Reporter undergoes ‘unnecessary’ transvaginal ultrasound toframe abortion debate

[Allhallowsday]

Reporter Megan Carpentier undergoes 'unnecessary' transvaginal ultrasound to frame abortion debate 

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/reporter-megan-carpentier-undergoes-unnecessary-transvaginal-ultrasound-frame-155926605.html

Plenty of pundits on both sides of the ideological aisle have weighed in on the country's ongoing abortion debate and the transvaginal ultrasound mandates passed by several states—what some people argue is part of the GOP's so-called "war on women." But few have actually gone through the procedure—which is why Megan Carpentier, executive editor of the progressive news site Raw Story, decided to have a "completely unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound" and document the experience for readers.

"It was vigorously uncomfortable," Carpentier wrote, partly "because the technician has to press the wand directly against the areas she wants to get an image of—your uterus, Fallopian tubes and ovaries—so there's more movement and more direct contact with pressure-sensitive areas of your body..."

...She concluded: "It's not a choice to be made at a distance by elected officials with an ideological axe to grind, little medical knowledge and a belief that it's acceptable to require doctors to put unnecessary instruments inside women's bodies in an effort to achieve in practice what they can't constitutionally pass into law: an end to abortion."


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/reporter-megan-carpentier-undergoes-unnecessary-transvaginal-ultrasound-frame-155926605.html

[Flick James]

You are doing some serious baiting lately, my friend.

But I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy it.

[Allhallowsday]

You are doing some serious baiting lately, my friend.

But I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy it.

You obviously don't typically look at my news postings.  Perhaps the last couple of days may seem baiting, but I think they are interesting stories well worth discussion, and I've been posting controversial news stories here as long as I've belonged. 

[Flick James]

You are doing some serious baiting lately, my friend.

But I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy it.

You obviously don't typically look at my news postings.  Perhaps the last couple of days may seem baiting, but I think they are interesting stories well worth discussion, and I've been posting controversial news stories here as long as I've belonged. 

Just seems to be a higher volume I guess. I love it. But hey, you should know I look because I get involved in them. Party on.

[alandhopewell]

     What's wrong with requiring a woman to have an ultrasound if she wants an abortion? It's nothing more than providing her with information so as to make an informed choice.

[Allhallowsday]

     What's wrong with requiring a woman to have an ultrasound if she wants an abortion? It's nothing more than providing her with information so as to make an informed choice.

Requiring?  I don't think the government should legislate requirements regarding lots of things, including medical procedures.  Did you read the article? 

[Flick James]

Here are a couple of observations for consideration.

I do think it's a little ironic that the same side of the political spectrum that opposes mandatory healthcare is in favor of a mandatory medical procedure.

It's also more than a little sad how damaging the polarization of America has become. Personally I am opposed to abortion, and would support it being largely illegal. But this to me is pretty obviously a separate issue. Yet, because of this stagnating polarization that trickles down from Washington to the very fabric of American life, such an issue just gets shoved to one side or the other.

Very sad. Polarization is a stagnating, mentally debilitating reality in America today. I believe that in many ways it is affecting the American psyche in ways far more destructive than any left or right agenda that we would be led to believe is the enemy. It is because of this polarization that we can't resolve our national budget. My two young boys throwing sand at each other in their sandbox show as much maturity as I see in Congress.

[indianasmith]

Personally, I believe with our founders that the first duty of government is to defend the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens.  That includes unborn life.  Requiring someone to actually see what it is they are proposing to kill - and I do not choose that word lightly; I firmly believe abortion KILLS unborn children - is the least we can ask of them before they have that tiny life chopped into pieces and sucked into a sink.

[Flick James]

Personally, I believe with our founders that the first duty of government is to defend the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens.  That includes unborn life.  Requiring someone to actually see what it is they are proposing to kill - and I do not choose that word lightly; I firmly believe abortion KILLS unborn children - is the least we can ask of them before they have that tiny life chopped into pieces and sucked into a sink.

