Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

volchitsa

robindch wrote: »

In addition to big purchases and loans, cooling-off periods are also part of many (all?) insurance and assurance policies, all goods and services purchased in the EU over the phone, by mail order as well - as you correctly point out - the riskier sales that happen at the behest of a pushy salesperson.

There's no presumption that I can find that the cooling-off period is there because the legislators (or the service providers) believe that the consumer might be one of those (as above) "silly things who don't know what they want".Thanks for the link - the comment about validity of consent is quite correct.

Npne of which changes my point, which you're still missing, it seems: there is no cooling off period for someone who walks into a shop to buy something.

Similarly there is no need for a cooling off period for someone who walks into a doctor's surgery and asks for a termination. In both cases the person has made a decision and is responsible for it.

The need for a delay is only there because there is some risk that a person may have been mis-sold something by advertising or sleight of hand or just pushiness, and your examples don't refute that. It's not just because it's a serious decision, as you appear to think: if I go to a garage forecourt and sign a cheque for a new car, I'll be held to that. There's no "cooling off" period then.

Igotadose

volchitsa wrote: »

Npne of which changes my point, which you're still missing, it seems: there is no cooling off period for someone who walks into a shop to buy something.

Similarly there is no need for a cooling off period for someone who walks into a doctor's surgery and asks for a termination. In both cases the person has made a decision and is responsible for it.

The need for a delay is only there because there is some risk that a person may have been mis-sold something by advertising or sleight of hand or just pushiness, and your examples don't refute that. It's not just because it's a serious decision, as you appear to think: if I go to a garage forecourt and sign a cheque for a new car, I'll be held to that. There's no "cooling off" period then.

No cooling off for vasectomies either

ohnonotgmail

volchitsa wrote: »

Npne of which changes my point, which you're still missing, it seems: there is no cooling off period for someone who walks into a shop to buy something.

Similarly there is no need for a cooling off period for someone who walks into a doctor's surgery and asks for a termination. In both cases the person has made a decision and is responsible for it.

The need for a delay is only there because there is some risk that a person may have been mis-sold something by advertising or sleight of hand or just pushiness, and your examples don't refute that. It's not just because it's a serious decision, as you appear to think: if I go to a garage forecourt and sign a cheque for a new car, I'll be held to that. There's no "cooling off" period then.

I was just coming in to say exactly that. With online sales or sales of financial products you have a consumer and another party that is very motivated to make a sale to that consumer. That motivation may lead them to be less than truthful. The same situation does not exist with a woman going to a doctor for an abortion that I am aware of. there is no incentive for the doctor to lie in order to convince the woman to have an abortion. Certainly none that I am aware of. Also the woman has usually made her mind up before consulting the doctor. Therefore I think the analogy put forward by Robinph is flawed.

eviltwin

Is there a cooling off period for any other procedure such as plastic surgery or tattoos?

lazygal

Not in law. The waiting period for abortion is legally mandated.

Loafing Oaf

Igotadose wrote: »

No cooling off for vasectomies either

I thought ice packs were sometimes used in the immediate aftermath...

robindch

volchitsa wrote: »

None of which changes my point, which you're still missing, it seems: there is no cooling off period for someone who walks into a shop to buy something.

So far as I'm aware, the US is the only country which mandates supplier-side delays to abortion services. Some US states, almost certainly different ones, mandate supplier-side delays to marriage licenses and purchasing firearms - the latter of which I suspect I wouldn't be alone in this forum in supporting. While the two situations are clearly completely different, I believe that they exist, as I said above, at least in part, because some of the legislators responsible for them believe that mandated, supplier-side delays may cut down the incidence of the service being carried out.

My point, again, is not that this is a good idea in the case of abortions - my position is that the woman seeking an abortion should be provided with unbiased medical advice and that the clinician should make a decision which she/he believes is in the best interests of the woman, and that this should apply to all medical advice and all medical procedures.

On the contrary, I'm suggesting that the blanket claim made earlier in the thread that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not be fully accurate. I certainly haven't heard the view expressed that legally-mandated, supplier-side delays to gun purchases are there because the legislators believe that gun purchasers are "silly" - on the contrary, I think most legislators legislate for these delays because they believe - in my view accurately - that they will reduce the chances of a rash decision leading to an outcome which may be difficult to reverse.

That's aside from reports of women forced to undergo abortions and it may be that some pro-choice legislators believe that a legally-mandated, supplier-side delay might help reduce these.

Igotadose wrote: »

No cooling off for vasectomies either

Not true.

A quick google shows that US mandates a 30-day waiting period for publicly-funded male and female sterilization, and it seems that individual US states have separate delays in place for private sterilization operations (California, for example, seems to have a delay of three days):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418554/
https://californiaptc.com/family-planning-training-services/birth-control-methods/vasectomy/

ohnonotgmail

robindch wrote: »

So far as I'm aware, the US is the only country which mandates supplier-side delays to abortion services. Some US states, almost certainly different ones, mandate supplier-side delays to marriage licenses and purchasing firearms - the latter of which I suspect I wouldn't be alone in this forum in supporting. While the two situations are clearly completely different, I believe that they exist, as I said above, at least in part, because some of the legislators responsible for them believe that mandated, supplier-side delays may cut down the incidence of the service being carried out.

My point, again, is not that this is a good idea in the case of abortions - my position is that the woman seeking an abortion should be provided with unbiased medical advice and that the clinician should make a decision which she/he believes is in the best interests of the woman, and that this should apply to all medical advice and all medical procedures.

On the contrary, I'm suggesting that the blanket claim made earlier in the thread that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not be fully accurate. I certainly haven't heard the view expressed that legally-mandated, supplier-side delays to gun purchases are there because the legislators believe that gun purchasers are "silly" - on the contrary, I think most legislators legislate for these delays because they believe - in my view accurately - that they will reduce the chances of a rash decision leading to an outcome which may be difficult to reverse.

That's aside from reports of women forced to undergo abortions and it may be that some pro-choice legislators believe that a legally-mandated, supplier-side delay might help reduce these.Not true.

A quick google shows that US mandates a 30-day waiting period for publicly-funded male and female sterilization, and it seems that individual US states have separate delays in place for private sterilization operations (California, for example, seems to have a delay of three days):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418554/
https://californiaptc.com/family-planning-training-services/birth-control-methods/vasectomy/

again you insist on analogies that dont apply to abortion. you said as much yourself.

Igotadose

Interesting point on the publically-funded vasectomies laws. Unlike in Ireland, though, health care's primarily paid privately in the US, which is why for typical US male, his insurance covers his vasectomy which he can walk into an outpatient clinic and have done, no cooling off.

robindch

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

again you insist on analogies that dont apply to abortion. you said as much yourself.

I'm not "insist"ing on anything. I'm suggesting that the blanket claim made earlier in the thread that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not be fully accurate.

I'm referring not to my beliefs, which are different and which I have included in the post above as there appears to be persistent doubt or confusion.

I am referring to the possible beliefs of legislators who put these laws in place.

ohnonotgmail

robindch wrote: »

I'm not "insist"ing on anything. I'm suggesting that the blanket claim made earlier in the thread that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not be fully accurate.

I'm referring not to my beliefs, which are different and which I have included in the post above as there appears to be persistent doubt or confusion.

I am referring to the possible beliefs of legislators who put these laws in place.

and you suggest that by introducing analogies to situations that are in no way similar.

robindch

Igotadose wrote: »

[...] for typical US male, his insurance covers his vasectomy which he can walk into an outpatient clinic and have done, no cooling off.

As above, that's does not seem to be possible in California where there appears to be a legally-mandated three-day delay for privately-funded vasectomies. Haven't checked other states, but it seems likely that other states will have similar delays for privately-funded vasectomies too, especially the less-liberal ones.

robindch

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and you suggest that by introducing analogies to situations that are in no way similar.

I am referring to what legislators may believe.

For at least the third time, I believe differently.

lazygal

I don't need advice when I need an abortion and I definitely don't need three days to make up my mind. Let people who want to wait do so. But there's no reason to make anyone wait for an abortion when they know they want one.

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

I am referring to what legislators may believe.

For at least the third time, I believe differently.

I think what is irking people is comparing consumer protection legislation there to protect people from certain ill-advised financial outlays to delaying a medical procedure for no scientific reasons.

If the delay in Irish provision (no point comparing to other jurisdictions esp the US where it varies greatly state to state) is analogous to consumer protection cooling-off laws than imho it very much implies the person seeking an abortion 'may' be acting impulsively and no understand the implications.
Like some smooth tongued salesperson doorstepped them convincing them to switch to their abortion service in the way similar could happen with a life insurance policy containing print so fine the Hubble couldn't pick it up.

It assumes women haven't thought about it, are acting impulsively, don't understand the repercussions - like an OAP buying a funeral payment plan - but there are no similar provisions for other medical procedures.
Also - it treats people seeking abortions as consumers not patients.


Nose job? No problem.
Vasectomy? No problem.
Abortion? Go away and have a think about it.
Insurance policy? Ok, but here'r time to think about it.

eviltwin

lazygal wrote: »

I don't need advice when I need an abortion and I definitely don't need three days to make up my mind. Let people who want to wait do so. But there's no reason to make anyone wait for an abortion when they know they want one.

As a 40 something woman it angers me that I am legally forced to wait three days just in case I change my mind while 18 year old can get face tattoos, plastic surgery or multiple piercings without a second thought.

lazygal

eviltwin wrote: »

As a 40 something woman it angers me that I am legally forced to wait three days just in case I change my mind while 18 year old can get face tattoos, plastic surgery or multiple piercings without a second thought.

Having a baby is infinitely more life changing and dangerous than an abortion before 12 weeks but the state doesn't mandate a waiting period before people get pregnant.

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It assumes women haven't thought about it, are acting impulsively, don't understand the repercussions [...]

Yes, one can certainly read it that way, however, I think it's useful to consider the possibility - however faint it might be - that legislators introduce mandatory delays because they believe that the delays will cut down on abortions, same way that mandatory delays are thought to cut down on gun sales, where gun sales are believed to be problematic.

Hence my belief that the original blanket claim that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not accurately convey the full range of reasons why legislators choose to introduce such restrictive legislation.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Vasectomy? No problem.

I don't believe there's a cooling-off period for vasectomies in Ireland - unlike, as above, in the US where there are separate federal and state laws mandating delays for vasectomies - but I also don't know of any guys who've walked into an Irish clinic and had a vasectomy on the same day either. There does seen to be a delay between the original consult, the consent and the operation, not the result of any specific law, but just on account of the delays inherent in any queueing system.

ohnonotgmail

robindch wrote: »

Yes, one can certainly read it that way, however, I think it's useful to consider the possibility - however faint it might be - that legislators introduce mandatory delays because they believe that the delays will cut down on abortions, same way that mandatory delays are thought to cut down on gun sales, where gun sales are believed to be problematic.

Hence my belief that the original blanket claim that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not accurately convey the full range of reasons why legislators choose to introduce such restrictive legislation.I don't believe there's a cooling-off period for vasectomies in Ireland - unlike, as above, in the US where there are separate federal and state laws mandating delays for vasectomies - but I also don't know of any guys who've walked into an Irish clinic and had a vasectomy on the same day either. There does seen to be a delay between the original consult, the consent and the operation, not the result of any specific law, but just on account of the delays inherent in any queueing system.

cooling off periods for firearms are to prevent impulsive acts of violence. a women seeing a doctor for an abortion can hardly be described as impulsive.

eviltwin

robindch wrote: »

Yes, one can certainly read it that way, however, I think it's useful to consider the possibility - however faint it might be - that legislators introduce mandatory delays because they believe that the delays will cut down on abortions, same way that mandatory delays are thought to cut down on gun sales, where gun sales are believed to be problematic.

Hence my belief that the original blanket claim that these laws are brought in because legislators believe that women are "silly things who don't know what they want" may not accurately convey the full range of reasons why legislators choose to introduce such restrictive legislation.I don't believe there's a cooling-off period for vasectomies in Ireland - unlike, as above, in the US where there are separate federal and state laws mandating delays for vasectomies - but I also don't know of any guys who've walked into an Irish clinic and had a vasectomy on the same day either. There does seen to be a delay between the original consult, the consent and the operation, not the result of any specific law, but just on account of the delays inherent in any queueing system.

Why the need to cut down on abortion? What’s wrong with it?

And wouldn’t the best way to cut down on abortion be to have better sex Ed, access to contraception etc ?

Clare_Culchie

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

cooling off periods for firearms are to prevent impulsive acts of violence.

Cooling off periods for abortion are also to prevent impulsive and deadly acts of violence.

lazygal

Clare_Culchie wrote: »

Cooling off periods for abortion are also to prevent impulsive and deadly acts of violence.

Can you show evidence for the claim that making people wait for abortions reduces impulsive and deadly acts of violence?

Clare_Culchie

lazygal wrote: »

Can you show evidence for the claim that making people wait for abortions reduces impulsive and deadly acts of violence?

Well, if they decide in those three days of consideration against having an abortion, hasn't that stopped at least one deadly act of violence?

The answer is Yes.

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Vasectomy? No problem.

A quick google indicates a waiting period of at least several months for public-funded vasectomies in Ireland:

https://www.imt.ie/news/annual-vasectomy-budget-spent-24-05-2018/

A call to one of the private providers and I learn that a waiting time of two to three weeks is normal. In NI, there seems to be a waiting period of over two years for public-funded procedures.

eviltwin

robindch wrote: »

A quick google indicates a waiting period of at least several months for public-funded vasectomies in Ireland:

https://www.imt.ie/news/annual-vasectomy-budget-spent-24-05-2018/

A call to one of the private providers and I learn that a waiting time of two to three weeks is normal. In NI, there seems to be a waiting period of over two years for public-funded procedures.

That’s not really the same thing though is it?

ohnonotgmail

robindch wrote: »

A quick google indicates a waiting period of at least several months for public-funded vasectomies in Ireland:

https://www.imt.ie/news/annual-vasectomy-budget-spent-24-05-2018/

A call to one of the private providers and I learn that a waiting time of two to three weeks is normal. In NI, there seems to be a waiting period of over two years for public-funded procedures.

none of those waiting times are legally mandated.

robindch

eviltwin wrote: »

Why the need to cut down on abortion? What’s wrong with it?

Anti-abortion legislators wish to pass legislation to reduce abortion because it wins votes at the ballot box.

robindch

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

none of those waiting times are legally mandated.

Yes, I'm simply disproving the claim, or at least the expectation, that you can walk into a vasectomy clinic and have your vasectomy immediately.

lazygal

Clare_Culchie wrote: »

Well, if they decide in those three days of consideration against having an abortion, hasn't that stopped at least one deadly act of violence?

The answer is Yes.

Abortion is not a deadly act though. Its an induced miscarriage.

lazygal

robindch wrote: »

Anti-abortion legislators wish to pass legislation to reduce abortion because it wins votes at the ballot box.

So its not about reducing abortion any more than their pain relief amendments were about babies. The anti choice moment are just using any possible reason to make it difficult to access abortion.