’t know how far it will go, or how the crazier of these people will react when they inevitably lose this last political battle.
muddy
@PurpleGirl:
I can only hope it turns out as well for them.
Steve
@gumbo: I’m not sure the AMA is opposed to limits on medical malpractice lawsuits. As others have noted, this law doesn’t alter a doctor’s ethical obligations.
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
@Another Halocene Human:
If my wife died because a doctor knowingly lied to her, a lawsuit would be the least of his problems.
les
@Rafer Janders:
See “Salvation Army.”
Joseph Nobles
There’s this “pox on both your houses” guy on Twitter saying that the solution is for the government to completely get out of reproductive decisions 100%. No funding, no mandates, no nothing. PP gets 100% private donations, it can do what it wants. Everybody happy.
Except for the women who aren’t getting healthcare right now because of withdrawn funding in Texas, but that’s a whole other argument. No, I think that’s exactly what the right wing wants – government out of healthcare. It’s all about killing the ACA. OK, left wingers, say the Repubs, you want government to take over health care? Here we go. Try and stop us. Oops, the only way to stop us is to repeal Obamacare? Aww, too bad, so sad.
And in other news, a lawsuit out of all this bullshit will make its way to the Supreme Court and give RobThomScAlito their best chance ever to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Taking out RvW and killing Obamacare. The question is not why are they doing all this crazy shit. The question is why are they restraining themselves?
wrb
@les:
And a lot of homeless shelters
Patricia Kayden
So you vote for Repubs and they do crazy things … and we are all supposed to be surprised? What won’t the Repubs do in their war against women? Nothing would surprise me.
What are the women of Arizona doing about this bill? Or are they okay with it? Would love to see the polls.
Hopefully, the majority of American women notice what the Repubs do when they have the upper hand and vote them out of Congress.
bootsy
This seems like one of the worst ones yet.
How is Arizona not like Afghanistan now? Women are property, not people. Who cares if they live or die, or get a cyst that “the pill” could protect them from getting.
KSH
That bill is illegal, pure and simple.
cckids
For myself, after my son was diagnosed with CP, I got mailings from ambulance chasers for YEARS wanting to “help” me sue my doctor, who was absolutely not at fault. Though if I’d been low-information or venal, I’m fairly sure I could have gone after him; after all, my son’s problem would have shown up easily on an ultrasound. But 30 years ago, they weren’t routine.
And, I cannot tell you how much it would have helped to have that information before he was born. When I was pregnant with son #2 (10 years later), I asked for an ultrasound as early as possible/practical to see the brain-I needed to know, not necessarily for an abortion, but because I NEEDED to know, for my own mental health. Whenever you get that news, it blindsides you; but having some counseling, time to get educated about what the future holds, seek medical care (for some conditions), or yes, end the pregnancy, gives you at least some control over your own life.
And, speaking as a parent of a profoundly disabled child who has both enriched and taken over my life, people should have the chance to make their own decisions. These kids can be the source of your greatest wisdom, joy & pain. I would never judge anyone their choices, whatever they may be.
RedKitten
I read the bill, and it’s interesting. Provision 5 does state that the other provisions do not apply to civil action for damages for an intentional act or omission, including one that violates criminal law.
So technically, you can still sue if the doctor KNOWINGLY omits information. But shit…how in the hell are you going to prove that?
And, as a doctor friend of mine put it, “That makes me think (and shudder) … Would a radiologist in AZ be allowed by law not to report prenatal defects on an ultrasound because of his/her ‘conscience’?” I mean, how easy would it be for a radiologist to say, “Oops…I must have just missed it. Sorry. My bad. Bygones!”
RedKitten
And you know what, even if it IS an honest mistake, I do not like the idea of a doctor getting off completely scot-free for not disclosing vital medical information. Each and every single one of us as a RIGHT to full and complete disclosure regarding our medical issues. Doctors need to take that extremely seriously, and if the odd lawsuit here or there reminds them to double-and-triple check things? That’s not necessarily a BAD thing.
kerFuFFler
OK, I’m ready to march. Voting and sending money to good candidates only gets you so far. We need to make some NOISE so people are aware of this BS.
