15 votes

The future abortionists of America

14 comments

  1. [2]
    patience_limited
    Link
    For fellow Tilders of other nations, this may seem horrifying, or irrelevant to your concerns. However, in the United States, it's a result of a long-term strategy to undermine women's...

    For fellow Tilders of other nations, this may seem horrifying, or irrelevant to your concerns. However, in the United States, it's a result of a long-term strategy to undermine women's self-determination.

    It shouldn't require extraordinary courage to provide healthcare.

    10 votes
    1. unknown user
      Link Parent
      Abortion is a controvesial topic, unfortunately. That we stand in one side of the argument does not make it less or non- controversial. Most people are superstitious, hopefully their number will...

      Abortion is a controvesial topic, unfortunately. That we stand in one side of the argument does not make it less or non- controversial. Most people are superstitious, hopefully their number will decrease as time goes by. My impression has been that fighting and demonstrations and the like are only the initiators/accelerators of change, but the actual change needs time and it's mostly not possible to get something that'll take fifty years to happen in five days or five months. Revolutions do not generally produce sound results, so maybe this is a good thing, IDK.

      I hope the law protects women from the superstitious there, until we have a better world that's what will help "free" people live on. We're lucky in Turkey that in some aspects of life like this the legislation happens to have taken sides with reason in the past, albeit the general vibe is rather depressing (who knows these current guys will not attempt to change the status quo? no one). Maybe in a couple generations we'll look back on all these "controversy" and think how stupid people were back then...

      4 votes
  2. [12]
    Eva
    (edited )
    Link
    That stat feels misleading; "Some" vs. "All" is a pretty big difference in this scenario. EDIT: > OB/GYN is not pronounced in the civilian way, where it’s spelled out, but shortened by a syllable...

    with around 80 percent of Americans in favor of legal abortion in some or all cases

    That stat feels misleading; "Some" vs. "All" is a pretty big difference in this scenario.

    EDIT:

    > OB/GYN is not pronounced in the civilian way, where it’s spelled out, but shortened by a syllable to oh-bee-guy-n.

    Also, who pronounces it "O-B-G-Y-N"? What?

    EDIT EDIT:

    >“It’s the first line in my Tinder bio,” said K, a local student set on becoming a provider. “If a guy can’t handle that, then he can’t handle me.”

    ...Was this written by a conservative? This has to have been written by a conservative.

    EDIT EDIT EDIT:

    >There was a relieved sigh when the audience heard that psychiatrists are more likely to be murdered in the course of their work than abortionists are.

    Given that the last time that happened with public recognition was in June, and it's common enough to where multiple academic papers have been written about it...um...might not be the best statistic to compare? Why not compare it to like, number of doctors as a whole?

    3 votes
    1. [4]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. [3]
        Eva
        Link Parent
        Interesting how that conflicts what the article said; I wonder if it was a typo or regional difference.

        Interesting how that conflicts what the article said; I wonder if it was a typo or regional difference.

        1 vote
        1. [3]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. [2]
            Eva
            Link Parent
            "Guy"? Most people use "Gin." Odd.

            "Guy"?

            Most people use "Gin."

            Odd.

            1 vote
            1. [2]
              Comment deleted by author
              Link Parent
              1. Petril
                Link Parent
                I've always heard o-b-g-y-N! Weird weird. I also just learned that not everyone pronounces the "L" in "Almond." In my region, I think everyone does!!

                I've always heard o-b-g-y-N! Weird weird.

                I also just learned that not everyone pronounces the "L" in "Almond." In my region, I think everyone does!!

                2 votes
    2. [2]
      patience_limited
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 18% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. As to a couple of your other criticisms, I'm not sure why direct quotations...

      According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 18% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.

      As to a couple of your other criticisms, I'm not sure why direct quotations of the participants should be scrutinized as if they're editorials, rather than straightforward reportage.

