Partial Birth ... DISTINGUISH for Abortion Rights
Partial-birth Abortion can be banned by US or State Law; if the law sustains a finding of Congress [legislature] without foreclosing fetal inviability abortion [privacy] options. In usttaining the Act's Constitutionality, the US Supreme Court in majority of five; have butted heads with the OB-Gyn College of the American Medical Association; in reasoning an exception to questining medical practices deemded ethical and medically necessary by the AMA for the modern medical profession.
The act sustains an option for the physician in cases of life-saving medical becessity of the mother; however it bans the procedure by medical personnel, or oanyone .. to induce labor for purposes of ecxtarcting the fetus and putting it to death.
Congress gingerly avoided the full impactive vocabulary and chose wording such as an action which will purposely effect an act which would kill the fetus outside the womb.
Only if Justice Ginsberg for the majority instead of the dissent; had found that alternatives did not exist; or that the procedure in enforcement were too vague or overbroad in punishment and restriction; could the Act have been overturned. No abortion save by that procedure is stopped .. and opponents did not raise an adequate case for sustaining that practice as specifically necessary -- save in the case of life-saving -- which the Act conserves as a medical option.
Challenges or charges to the medical action in case a partial birth occurs are before a medical procedures administrative board for medical fact finding.
Noparticular case of privacy invasion for specific record-keeping; or patients privacy rights chilling are raised.
Congress having found a particular procedure repugnant or horrific have as a people's forum proscribed it; and via the Constitution. It is a sustainable statute thereby. In no modern democracy, do physicians sustain a monopoly in medical procedures licensing save by law of a democratic institution.
Women concerned about abortion procedure and privay need simply eductae themselves of this particular option; and otherwise have their rights undiminished.
As a personal note, I found the AMA position previously adequate and thought the Act unnecessary particularly due to the lesser numbers of Partial Birth Abortions which facts were not entirely raised in amplification without hysteria before Congress. Opponents at Court however, did not sustain that proposition of extreme subjectivity.
FindLaw & NY Times source for US Supreme Court Opinion
81 IUSC 1531 from FindLaw ..Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act
The act sustains an option for the physician in cases of life-saving medical becessity of the mother; however it bans the procedure by medical personnel, or oanyone .. to induce labor for purposes of ecxtarcting the fetus and putting it to death.
Congress gingerly avoided the full impactive vocabulary and chose wording such as an action which will purposely effect an act which would kill the fetus outside the womb.
Only if Justice Ginsberg for the majority instead of the dissent; had found that alternatives did not exist; or that the procedure in enforcement were too vague or overbroad in punishment and restriction; could the Act have been overturned. No abortion save by that procedure is stopped .. and opponents did not raise an adequate case for sustaining that practice as specifically necessary -- save in the case of life-saving -- which the Act conserves as a medical option.
Challenges or charges to the medical action in case a partial birth occurs are before a medical procedures administrative board for medical fact finding.
Noparticular case of privacy invasion for specific record-keeping; or patients privacy rights chilling are raised.
Congress having found a particular procedure repugnant or horrific have as a people's forum proscribed it; and via the Constitution. It is a sustainable statute thereby. In no modern democracy, do physicians sustain a monopoly in medical procedures licensing save by law of a democratic institution.
Women concerned about abortion procedure and privay need simply eductae themselves of this particular option; and otherwise have their rights undiminished.
As a personal note, I found the AMA position previously adequate and thought the Act unnecessary particularly due to the lesser numbers of Partial Birth Abortions which facts were not entirely raised in amplification without hysteria before Congress. Opponents at Court however, did not sustain that proposition of extreme subjectivity.
FindLaw & NY Times source for US Supreme Court Opinion
81 IUSC 1531 from FindLaw ..Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act
posted by scotty of course at 3:45 PM
0 comments
