I apologize for the lack of sources, but it's been difficult finding relevant information in the short periods I've had available to respond.
1. Okay, your informed consent information seems good on paper, but the presentation raises a few questions:
-A significant amount of this information is placed under the header of "written." This is, obviously, a bit unclear. When people speak of requiring informed consent, my impression, at least, has been that such includes signing a waiver asserting that you have been "provided with the information and are aware that the risks include: ... ." Having "written" information "offered" sounds to me like there is a pamphlet tray with "What You Should Know About Abortion." Cynical, yes, but your list doesn't positively assert anything more than that. And, similarly, "giving" this written information could be little more than handing the pamphlets along with the paperwork they need to fill out. -Out of the 33 states, only 8 of them specifically say that abortion cannot be coerced, and only two of those instances are told in person. Based on what has been said by Third Way, as well as a plethora of concerns(search for coerced abortion), this seems to be a major issue. Despite this, it appears that there are pro-choice individuals who oppose legislation to prevent coercion.(apologies for the markedly pro-life site) -In addition, there is concern over the quality and competency of counselors and counseling.(section on "Known Deficiencies of Abortion Counseling")
2. I've admitted the weakness of this argument on both fronts you mentioned, and I'm not currently equipped to follow up on it, but please keep in mind that it may be more prominent than you realize.
3. Again, this would have to be personal experience. I have met many people, and read many articles, which seem to imply a lack of distinction, or care to distinguish. In regards to EC, I'm forced to wonder: medically, life begins at conception; if pregnancy doesn't start at implantation, what is the termination of life in the time between these two points?
4. My concern here was if "medical" abortion fills the same stringent requirements as surgical abortion. The "non-invasive" claim implies that there is less concern about informed consent. Speculation, mind you, but a concern nonetheless.
no subject
1. Okay, your informed consent information seems good on paper, but the presentation raises a few questions:
-A significant amount of this information is placed under the header of "written." This is, obviously, a bit unclear. When people speak of requiring informed consent, my impression, at least, has been that such includes signing a waiver asserting that you have been "provided with the information and are aware that the risks include: ... ." Having "written" information "offered" sounds to me like there is a pamphlet tray with "What You Should Know About Abortion." Cynical, yes, but your list doesn't positively assert anything more than that. And, similarly, "giving" this written information could be little more than handing the pamphlets along with the paperwork they need to fill out.
-Out of the 33 states, only 8 of them specifically say that abortion cannot be coerced, and only two of those instances are told in person. Based on what has been said by Third Way, as well as a plethora of concerns(search for coerced abortion), this seems to be a major issue. Despite this, it appears that there are pro-choice individuals who oppose legislation to prevent coercion.(apologies for the markedly pro-life site)
-In addition, there is concern over the quality and competency of counselors and counseling.(section on "Known Deficiencies of Abortion Counseling")
2. I've admitted the weakness of this argument on both fronts you mentioned, and I'm not currently equipped to follow up on it, but please keep in mind that it may be more prominent than you realize.
3. Again, this would have to be personal experience. I have met many people, and read many articles, which seem to imply a lack of distinction, or care to distinguish. In regards to EC, I'm forced to wonder: medically, life begins at conception; if pregnancy doesn't start at implantation, what is the termination of life in the time between these two points?
4. My concern here was if "medical" abortion fills the same stringent requirements as surgical abortion. The "non-invasive" claim implies that there is less concern about informed consent. Speculation, mind you, but a concern nonetheless.