      5 votes
      1. Eva
        Link Parent
        That's a significantly different statistic than the one stated in the article. Many people and organizations, like the Catholic Church, for example, allow them if they're going to be lifesaving...

        That's a significantly different statistic than the one stated in the article.

        Many people and organizations, like the Catholic Church, for example, allow them if they're going to be lifesaving for the mother.

        You can't mix "some or all" like that if you're wanting to be statistically honest.

        6 votes
    3. [6]
      spit-evil-olive-tips
      Link Parent
      For the purposes of the article (medical students or doctors being trained to perform abortions) it seems appropriate. 80% of Americans believe that training should exist, though they may desire...

      with around 80 percent of Americans in favor of legal abortion in some or all cases

      That stat feels misleading; "Some" vs. "All" is a pretty big difference in this scenario.

      For the purposes of the article (medical students or doctors being trained to perform abortions) it seems appropriate. 80% of Americans believe that training should exist, though they may desire restrictions on it. Only 20% of Americans believe that people shouldn't even be trained to perform it at all.

      3 votes
      1. [5]
        Eva
        Link Parent
        If it's in some cases, the idea that there needs to be general training beyond what there already is isn't necessarily a good one; especially given that the article goes into the topic of...

        If it's in some cases, the idea that there needs to be general training beyond what there already is isn't necessarily a good one; especially given that the article goes into the topic of "abortionists," people solely there to eagerly administer abortions:

        A smaller number of people were there because they had decided to become abortionists. They talked differently than their peers, and I got the sense they wanted to fast-forward through parts that weren’t relevant to them, the parts they were supposed to find convincing. They were the already convinced.

        “It’s the first line in my Tinder bio,” said K, a local student set on becoming a provider. “If a guy can’t handle that, then he can’t handle me.”

        If "Some/Limited Cases" is the majority opinion, then 1500+ full-timers isn't a bad number; more than enough people per-state.

        (I'd really love for a "Quality" comment tag to be added to Tildes; your comment really deserves one. You do make a pretty good point.)

        2 votes
        1. [4]
          spit-evil-olive-tips
          Link Parent
          Part of the point of the article is that in many medical schools, there's little or no training: If you read that entire paragraph in context, it's clear that the passage you quoted is not about...

          the idea that there needs to be general training beyond what there already is isn't necessarily a good one

          Part of the point of the article is that in many medical schools, there's little or no training:

          The conference featured more hours in abortion training—theoretical and practical—than many attendees will ever receive in medical school.
          ...
          Only 10 percent of third-year OB/GYN clinical rotation programs reported any clinical abortion experience (think, a field trip to Planned Parenthood), in which most students participated.
          ...
          By making abortion education optional, schools, legislatures, and regulatory bodies have ensured that most time-crunched medical students won’t bother to participate.

          especially given that the article goes into the topic of "abortionists," people solely there to eagerly administer abortions

          If you read that entire paragraph in context, it's clear that the passage you quoted is not about people who "solely" want to administer abortions (emphasis added):

          Most of the conference attendees I spoke with were considering providing abortions once they become MDs. They were also planning on advocating for abortion access wherever they end up in the health industry, and they viewed the medical training as a necessary part of a comprehensive education that they were willing to go out of their way to obtain. A smaller number of people were there because they had decided to become abortionists. They talked differently than their peers, and I got the sense they wanted to fast-forward through parts that weren’t relevant to them, the parts they were supposed to find convincing. They were the already convinced.

          That is, it sounds like the conference had sessions targeted towards the majority of people who think abortion should be legal some of the time, and convincing them why abortion rights should be protected. Also present at the conference, in smaller numbers, were the people who believed abortion should be legal most or all of the time. To those people, any discussion aimed at convincing the "some of the time" crowd is going to be boring and superfluous.

          If "Some/Limited Cases" is the majority opinion, then 1500+ full-timers isn't a bad number; more than enough people per-state.

