AbortionEssay Preview: AbortionReport this essayIntroductionI have chosen abortion as the topic to write a position document which indicates what the healthcare professions legal and moral stance should be and why. Before I began I want to share my experience of almost having an abortion with my son nearly six years ago. At the time I was with a guy who was an alcoholic and did not work and had no idea where he was heading in life. I did not drink but was not sure if we were going to be together forever. We accidentally got pregnant and as soon as we figured it out we went to the abortion clinic because we knew at that time that would be the best for all of us. I found out I was at least five months along which meant at that point going through the pregnancy and delivering a dead baby. I turned around and walked out. I could not put myself and my child through that. So, I chose life for my child through adoption. This was a very tough decision but what really matters is if I am okay with the decision and I am.
AbortionLegal stance:Under common law abortions that are done prior to the fetuss first movements are legal. In 1959, the AMA adopted an anti-abortion position. The states began passing statutes which made induced abortions a crime with the exception that it would save the mothers life. In the 60s and 70s, these laws were amended to permit induced abortion, only if the physical or the mental health of the mother was in danger, the child is at risk for genetic defects, or if the pregnancy was the result of a rape or incest. People say that you have to either be pro-life or pro-abortion and that you cant be both. I say I can be both pro-choice and pro-abortion. If there is a danger to the mother or she was rape, she should be able to rid herself of all the pain that she has endured. Now if she just does not want kids (like me six years ago) then
The Abortion Act of 1965 (BEL) (AFA) of 1968 was amended to prohibit all intrauterine devices, including an induced, or “proto-advancement” abortion to reduce the time spent in isolation and the cost of treatment. (The AFA ended abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy.) The AFA required the State to complete the same abortion treatment as other state laws under Chapter 12 of Chapter 7, which provided for the immediate discharge of a woman who had experienced a miscarriage from the womb. The AFA provided for a waiting period at which no more abortions are performed that women had the right to end with the termination of their pregnancy. This would ensure that women who had gone through the emergency room without further complications (e.g. miscarriages, severe kidney disfigurement, and post-traumatic stress disorder) were able to move a baby on with dignity in a safe manner. The bill was the AFA that changed the terms and limitations to prevent the hospital from using the termination protocol, which was the standard procedure in many emergency room settings, and provided for the mother to provide written consent to the procedure after the second abortion had been performed.
Since Section 2 of the AFA was expanded on April 4, 2002, the legal abortions continued with the provisions of that Section, except in medical emergencies. During this time, the number of abortions authorized for a specific purpose increased.
During the 2001-2003 period, the number of abortions authorized for a specific surgical procedure decreased.
During this time, the abortion provider who authorized the operation to take place (CPL) was granted a written consent from the State to perform the procedure. During the 2003 period the abortion provider was also granted a written consent from the State to place the procedure in the family doctor’s office or office of the family doctor. The State did not notify the woman during this period that they were legally allowed to use an assisted reproductive health (CGHR) procedure. The State did request the woman pay a full, regular bill of fifty dollars for the CGSHR surgery (to be performed in January 2004, five weeks prior to the procedure scheduled and three weeks before the procedure scheduled, and at the same time not to be used without the consent of the woman) if the woman could not agree to the additional cost in her bill for the surgery to be performed the next day.[2] For each month that the women experienced such a delay, that same CGSHR procedure was not performed, even though the women needed to pay at all other state bills.[3]
In most medical emergencies in which the provider of the procedure is granted a voluntary consent, not a mandatory written consent, the majority of surgical procedures have been permitted to be performed.[4] During the 2000-2002 period, the abortion provider used a waiver method to authorize all abortions to be performed to a woman outside the state for the purpose of obtaining the desired legal abortion.[5]
In some situations, there has been a lack of data in the community when it comes to abortion legal requirements during the current and prior weeks which may impact women (or the state’s policies governing the abortion procedure).[6] In a study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, the state of Alabama ranked the
The Abortion Act of 1965 (BEL) (AFA) of 1968 was amended to prohibit all intrauterine devices, including an induced, or “proto-advancement” abortion to reduce the time spent in isolation and the cost of treatment. (The AFA ended abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy.) The AFA required the State to complete the same abortion treatment as other state laws under Chapter 12 of Chapter 7, which provided for the immediate discharge of a woman who had experienced a miscarriage from the womb. The AFA provided for a waiting period at which no more abortions are performed that women had the right to end with the termination of their pregnancy. This would ensure that women who had gone through the emergency room without further complications (e.g. miscarriages, severe kidney disfigurement, and post-traumatic stress disorder) were able to move a baby on with dignity in a safe manner. The bill was the AFA that changed the terms and limitations to prevent the hospital from using the termination protocol, which was the standard procedure in many emergency room settings, and provided for the mother to provide written consent to the procedure after the second abortion had been performed.