Patricia Kayden
Not sure if Balloon Juice covered this story, which is along the lines of the post.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/03/08/440348/georgia-women-stage-walk-out-to-protest-anti-abortion-and-contraception-bills/
Mike Lamb
@Another Halocene Human: Absolutely. I’m referring to a situation in which a baby is born with some type of physical or mental disability, without more, and the doctor is sued. On the one hand, I understand the theory–the doctor negligently witheld information that prevented an informed consent. On the other, it is distasteful to me, after the child is born, to argue that the fetus would have been aborted.
Rome Again
@Kathy in St. Louis:
You don’t understand WHY Kathy? Because Zygotes can feel PAIN, of course! Zygotes are SCREAMING in SHEER TERROR and are unheard.
I”m wishing now that I didn’t move to Phoenix.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@The Ancient Randonneur:
The favorite line of some angry Mothers (speaking to their misbehaving kids) comes to mind: I brought you into this world and I’ll take you out of it if I have to!.
Conservative men have adopted that for the population. They’ll fight like hell to make sure that every pregnancy results in a baby, no matter what the woman wants, but once the baby is here then it’s on its own. If that baby grows up and breaks the wrong law then those same Christians will have it killed. It’s the Christian way.
The Spartan Christian.
Amir Khalid
So this despicable Arizonan law would allow an OB-GYN to hide the truth from a patient on conscience grounds i.e. if he thinks she might abort her pregnancy. I’m heartened to hear informed opinion that the law is problematic, in that it permits a gross violation of medical ethics; that it might well not survive judicial scrutiny. But I sit before my laptop amazed that it could be proposed at all, let alone be passed, by legislators who claim to be civilized human beings.
Steve
@Mike Lamb:
This is basically why these laws exist, rightly or wrongly. You’d be arguing to the jury that you’re worse off having this baby that has birth defects than if you had no baby at all. Of course, that’s unquestionably true from a monetary standpoint, but a healthy baby is also a lot more expensive than no baby at all.
Naturally, none of us think there is anything automatically wrong with saying “I’d rather have no baby at all,” since that’s basically what every woman who has an abortion says. But the question is whether you can or should put a price tag on that.
wrb
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
Bill Cosby. It was on an album of his from the 60s that I had when a kid, although apparently he also used it in the pilot of The Cosby Show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJa0Ofgz_KA
SST
get your facts straight before you all flip out – it prevents claims against doctors who are NEGLIGENT, not those who INTENTIONALLY withhold info.
Rome Again
@SST:
You SURE?
http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/553198
(apologies for my awful blockquoting result, eww!)
Mnemosyne
@SST:
Withholding information because you don’t want your patient to abort a fetus with Down Syndrome isn’t negligent?
Steve
@Rome Again: Paragraph E does seem to say that intentional (or even grossly negligent) acts are not covered by the bill.
Jeff
God, you people on the left are blithering idiots. This bill is not about abortion. Addicting Info deliberately- and egregiously- twisted the intent of the bill, which would protect doctors from malpractice suits using the “if my baby has a birth defect, someone is to blame” premise. This is one step forward in the fight against frivolous lawsuits, which we ALL pay for in higher medical costs. Furthermore, deliberately withholding info from a patient for ANY reason is malpractice in an of itself.
This info is easily obtained. Do due diligence. Discover “The Google.” Just because it’s on the web doesn’t mean it’s true.
Fucking fools.
Mnemosyne
@Steve:
What’s the difference between “omission” and “intentional act”? Is there something under the law that defines “omission” as always accidental?
Brachiator
@Rome Again: WTF is a “wrongful conception?”
Steve
@Mnemosyne: An act is doing something, an omission is failing to do something. Failing to order a test is an omission; failing to tell someone the test results is also an omission. When the bill says “an intentional act or omission,” that should be read as “an intentional act, or an intentional omission.”
If it’s an intentional omission or a grossly negligent omission, then it’s not covered by this bill and there can still be a lawsuit.
Rome Again
@Brachiator:
Don’t ask me, I didn’t create it.
