Tara Rule says her doctor in upstate New York was “determined to protect a hypothetical fetus" instead of helping her treat debilitating pain.

  • Abnorc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    If a doctor spells out a risk to a patient and then still gives something that ends up causing harm, it is really a bit of a grey area. I don’t think that the doctor is entirely free of guilt in general. That being said, denying a medication without offering a proper substitute on this basis seems egregious. One can, under normal circumstances, control if they get pregnant or not.

    • Not in this case though. Worst thing the doctor could ask for a confirmation that ge informed the patient about the associated risks. I’d imagine a conversation like this:

      “I inform you that this medication can cause severe birth defects in any baby in case you are pregnant. If you are pregnant you should not take this medication”

      “I am not pregnant and do not plan to get pregnant. If i should be pregnant without my knowledge i’ll not keep the baby.”

      “Given the strong risk associated with possible birth defects from this medication, could you please sign here, that i informed you about the risk?”

      • Kafkacious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        The moral grey area here is the person that ends up with birth defects I think. Not sure I agree with the policy, but remove it with a large enough population you will end up with some women ignoring advice and carrying to term.

        • Nalivai
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is no person and would never be a person. In some other case, where the pregnancy is on the table, sure, maybe then we can talk about it. But this precrime bullshit is nothing more than just another strive to remove agency from women.

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no person and would never be a person

            Based on the full context, I’m actually on the woman’s side here. Even if I supported expanding fetal rights (I don’t), those rights should never start before conception.

            But this statement is not something we can know. I’ve known plenty of people who “aren’t pregnant and wouldn’t keep a baby if I were” that are now happy parents of that baby they wouldn’t keep. I’ve also known people who wanted children and then flipped a 180 and opted for abortion.