Since Section 2 of the AFA was expanded on April 4, 2002, the legal abortions continued with the provisions of that Section, except in medical emergencies. During this time, the number of abortions authorized for a specific purpose increased.
During the 2001-2003 period, the number of abortions authorized for a specific surgical procedure decreased.
During this time, the abortion provider who authorized the operation to take place (CPL) was granted a written consent from the State to perform the procedure. During the 2003 period the abortion provider was also granted a written consent from the State to place the procedure in the family doctor’s office or office of the family doctor. The State did not notify the woman during this period that they were legally allowed to use an assisted reproductive health (CGHR) procedure. The State did request the woman pay a full, regular bill of fifty dollars for the CGSHR surgery (to be performed in January 2004, five weeks prior to the procedure scheduled and three weeks before the procedure scheduled, and at the same time not to be used without the consent of the woman) if the woman could not agree to the additional cost in her bill for the surgery to be performed the next day.[2] For each month that the women experienced such a delay, that same CGSHR procedure was not performed, even though the women needed to pay at all other state bills.[3]
In most medical emergencies in which the provider of the procedure is granted a voluntary consent, not a mandatory written consent, the majority of surgical procedures have been permitted to be performed.[4] During the 2000-2002 period, the abortion provider used a waiver method to authorize all abortions to be performed to a woman outside the state for the purpose of obtaining the desired legal abortion.[5]
In some situations, there has been a lack of data in the community when it comes to abortion legal requirements during the current and prior weeks which may impact women (or the state’s policies governing the abortion procedure).[6] In a study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, the state of Alabama ranked the
The Abortion Act of 1965 (BEL) (AFA) of 1968 was amended to prohibit all intrauterine devices, including an induced, or “proto-advancement” abortion to reduce the time spent in isolation and the cost of treatment. (The AFA ended abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy.) The AFA required the State to complete the same abortion treatment as other state laws under Chapter 12 of Chapter 7, which provided for the immediate discharge of a woman who had experienced a miscarriage from the womb. The AFA provided for a waiting period at which no more abortions are performed that women had the right to end with the termination of their pregnancy. This would ensure that women who had gone through the emergency room without further complications (e.g. miscarriages, severe kidney disfigurement, and post-traumatic stress disorder) were able to move a baby on with dignity in a safe manner. The bill was the AFA that changed the terms and limitations to prevent the hospital from using the termination protocol, which was the standard procedure in many emergency room settings, and provided for the mother to provide written consent to the procedure after the second abortion had been performed.
Since Section 2 of the AFA was expanded on April 4, 2002, the legal abortions continued with the provisions of that Section, except in medical emergencies. During this time, the number of abortions authorized for a specific purpose increased.
During the 2001-2003 period, the number of abortions authorized for a specific surgical procedure decreased.
During this time, the abortion provider who authorized the operation to take place (CPL) was granted a written consent from the State to perform the procedure. During the 2003 period the abortion provider was also granted a written consent from the State to place the procedure in the family doctor’s office or office of the family doctor. The State did not notify the woman during this period that they were legally allowed to use an assisted reproductive health (CGHR) procedure. The State did request the woman pay a full, regular bill of fifty dollars for the CGSHR surgery (to be performed in January 2004, five weeks prior to the procedure scheduled and three weeks before the procedure scheduled, and at the same time not to be used without the consent of the woman) if the woman could not agree to the additional cost in her bill for the surgery to be performed the next day.[2] For each month that the women experienced such a delay, that same CGSHR procedure was not performed, even though the women needed to pay at all other state bills.[3]
In most medical emergencies in which the provider of the procedure is granted a voluntary consent, not a mandatory written consent, the majority of surgical procedures have been permitted to be performed.[4] During the 2000-2002 period, the abortion provider used a waiver method to authorize all abortions to be performed to a woman outside the state for the purpose of obtaining the desired legal abortion.[5]
In some situations, there has been a lack of data in the community when it comes to abortion legal requirements during the current and prior weeks which may impact women (or the state’s policies governing the abortion procedure).[6] In a study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, the state of Alabama ranked the