Latest Breaking News

summer_in_TX

(4,066 posts)

17. They do...

Mon Jul 11, 2022, 06:51 PM

Jul 2022

The problem is that while some conditions are immediately life-threatening, others may not be initially but can go south very quickly.

The big concern is doctors will hesitate, feel like they need to check with their hospitals' lawyers, and in some cases wait for approval and waste time that costs women their lives or leads to permanent health impairments.

This federal directive is excellent, particularly since it cites established law.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Biden administration says federal law preempts state abortion bans when emergency care is needed [View all] BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 OP

More of this sort of action, please! LonePirate Jul 2022 #1

This is a good, but I have no doubt that someone will challenge this all the way up to the SC, and JohnSJ Jul 2022 #2

Came here to say the same thing! ShazzieB Jul 2022 #16

Yes JohnSJ Jul 2022 #19

"You want medical personnel to stand by and watch a woman die before their eyes?" CTyankee Jul 2022 #24

This is an executive order, not legislation, I don't think the SC gets to weigh in localroger Jul 2022 #3

The E.O. is doing what? BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #4

Thanks for the clarification /nt localroger Jul 2022 #28

Executive orders can absolutely be challenged in court Willis88 Jul 2022 #11

EMTALA is a statute, not an EO. Piratedog Jul 2022 #20

EMTALA is guidance though. EO says it will be enforced per new guidelines /nt. localroger Jul 2022 #27

"EMTALA is guidance" BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #32

Executive Orders are frequently shot down by the SC LeftInTX Jul 2022 #29

Kick for PJB.. Kick for DEMS!! TY! Cha Jul 2022 #5

K & R! 50 Shades Of Blue Jul 2022 #6

While on the one hand I love this, it's necessary and good to remind providers of Federal Law Hugh_Lebowski Jul 2022 #7

This is not ceding ground at all. Novara Jul 2022 #13

It's not a 'huge fucking deal' because it's just a reminder that the laws for this already exist Hugh_Lebowski Jul 2022 #61

"Feel like we really need to fight for ALL choice" BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #18

What states does this preempt? FBaggins Jul 2022 #8

No certain or doctors may be afraid to try due to possible prosecution from the state Willis88 Jul 2022 #12

Some asshole wrote a law that would make doctors re-implant ectopic pregnancies Novara Jul 2022 #14

You have to be kidding. This is sick ecstatic Jul 2022 #63

I am not kidding Novara Jul 2022 #64

Here is the problem BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #15

They do... summer_in_TX Jul 2022 #17

SC does for the time being stage left Jul 2022 #45

I believe the SC "no exceptions" bill is really "no exceptions for rape/incest" FBaggins Jul 2022 #47

Kick & R DemocraticPatriot Jul 2022 #9

Wonderful news for women with incomplete miscarriages. In Texas women have to wait for deadly flying_wahini Jul 2022 #10

well, at least until the 6 fascist kings and queen say different. nt yaesu Jul 2022 #21

I didn't think guidance docs were binding. OneCrazyDiamond Jul 2022 #22

HHS is sending a letter to healthcare providers BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #23

I hope it works. OneCrazyDiamond Jul 2022 #31

See here where a portion of the statue was included in the post BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #34

I think it is the right thing to do OneCrazyDiamond Jul 2022 #50

Well in the case of the EPA & CO2 BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #52

Not "clinics and practices" FBaggins Jul 2022 #37

Yes - any entity that accepts federal funding - notably Medicare BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #39

Abortion clinics can't receive federal funding FBaggins Jul 2022 #40

Nowhere do I say "abortion clinics" BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #41

OB-GYNs transfer emergency patients to hospital ERs, not the other way around FBaggins Jul 2022 #42

You are again missing the full depth and breadth of what can happen to a woman BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #43

I don't disagree with the vast majority of what you're saying FBaggins Jul 2022 #51

Regarding this BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #53

You may have started your reply before my "on edit" FBaggins Jul 2022 #54

It does not say "ER". BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #55

I gave you the text from the current HHS notice FBaggins Jul 2022 #56

And I gave you the text to the statute that they are referencing BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #57

No you didn't. You gave me your own *interpretation* of a piece of the text. FBaggins Jul 2022 #58

And my last reply before the hearing starts since I'm hosting the live threads BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #59

Ok. Hope the hosting goes well. I'll try to drop in. FBaggins Jul 2022 #60

BIG K&R! Bayard Jul 2022 #25

*2. n/t iluvtennis Jul 2022 #26

K&R betsuni Jul 2022 #30

Tell me we're going to go through another nullification crisis! AZLD4Candidate Jul 2022 #33

They will be playing with fire if that happens... BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #35

healthcare folk should not fear being sued Skittles Jul 2022 #36

Per what I posted above from the statute associated with the "EMTALA" that is referenced BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #38

A thousand thanks for all the links, B! ancianita Jul 2022 #44

LOL BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #46

RIGHT?! ancianita Jul 2022 #48

HA! BumRushDaShow Jul 2022 #49

Assuming doctors with that skillset will even hang around the Gilead states ecstatic Jul 2022 #62