Skip to main content

View Diary: Federal Judge Blocks Closing of Mississippi's Only Abortion Clinic (56 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Could anyone imagine what it would be like... (31+ / 0-)

    if dentists were required to have admitting privileges in these states? Or the dentist office would need doorways wide enough for a gurney?
    Anytime anesthesia in used for a procedure, there is a real risk that something can go seriously wrong.
    If the concern is really about healthcare, these would be issues.
    But its not about healthcare. Its about small minded-people who worry about the morals of other people.

    "I'm gonna dance between the raindrops"

    by IB JOHN on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:38:32 AM PDT

    •  This is an excellent (15+ / 0-)

      parallel.  Thank you for that.

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:52:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Vaginas are involved. (8+ / 0-)

      Therefore, totally arbitrary standards.

      I don't see the same kind of requirements for facilities where doctors perform vasectomies.  

      My dogs think I'm smart and pretty.

      by martydd on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:10:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What about the other clinics? (18+ / 0-)

      In addition to their sole abortion clinic, Mississippi has 65 ambulatory surgical centers, 4 comprehensive rehabilitation facilities, 73 dialysis clinics, 53 home health agencies (three of them in Tennessee), 121 hospices, 16 intermediate care facilities for mentally retarded at 73 different locations, 210 nursing homes, 32 outpatient physical therapist facilities, 184 personal care homes (including 80 assisted living facilities) 5 portable x-ray providers, 7 residential psychiatric providers, 162 rural health clinics, and 117 hospitals.

      Does Mississippi, in its concern for patient health, require the doctors associated with those other 932 non-hospital health service providers have admitting priviledges at one of those hospitals?

      Do the X-Ray trailers meet doorway standards? Do those rural health clinics have covered access? Are all the halls in ambulatory surgical centers wide enough for gurneys? Are the closets in the dialysis centers large enough?

      I'd venture to say those 932 other facilities have a lot more emergencys that require hospital admitance every year than does that single abortion clinic.

      "The problems of incompetent, corrupt, corporatist government are incompetence, corruption and corporatism, not government." Jerome a Paris

      by Orinoco on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:26:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your ventured statement would be on the mark... (6+ / 0-)

        ...The physician who was thrown off the state board of health in Mississippi was treated that way because he does have admitting privileges and told the abortion clinic that they could call upon him in an emergency. For the 10 years he was on the clinic's list, he says he only remembers being called a couple of times.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 11:58:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly. This is why it's so clear that the MS (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        IB JOHN, Eyesbright, ericlewis0, Orinoco

        law won't stand.  Passing a law aimed at one person (or, presumably, one organization) is against the Constitution.  Yet MS passed this law to close ONE clinic.  So they can keep doctors and their patients from engaging in a procedure that is legal in the United States!

        The great thing about the judge's ruling is that Mississippi won't win by default.  If the clinic were forced to close, and remain closed through the whole process of going to court and pursuing it all the way to the Supreme Court -- by that time all the staff have found other jobs or moved, the owner has no financial reserves left, etc. -- eventually the clinic wins the case but probably never reopens.

        Now, there's a real chance that the clinic will survive.

        --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

        by Fiona West on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 12:20:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  the only problem with that otherwise cool answer (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Orinoco

        is that Mississippi culture attaches no stigma to working at a dialysis clinic, nursing home, hospice or x-ray provider.

        so doctors are free to offer themselves for admitting privileges for those jobs without fear for their lives or danger to their professional reputations

        Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
        Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

        by TrueBlueMajority on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:46:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The question isn't whether they could (0+ / 0-)

          the question is whether they are required to by the state of Mississippi, as a condition for those facilities remaining open.

          Besides, if Mississippi culture is the issue, the doctor working at the abortion clinic has already taken on the stigma with or without admitting priviledges at a hospital. Its just that these domestic terrorists have discovered ordinary hospitals are easier targets than individual doctors who have determined to provide abortions.

           

          "The problems of incompetent, corrupt, corporatist government are incompetence, corruption and corporatism, not government." Jerome a Paris

          by Orinoco on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:20:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  i hear you and i am in agreement with you Orinoco (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Orinoco

            about your original basic point.

            My point is different.

            Suppose the law were changed to be more "neutral", requiring those facilities you mentioned to have doctors with admitting privileges also.

            Those facilities would have no problem getting as many doctors as they need, because there is no stigma or professional risk to working at those facilities.  such a law would not prevent those other facilities from doing business.  the hospitals would not band together to deliberately refuse admitting privileges to anyone working at those facilities.  that is the difference between those facilities and the abortion care facility.

            So it is not a solution to broaden the law to require those other facilities to use doctors with admitting privileges.

            But you and I are in perfect agreement with pointing out that the law cannot be justified by claiming public safety.  those other facilities probably have serious incidents requiring hospitalization much more than the abortion clinic does.

            Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
            Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

            by TrueBlueMajority on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:34:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Ok. I sort of thought that's what you meant (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TrueBlueMajority

              It's really about people (probably doctors) serving on hospitals' admitting doctor review panels who are cowed or terrorized or in agreement with local forced birthers.

              So the real issue is that hospitals, in effect, discriminate on the basis of religion when deciding admitting priviledges (I am giving fundamentalist forced birthers the respect of calling them a religion rather than a hate group which supports domestic terrorism).

              While I understand that granting admitting priviledges is something like an employment process, perhaps some transparency and external review of that process would take some of the politics out of it, or at least make it more difficult for legislators to hide behind it.

              "The problems of incompetent, corrupt, corporatist government are incompetence, corruption and corporatism, not government." Jerome a Paris

              by Orinoco on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:17:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site