Rome Again
How does one prove intent exactly?
Steve
@Rome Again: It’s actually not that impossible. If a test result comes back positive for something serious and the doctor just “forgets” to mention it to you, that’s going to be gross negligence at a minimum and a jury could probably infer intent. Also, you could probably show a pattern since it’s likely you’re not the only patient he “forgot” to tell.
If the positive test result is the equivalent of a splotch on an X-ray then maybe the doctor could plausibly claim that he just overlooked it, which would be “mere” negligence rather than gross negligence.
Honestly, I don’t think there are many doctors who are awful enough to intentionally withhold information about birth defects and the like from their patients. It’s certainly not a very doctorly thing to do, and I think they could very well lose their license whether or not they could be sued for malpractice. I’m not a fan of this law so please don’t think I’m just trying to minimize it.
Greyjoy
Don’t forget that some a-hole in Wisconsin wants to define single motherhood as child abuse.
So just to be clear, in 2012, three states wanted to require trans-vaginal ultrasounds prior to an abortion, because a regular one wasn’t invasive enough. Then they want women to watch a video and, in two cases, undergo a mandatory waiting period before acquiring that abortion.
One more state wants to make it legal for a doctor not to tell you that your fetus has spina bifida or whatever because you might get an abortion if you knew.
The entire Republican party wants to allow employers to forego birth control coverage. One presidential candidate said that an effective birth control method was to hold an aspirin between your knees.
A Republican congressional committee refused to allow any women to speak on the topic of why insurers should be required to cover birth control.
A prominent GOP mouthpiece took that ball and ran with it, calling the one woman who WAS scheduled to speak (and then denied) a slut and a prostitute over the open airwaves to 20 million listeners.
And now a Wisconsin senator wants to criminalize single motherhood by stating that the act of being a mother while not being married is tantamount to child abuse and neglect.
Nowhere, in ANY of these actions, is there even so much as a reference to men, to men’s insurance coverage for sexual and reproductive needs, to men’s roles in single parenthood, or to whether men are sluts and prostitutes for using a condom.
Scamp Dog
@Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.): It’s easy, just click on the text of this post!
Scamp Dog
@Horrendo Slapp (formerly Jimperson Zibb, Duncan Dönitz, Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.): It’s easy, just click on the text of this post!
Shana
Looks like it’s time to order another one of those bumper stickers that says “If you can’t trust me with choice how can you trust me with a child?”
IrishGirl
I just found out about this piece of crap bill and started a petition about it at Change.org, please go sign it!!!! Also I have a post on my blog (http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com) with contact info for Arizona Speaker of the House because they will take up the bill next, the woman who created the bill (yeah, a woman! gender traitor), the AZ AMA and the national AMA, etc. If you live in AZ, call these people. I sure as hell will be 8 am sharp.
http://www.change.org/petitions/the-arizona-state-house-of-representatives-vote-no-on-the-wrongful-births-bill-senate-bill-1359#
IrishGirl
@Martin: That won’t stop them from passing it into law and then someone will have to sue (ACLU? The AMA?) and how many years will it take to get to the Supreme Court…the ratf*ckers
IrishGirl
@Brachiator: Not only that the modern Hippocratic oath ALSO says they will “practice medicine ethically”, which they can’t do because they are completely denying a woman autonomy by keeping her in the dark AND it says “to not play God”, which is the other thing they are doing. If the AMA and the ARMA don’t stand up against this something is deeply, deeply wrong. I’m uncertain how it got past them but I suspect it was another one of those blitzkrieg bills they propose and pass before constituents even know what’s going on. They tend to do that kind of late night quickie legislation here in AZ.
IrishGirl
@here4tehbeer: NO! I am stuck living here for at least another 10 years.
IrishGirl
@swbarnes2: Basically, yes that’s what the bill says. It leaves the decision completely up to the Doctor, making him or her God. Nice, eh?
IrishGirl
@Ben Cisco: When I first read A Handmaids Tale it made me physically sick to think about this kind of oppression. Now it is becoming a reality and I’m not sick any more. I am pissed off…enraged actually. This BS has gotta stop.