          This is explicitly contradicted by the article we're discussing:

          Because abortion reporting isn’t mandatory in all states, exact numbers on procedures performed aren’t available, but most estimates put the current annual total between 650,000 and 750,000. The rate works out to more than one procedure per day, every day of the year, for every single provider, and it’s not equally distributed among those 1,700 doctors.
          ...
          One group was from a public university in a Southern state where doctors who perform second-trimester abortions are flown in from around the country for a couple days of work at a time and then flown home.

          5 votes
          1. [3]
            Eva
            Link Parent
            It's not, as "Some" wouldn't necessarily include non-medically necessary options; which AFAIA are the most common? I did, and I was moreover pointing attention to the second quoted paragraph,...

            This is explicitly contradicted by the article we're discussing:

            It's not, as "Some" wouldn't necessarily include non-medically necessary options; which AFAIA are the most common?

            If you read that entire paragraph in context, it's clear that the passage you quoted is not about people who "solely" want to administer abortions (emphasis added):

            That is, it sounds like the conference had sessions targeted towards the majority of people who think abortion should be legal some of the time, and convincing them why abortion rights should be protected. Also present at the conference, in smaller numbers, were the people who believed abortion should be legal most or all of the time. To those people, any discussion aimed at convincing the "some of the time" crowd is going to be boring and superfluous.

            I did, and I was moreover pointing attention to the second quoted paragraph, demonstrating how eager they seemingly were, and what I assumed to be the difference in voice.

            Part of the point of the article is that in many medical schools, there's little or no training:

            Exactly, I was talking about the number of people being trained, and how it might be enough from the perspective of people in the "Some" group.

            1 vote
            1. [2]
              spit-evil-olive-tips
              Link Parent
              I think you're taking your own personal beliefs (which from what I gather in this thread seem to be at least partially in favor of restricting access to abortion) and projecting them onto the...

              It's not, as "Some" wouldn't necessarily include non-medically necessary options; which AFAIA are the most common?

              I think you're taking your own personal beliefs (which from what I gather in this thread seem to be at least partially in favor of restricting access to abortion) and projecting them onto the results of that poll. The author of this article doesn't link to their source for the 80% figure, but they seem to match up with this Gallup poll. They include the exact questions asked as well as the responses:

              Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances or illegal in all circumstances?

              "Illegal in all circumstances" is consistently 20% or below; the other two choices are around 80%; with a very small number (1-3%) undecided.

              There isn't enough data in the wording of that question to conclude what specific restrictions the "legal only under certain circumstances" respondents support.

              I'd respond to the rest of your post, but it again seems to center around what I think is a misinterpretation of the data regarding the "some" wording, and a projection of your own personal feelings about the subject onto what is the majority (50-60%) opinion according to the polls.

              4 votes
              1. Eva
                Link Parent
                Not at all, I've got very little strong opinion either way on abortion; as a lesbian it's not something I'm ever going to encounter. As an academic, I despise misleading statistics, though. The...

                I think you're taking your own personal beliefs (which from what I gather in this thread seem to be at least partially in favor of restricting access to abortion) and projecting them onto the results of that poll.

                Not at all, I've got very little strong opinion either way on abortion; as a lesbian it's not something I'm ever going to encounter. As an academic, I despise misleading statistics, though.

                The author of this article doesn't link to their source for the 80% figure, but they seem to match up with this Gallup poll. They include the exact questions asked as well as the responses:

                The Gallup poll doesn't do anything wrong reporting-wise, as it's honest, but the author does do something wrong.

                You cannot compare the "Some" cases to the "All" cases. "Some" includes clauses like "to save the life of the mother;" something that a great number of people exclusively believe in; including the majority of American Catholics. It's very likely that a sizable majority of them could think the "All" view is reprehensible, or that it just absolutely shouldn't be done.

                Notice the Gallup poll also shows that 48% of those people claim to be pro-life, while 48% claim to be pro-choice, which implies that half of them believe it should happen in only life-saving cases.

                1 vote