Despite our differences, we agree on abortion. I think there is nothing wrong with "asking" somebody to do anything. "Requiring" it is a different story. I honestly find it surprising that those who would oppose mandatory healthcare would support ANY mandatory medical procedure. I'm confused.

[lester1/2jr]

I think there is nothing wrong with "asking" somebody to do anything. "Requiring" it is a different story.

I agree. It's unconstitutional. My tax dollars going to pay for a procedure the women having it dont want or need? no thanks.  Jesus didn't forcibly convert pagans.

[The Gravekeeper]

What irks me about this is that they seem to assume that every woman going in for an abortion is making a rash decision and doesn't know enough about what she's getting into.

Every case is different; I just wish that both sides of the debate would smarten and realize that they're talking about people, not some abstract concept. It seems incredibly disrespectful to paint everyone who's had an abortion with the same brush ("she's just exercising her right to choose!" "she's a slut and should have kept her legs closed!") I mean, hell, if you're American and you know any women, you probably know at least one that's had an abortion.

[Flick James]

What irks me about this is that they seem to assume that every woman going in for an abortion is making a rash decision and doesn't know enough about what she's getting into.

Every case is different; I just wish that both sides of the debate would smarten and realize that they're talking about people, not some abstract concept. It seems incredibly disrespectful to paint everyone who's had an abortion with the same brush ("she's just exercising her right to choose!" "she's a slut and should have kept her legs closed!") I mean, hell, if you're American and you know any women, you probably know at least one that's had an abortion.

Many people have an axe to grind, and unfortunately for many it consumes them.

[AndyC]

I agree with Flick. Abortion is an issue that can never be properly discussed for what it is, because it has gotten so inextricably mixed up with every other fight it's gotten associated with. Liberal vs. conservative, feminist vs. sexist, religious vs. humanist, sex-positive vs. puritan, and so on. I wouldn't dare get into an argument about it unless I could be sure what the other person was really arguing about.

[Flick James]

I agree with Flick. Abortion is an issue that can never be properly discussed for what it is, because it has gotten so inextricably mixed up with every other fight it's gotten associated with. Liberal vs. conservative, feminist vs. sexist, religious vs. humanist, sex-positive vs. puritan, and so on. I wouldn't dare get into an argument about it unless I could be sure what the other person was really arguing about.

Thanks Andy.

I actually think that's the saddest thing of all. People can't just have opinions of their own anymore. I understand adopting a philosophy/political stance/belief structure. It is actually a very important thing to do. It guides one's morality, one's actions and behaviors. In today's American culture, however, it is as if there are two modes of thinking, and those are our only options. It is so bad that people will adopt positions that if they actually gave it some serious though they would find they disagree with, or at least accept that it may not be the best course of action.

Now, if that ruffles some feathers, so be it. I happen to think that if somebody gets deeply offended by that observation, there's a good chance it hits close to home and it triggers a defense mechanism. This is understandable.

Anyway, as to the topic of the thread, I can see the moral justification for wanting abortion to be illegal. I just can't see the justification for requiring a medical procedure. They don't seem to be a part of the same agenda to me.

[indianasmith]

If it reduces the number of abortions, I'm for it.
This is probably my single biggest issue.  I guess it really hit home for me when my wife was pregnant with our twins.  Under current law, if she had wanted to, she could have gone to a clinic and had them both killed, and legally it would have been completely beyond my power to do a single thing about it.  Not that it was ever going to happen - she hates abortion as much as I do - but the idea that such a thing could legally be done just filled me with unutterable loathing which persists to this day.  It's not a Democrat/Republican thing for me, nor a Christian thing. And I have no issue whatsoever with people wanting to use contraception - we used it for years.   For me this issue goes to the very heart of what Jefferson called our "inalienable rights" - first and foremost of which is the Right to Life.  Roe vs. Wade trampled that right, and it has been hailed as "freedom of choice."

You can wrap it in the flowery language of choice all day long, and it does not alter the fact that at the end of the day you have a tiny, dead child who will never get to laugh, or love, or weep.