IrishGirl
@Violet: Do you live in AZ? I do. I’ve been raging at the state govt for a couple of years now on my blog but things are getting kind of scary now.
IrishGirl
@The Dangerman: Yes, but once it becomes law and until it can be gotten rid of, it still has the power to hurt people. And we can’t be complacent about it. It’s one more step down the road to fascism, which I know sounds extreme but I am becoming increasingly disturbed by the number and widespread nature of these laws against women’s self-determination.
IrishGirl
@JGabriel: But the point isn’t that they would have standing AFTER the fact–of course they would. But by then the damage is done. It’s unconstitutional, unethical and flat out dangerous. It needs to be stopped before it becomes law.
IrishGirl
@General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero): Count me in (except for the weed part, I’m a dork and have no idea how to buy any)
IrishGirl
@Steve: the hell it doesn’t! the Hippocratic Oath specifically requires them to practice ethically and a core concept in any ethical theory is the concept of autonomy. Failing to fully inform the patient takes away their autonomy and that is an ethical violation. Furthermore, they specifically say in the oath they are not to play God, again….by keeping information from her and making the decision to protect the child at whatever risk to the mother, is playing God and that is also prohibited. If the AMA allows these kinds of bills, they lose all credibility with me forever.
IrishGirl
@Joseph Nobles: Well, they aren’t…and you’ve hit the nail on the head. They are trying, in every place possible and in every way possible, to get a case up to SCOTUS to challenge Roe v. Wade. There’s too many of these laws in too many places occurring at the same time, not to be a coordinated push by the GOP of some kind.
IrishGirl
@Patricia Kayden: The Women in Arizona learned about this bill the same time as the rest of the nation. AZ GOP has such a stranglehold on the legislature that they can bring up a bill, debate it and pass it within hours. It’s virtually impossible to be prepared 24/7 and react quickly enough before the Senate or House completes their process.
IrishGirl
@RedKitten: Malpractice lawsuits are such a small percentage of what actually contributes to the high cost of healthcare but the GOP makes it sound like its the #1 source of the rise in costs. It’s just an excuse to have their way. So, yes, a little reminder for doctor’s is not a bad thing and it should stay that way. If they REALLY wanted to prevent malpractice, they would help more people go to medical school, place restrictions on the number of hours a doctor has to work in a row, place lower restrictions on how much an attorney can make in a medical malpractice suit and a bazillion other things that would reduce malpractice lawsuits. But no, they’d rather give doctor’s carte blanche to decide what they share with a patient.
IrishGirl
@kerFuFFler: Are you in AZ?
IrishGirl
@Steve: You know, from a woman’s perspective, you guys arguing about the optics of a theoretical malpractice trial is really effin annoying. This isn’t about the optics….it’s about the violation of woman’s autonomy…her self-determination….and the doctor’s ethical and professional obligation to the patient. And as to what you argue in court…you don’t say I’d be better off without this child, you argue that I wouldn’t have these expenses without this child that you forced me to have, so give me some damn money to care for him/her because otherwise we’ll be homeless you heartless son of a b*tch. That’s what you argue.
IrishGirl
@Steve:
And you know this how? You are an attorney? I’m just a lay person but if I was drafting a bill, I would literally put an “intentional act or an intentional omission” because it seems like it means the same thing.
Another Halocene Human
@IrishGirl: Trudat. These supermajorities are dangerous to democracy. It’s all about the districting. That’s how they take the people’s vote away. I guess it’s not enough now because they are passing all these VoterID laws to keep college students and the poor from voting. (I guess they got caught on the DieBold gambit, although black hole voting machines are still out there… check out BradBlog for a great overview of that topic.)
Another Halocene Human
@IrishGirl: Yes, they need to stop the ridiculous hours for residents. It’s a matter of patient’s rights, I would say. Hospitals are very resistant to this so perhaps we need a federal law. Hey, they put restrictions on truckers for the safety of the public.
kyn
@Mike Lamb: Unfortunately, that can happen. In WA there is a case going forward for just that.