The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on June 22, 2012, 05:25:10 PM
-
proud2BlibKansan (92,093 posts)
Kansas revokes Ann Kristin Neuhaus' medical license over abortion referrals
Source: Pitch Weekly
The latest salvo in the debate over abortion in Kansas is a loud one. Earlier this morning, the Associated Press reported that the Kansas Board of Healing Arts decided to strip Dr. Ann Kristin Neuhaus of her medical license.
Neuhaus, profiled by The Pitch's Justin Kendall back in November, is a Nortonville doctor who provided second opinion mental health exams on patients seeking late-term abortions from the late Dr. George Tiller. Those consultations, between 1999 and 2006, were required under Kansas law, which has since been changed to remove the mental health exception for late term abortions.
Kansas regulators agreed with an administrative judge that Neuhaus had failed to sufficiently examine 11 patients, who were seeking abortions after 22 weeks, in 2003.
Read more: http://www.pitch.com/plog/archives/2012/06/22/kansas-revokes-ann-kristin-neuhaus-medical-license-over-abortion-referrals
LiberalLoner (3,852 posts)
2. Glad I'm not living in Kansas. I fear for the women who are living there.
Yeah, ut at least the children are safer now.
EFerrari (163,504 posts)
8. This isn't just about KS. They're trying to create a precedent. n/t
LOL
yes
xxqqqzme (12,307 posts)
4. And the witch hunt rolls
on across the great plains.
Wish I still had my curse inflicting powers.
Usually "witch hunt" infers pursuit of non-existent threats.
I assure the children are quite real.
RitchieRich (120 posts)
5. Were they medically necessary?
...not that it should really matter, but one is less justifiable. It would certainly frame the argument one way or the other.
uh oh
proud2BlibKansan (92,093 posts)
7. Some were, yes
Most of the cases the board looked at involved very young girls. The youngest was 9. And if you think giving birth is a safe medical procedure for a 9 year old, then we don't have anything more to talk about.
"Some"
As in the rest weren't.
I'd like to know what pregnancy-induced medical condition can threaten a woman's health after 22 weeks that can only be mitigated by abortion.
MightyOkie (52 posts)
26. Thanks Doctor
Enjoy your stay.
mbperrin (5,988 posts)
9. The law in Kansas required the doctor to ascertain that the woman
was not mentally disturbed, essentially.
Medically necessary means?
Warren Stupidity (27,118 posts)
20. It really is none of your business
Nor the business of the state of Kansas what the mental health of these women was.
However, late term abortions are all medically necessary in Kansas. But go right ahead and defend rw fundies who would deny a 10 year old child an abortion.
P S if you don't want replies to your defense of the indefensible, don't post.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014149854
-
Rush rightly calls it their sacrament.
-
Giving birth would be bad for a ten year old, but having an abortion would not?
Both would be horrific.
The main question here is:
WHY IS THAT CHILD PREGNANT????
-
Giving birth would be bad for a ten year old, but having an abortion would not?
Both would be horrific.
The main question here is:
WHY IS THAT CHILD PREGNANT????
Well, if she goes to Planned Parenthood we'll never know.
-
LiberalLoner (3,852 posts)
2. Glad I'm not living in Kansas. I fear for the women who are living there.
Children, not so much. :banghead:
-
Giving birth would be bad for a ten year old, but having an abortion would not?
Both would be horrific.
The main question here is:
WHY IS THAT CHILD PREGNANT????
Exactly the point. None of the "doctors" or medical personnel involved with Tiller's clinic, including Neuhaus, ever reported the likelihood that the children were being molested. This is still true of Kansas Planned Parenthood, and the reason behind the case that caused the political powers of Kansas to crucify Phil Kline. No leftist is willing to "reduce the right to sex" just to protect children...born or unborn. :mad:
-
Giving birth would be bad for a ten year old, but having an abortion would not?
Both would be horrific.
The main question here is:
WHY IS THAT CHILD PREGNANT????
If the jug-eared kenyan had a son, he'd look just like the "baby-daddy".