General Question

luigirovatti's avatar

Beside the imminent vote at the Senate, and appointing anti-abortion judge at the Supreme Court, is there any other way to restore abortion rights?

Asked by luigirovatti (2869points) July 16th, 2022

The first is unlikely to pass, and the second was given the blue slip.

Personally I agree with the approach the following article took (namely, declare public health emergency):

Read it, then tell me what you think.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

13 Answers

JLeslie's avatar

Some good arguments there.

I think I come down on the side of not declaring it an emergency. I feel that should probably be reserved for contagious disease.

Even if they make the abortion medication legal across state lines, there will be the fear of getting caught.

Also, the declaration of the emergency, the local pharmacists might be afraid to dispense them with the local laws. I realize the federal law should trump any local law, but some of these states are crazy and don’t care.

elbanditoroso's avatar

@luigirovatti you are naive.

The crazy forced-birth people don’t see this as a public health emergency. They are jumping for joy at the death of Roe vs. Wade. They don’t care how many women die (and frankly they care more about fetuses than adult women).

As the article says – the health emergency tactic is unlikely to work.

kritiper's avatar

Give it time and in that time vote in Senators and Congressmen/women who are pro-choice, and who don’t allow religion into their politics, then they can pass laws allowing it.

Bill1939's avatar

While there is little we can do now, come November we can vote Democrats into positions held by those Republicans that will not honor their oath to Protect and Preserve our Constitution. I will support the Republican Party when they return to the values that made Abraham Lincoln decide to join their Party.

janbb's avatar

I think in the OP, you meant to write pro-choice judge, didn’t you?

seawulf575's avatar

@janbb No, he actually was going to appoint an anti-abortion lawyer to a lifetime appointment as a judge. But he got enough blowback that he has changed that stance.

janbb's avatar

@seawulf575 Yeah, I know that happened but that was at the Federal level, not the Supreme Court and doesn’t fit with the tone of the Q. Perhaps the OP can clarify.

kruger_d's avatar

I really hope the AMA will go to bat for us. Doctors are having to watch women in crisis decline while their lawyers work out when they can intervene.

luigirovatti's avatar

@janbb: You’re right. I thought after writing this question that Supreme Court judges were not appointed that frequently. Sorry, I was wrong in writing this.

JLeslie's avatar

@kruger_d That’s a good point, I hadn’t thought of the AMA.

It seems to me the AMA tends to go to bat for whatever will make doctors more money. I do think they might step in, not only because procedures to help women usually are money makers, but also to protect doctors from law suits and jail. Plus, that additional thing of helping women for moral and ethical reasons.

janbb's avatar

@JLeslie Anything I’ve read by doctors on this issue suggests that they are anguished about the moral and ethical issues around not being able to help their patients. I think you may be being overly cynical.

JLeslie's avatar

@janbb I have no doubt doctors are concerned about it. I think you might be overly idealistic about the AMA.

The AMA fought against patients having access to test results. That’s about money to me. How dare they try to put an obstacle in from of an individual knowing about their own medical condition. They don’t want you to see a test result directly from the lab because they want to charge you for another appointment or charge you for a copy of your chart or don’t want to have to be nicer with how that chart your condition, because now patients can readily see notes if the full chart is easily accessible.

The AMA has spent MILLIONS lobbying against single payer health care.

The AMA has the copyright for CPT billing codes, so the AMA gets a licensing fee, unless that has changed and I’m unaware. So, any doctor using the code system (they don’t have much choice) are funding the AMA with millions of dollars to use as they seem appropriate.

It’s not like all doctors agree with everything the AMA does, plenty are frustrated with some of the lobbying the AMA does. I had that problem with the Realtor Association when I was a realtor. I don’t agree with everything the organization lobbies for, but I have little choice if I want to use the MLS, they have a monopoly basically, although now so much is simultaneously shown on Zillow and other websites I guess there is a way around it, but not as good as the MLS.

The AMA gives a lot of money to Republicans, although they do to Democrats too. Any money to Republicans in the last 20 years has helped us get to the point we are now in my opinion.

I hope you research it and not just listen to me. It’s not all good or bad regarding the AMA, but they are not some sort of purely altruistic organization.

kruger_d's avatar

I should not have said “decline”. I meant die.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther