Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Iowa Republican submits bill allowing women to sue abortion providers because of "abortion regret." Remember, though, frivolous medical lawsuits are bad   (slate.com) divider line 132
    More: Stupid, abortion providers, Iowa, Republicans, abortions, abortion regret, emotional stress, mental health professional, informed consent  
•       •       •

2447 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Feb 2014 at 4:48 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



132 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-02-28 04:04:52 PM  
If they add a rider allowing suits against the mothers that birthed the jackasses that are proposing this idiotic bill for pain and suffering of humanity by not aborting the members of the Iowa caucus proposing this maybe. It would have to allow suits against the members themselves if their mother is already dead. They have to add a penalty cost ( thinking 2x costs) beyond loser pays legal fees including all appeals costs.
 
2014-02-28 04:26:29 PM  
In that case, I should be able to sue the Catholic church for "religion regret." I'd like millions of $$$ in damages for all of the pain and suffering I've experienced as a direct result of having Catholicism shoved down my throat for the first 17 years of my life.
 
2014-02-28 04:31:33 PM  
I regret going in to debt to pay for college. I don't feel that I was very well informed about the consequences of signing those loan checks. Gimme $.
 
2014-02-28 04:31:43 PM  
So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?
 
2014-02-28 04:32:35 PM  
Let's see if yesterday's "why on earth would there be privacy concerns at an abortion clinic" brigade shows up.

Also, for the sake of an informed discussion, here's the bill.
 
2014-02-28 04:36:46 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.
 
2014-02-28 04:38:10 PM  

Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.


Hosts.
 
2014-02-28 04:40:33 PM  

RedPhoenix122: Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.

Hosts.


Fetus factories
 
2014-02-28 04:42:41 PM  
Did you go in there to get an abortion?

Yes.

Did he give you an abortion?

Yes.

GTFO.
 
2014-02-28 04:45:56 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: RedPhoenix122: Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.

Hosts.

Fetus factories


I was referring to this
 
2014-02-28 04:49:45 PM  
The party of personal responsibility strikes again.
 
2014-02-28 04:53:15 PM  
Can we sue politicians because of election regret?
 
2014-02-28 04:54:40 PM  
This is a great idea...for elections.
 
2014-02-28 04:55:04 PM  
How about getting-drunk regret? Can I sue my bartender over my hangover?
 
2014-02-28 04:55:05 PM  
What d'ya got for tattoo regret?
 
2014-02-28 04:55:17 PM  

naughtyrev: Can we sue politicians because of election regret?


DAMMIT!  Just missed.
 
2014-02-28 04:55:28 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


I'm thinking the reason would be to increase the insurance premiums to the point that no abortion clinic could fund the operation. Which I would be all for if it would finally get people to admit that lawsuits are a major cause of expenses in the healthcare industry and that tort reform is necessary.
 
2014-02-28 04:55:39 PM  

RedPhoenix122: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: RedPhoenix122: Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.

Hosts.

Fetus factories

I was referring to this


Oh, they actually came out and said it?
 
2014-02-28 04:55:40 PM  
If I join TF and then regret it, can I sue drew? Or at least get my five bucks back?
 
2014-02-28 04:55:57 PM  
I only have a limited supply of punches to the face, but I'm saving one for this asshat.
 
2014-02-28 04:56:17 PM  
So when are they going to allow "mothers" to sue the officiating clergyman for regret, etc.?

It seems more fair to me to allow the "mother"s to sue the "fathers" of the dead lump of protoplasm because they regret having sex with them. And really sue their asses off in cases of rape and incestuous rape, of course. But, hey, if you want to sue a professional with the ability to pay, I recommend suing the Pope. Why fark around with dumbass one night stands, idiot husbands and demented brothers, uncles, and fathers? You tried that once and how did it work out for you?
 
2014-02-28 04:56:43 PM  
Another abortion law??

I d&c *that* coming
 
2014-02-28 04:57:15 PM  
Life is filled with regrets, some more than others. If it was a legal procedure, and you entered into it of your own free will, then any regret you have is just something you'll have to live with.
 
2014-02-28 04:57:16 PM  
Hey, what about circumcision regret? Can I get a couple dollars here for some circumcision regret? C'mon, I had a valuable foreskin! I want some of that sweet, sweet regret money from somebody for somethin'...
 
2014-02-28 04:57:34 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


Naturally.

I'm no lawyer, but I imagine this wouldn't be too difficult to work around - just add a form that patients have to sign promising that they won't sue.

Nice try, though!
 
2014-02-28 04:58:36 PM  

naughtyrev: Can we sue politicians because of election regret?


It's call a recall.

mbillips: How about getting-drunk regret? Can I sue my bartender over my hangover?


Actually you can sue if the bartender kept serving you after he knew you were drunk. I'm not sure if it has ever worked on hangovers but car accidents and injury due to alcohol poisoning has worked. I'm not sure if a lawyer would bother with trying to get compensation for a headache
 
2014-02-28 04:59:38 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


Seems like it. I would like to personally kick the people behind this square in the nuts. They are trying to abuse the legal system to make a point. Fark that noise.
 
2014-02-28 04:59:44 PM  

Lorelle: In that case, I should be able to sue the Catholic church for "religion regret." I'd like millions of $$$ in damages for all of the pain and suffering I've experienced as a direct result of having Catholicism shoved down my throat for the first 17 years of my life.


What would you rather have had shoved down your throat?

/ba-zing!
 
2014-02-28 04:59:48 PM  

vernonFL: Another abortion law??

I d&c *that* coming


ba-dum!
 
2014-02-28 05:00:03 PM  
Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.
 
2014-02-28 05:00:07 PM  
That's creative. Can't backdoor an abortion ban, so drive Dr insurance costs through the roof and make dr afraid to provide them.

Pucking futz
 
2014-02-28 05:00:46 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: RedPhoenix122: Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.

Hosts.

Fetus factories


"Brood mares for the State"
 
2014-02-28 05:02:09 PM  
Go home America. You're drunk.
 
2014-02-28 05:02:44 PM  
Vote Republican: what could possibly go wrong?
 
2014-02-28 05:02:50 PM  
You could just as easily say "All regulations are good" to a liberal decrying abortion clinic regulations.  This subject seems to make both sides appreciate the other's default position.
 
2014-02-28 05:03:37 PM  
I think we are nearing the event horizon.
 
2014-02-28 05:04:53 PM  
Lawsuits bad, killing baby's good.
 
2014-02-28 05:05:15 PM  
It kind of sucks watching the Republican party implode. Something has to balance out the nutty far left. Unfortunately the right was taken over by the far right.
 
2014-02-28 05:06:55 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


From what I've heard doctors already advise against abortions if they believe the patient has beliefs that will cause them to severely regret the decision.
 
2014-02-28 05:07:15 PM  
So, more government regulation and more medical malpractice liability?  The Republican party is in its third trimester of hypocrisy.
 
2014-02-28 05:08:24 PM  

Gentoolive: Lawsuits bad, killing baby's good.


0/10
 
2014-02-28 05:09:31 PM  
Can we just repeal the 19th Amendment instead?
 
2014-02-28 05:11:55 PM  

Lorelle: In that case, I should be able to sue the Catholic church for "religion regret." I'd like millions of $$$ in damages for all of the pain and suffering I've experienced as a direct result of having Catholicism shoved down my throat for the first 17 years of my life.

No shiat. I can put a cherry on the top of that cake with the fact I went thru Catholic Social Services back in the day for being adopted and frankly speaking, it did not turn out good at all for me. Atheist.

 
2014-02-28 05:12:22 PM  
Let me guess subby, I bet you think that abortion clinics should not be allowed to refuse service to gay men.
 
2014-02-28 05:12:37 PM  
What about voter's regret.
 
2014-02-28 05:14:02 PM  
Farking clownshoes.
 
2014-02-28 05:14:04 PM  

Gentoolive: Lawsuits bad, killing baby's good.


If your going to kill anything you eat all of it.
 
2014-02-28 05:14:56 PM  
Taco Bell will go bankrupt following this logic.

/Abortion to GI system.
//Multiple regretter; will regret again
 
2014-02-28 05:15:30 PM  
So he thinks women are too feeble-minded and emotional to be held accountable for putting their signature on legal documents (ie informed consent form), huh?

I'm trying to think of a way to phrase the question of whether he thinks women should be able to sign anything at all (including their own "traditional marriage" forms or if they should have to get their daddy to sign for them), but my brain keeps looping back to "OMG this man is a complete and total f*ckwit!"
 
2014-02-28 05:15:45 PM  

brantgoose: So when are they going to allow "mothers" to sue the officiating clergyman for regret, etc.?

It seems more fair to me to allow the "mother"s to sue the "fathers" of the dead lump of protoplasm because they regret having sex with them. And really sue their asses off in cases of rape and incestuous rape, of course. But, hey, if you want to sue a professional with the ability to pay, I recommend suing the Pope. Why fark around with dumbass one night stands, idiot husbands and demented brothers, uncles, and fathers? You tried that once and how did it work out for you?


If women could sue men because they regret having sex with them, Ben Roethlisberger would be in real trouble...

/...at least it would cut down on the false rape accusations...
 
2014-02-28 05:16:53 PM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: I think we are nearing the event horizon.


I think all that is needed is a RAPE-RAPE REGRETS LAWSUIT action. For the rapers to sue the women they rape for the distressed caused by the harlots for allowing themselves to be rape-raped and not fighting hard enough to (whatever the farking word is that I can't spel.)  the raper from raping.

 Don't laugh, it's going to happen.

/Rape
 
2014-02-28 05:21:00 PM  
Sounds like the person who wrote this bill is encouraging women to go get pregnant just to get an abortion and sure.

They must really love abortions.
 
2014-02-28 05:21:02 PM  
How's that laser-like focus on the economy coming along, guys?
 
2014-02-28 05:22:22 PM  
I'm suing my doctor for "4-hour-boner-from-boner-pill" regret.

/ Er, no I'm not.
// Best lake weekend.
 
2014-02-28 05:23:20 PM  
They only want democratic babies aborted, not republic.
 
2014-02-28 05:24:30 PM  
O.o this damn bill needs to die.
 
2014-02-28 05:25:36 PM  

Shirley Ujest: Random Anonymous Blackmail: I think we are nearing the event horizon.

I think all that is needed is a RAPE-RAPE REGRETS LAWSUIT action. For the rapers to sue the women they rape for the distressed caused by the harlots for allowing themselves to be rape-raped and not fighting hard enough to (whatever the farking word is that I can't spel.)  the raper from raping.

 Don't laugh, it's going to happen.

/Rape


Rape vs. Cocktease?
 
2014-02-28 05:28:44 PM  

Shirley Ujest: They only want democratic babies aborted, not republic.


Democrats don't have babies, they spawn heathens.
 
2014-02-28 05:28:46 PM  

indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.


Thanks, I needed a laugh before leaving work today.
 
2014-02-28 05:28:59 PM  
Just give'm one of the many, many unwanted, neglected or abused kids rotting in nightmare foster homes.
 
2014-02-28 05:29:10 PM  

BMFPitt: Sounds like the person who wrote this bill is encouraging women to go get pregnant just to get an abortion and sure.

They must really love abortions.


That was my first thought too, but then I realized the consequence of that: making abortion-regret-lawsuit-coverage such an expensive part of malpractice insurance that providers have to stop performing the procedure. This may be a rare case of a GOP legislator actually thinking (one myopic part of) his cunning plan all the way through.
 
2014-02-28 05:31:38 PM  

Mr_Fabulous: How's that laser-like focus on the economy coming along, guys?


Nothing like a cheap, disposable labor force to compete with the likes of China right?
 
2014-02-28 05:32:54 PM  

apoptotic: So he thinks women are too feeble-minded and emotional to be held accountable for putting their signature on legal documents (ie informed consent form), huh?

I'm trying to think of a way to phrase the question of whether he thinks women should be able to sign anything at all (including their own "traditional marriage" forms or if they should have to get their daddy to sign for them), but my brain keeps looping back to "OMG this man is a complete and total f*ckwit!"


Back in my day, the husband's consent was necessary before a woman could have a tubal ligation.
 
2014-02-28 05:33:56 PM  

apoptotic: BMFPitt: Sounds like the person who wrote this bill is encouraging women to go get pregnant just to get an abortion and sure.

They must really love abortions.

That was my first thought too, but then I realized the consequence of that: making abortion-regret-lawsuit-coverage such an expensive part of malpractice insurance that providers have to stop performing the procedure. This may be a rare case of a GOP legislator actually thinking (one myopic part of) his cunning plan all the way through.


That's obviously the intent, but if I were interviewing him, that's definitely the direction I would go.
 
2014-02-28 05:34:08 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


section 1 paragraph 3 (I think) states that financial damages can be limited, so yes, they want some show trials to try and dissuade doctors from performing abortions, let's tie up all their time in court!!! also in limiting damages to me it says they don't give a fark about the woman or host as women are known in GOP circles.

the GOP is running out of ideas on how they can subvert settled law so it's kitchen sink time.
 
2014-02-28 05:37:15 PM  
Danko Jones would have one hell of a lawsuit...
 
2014-02-28 05:38:25 PM  
can anyone come up with a regret tort like this? i've got nothing
 
2014-02-28 05:38:37 PM  

indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.


Who do we sue for that? Bush or the fat chick?


Gentoolive: Lawsuits bad, killing baby's good.


Killing baby is not good. Killing baby is actually quite terrifying.

static.comicvine.com
 
2014-02-28 05:41:33 PM  
You know what women regret more than having an abortion? Being denied one.
 
2014-02-28 05:42:48 PM  

JNowe: What d'ya got for tattoo regret?


Please, there is no such thing
starcasm.net
 
2014-02-28 05:44:37 PM  

MutantMotherMouse: apoptotic: So he thinks women are too feeble-minded and emotional to be held accountable for putting their signature on legal documents (ie informed consent form), huh?

I'm trying to think of a way to phrase the question of whether he thinks women should be able to sign anything at all (including their own "traditional marriage" forms or if they should have to get their daddy to sign for them), but my brain keeps looping back to "OMG this man is a complete and total f*ckwit!"

Back in my day, the husband's consent was necessary before a woman could have a tubal ligation.


I didn't marry no barren womb!
 
2014-02-28 05:44:41 PM  

Trivia Jockey: naughtyrev: Can we sue politicians because of election regret?

DAMMIT!  Just missed.


Just think of your comment as a big fat "THIS" to that and you're good.

Really, this nitwit is opening up a bottomless can of worms. Infinite possibilities for [your regret here].
 
2014-02-28 05:45:50 PM  
I wonder what the Venn diagram of the people who support this bill and the people who get frothing mad about what they call "sex regret" rape cases looks like.  I'm going to guess there's a lot of overlap.  And that the folks in that overlapping area are completely irony-proof.
 
2014-02-28 05:48:51 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: ...if it would finally get people to admit that lawsuits are a major cause of expenses in the healthcare industry and that tort reform is necessary.



How much is "major"? Of all the dollars spent on health care in the U.S., what's the percentage that goes to lawsuits? Since you brought it up, I presume you have some numbers handy...
 
2014-02-28 05:53:48 PM  

phaseolus: The Stealth Hippopotamus: ...if it would finally get people to admit that lawsuits are a major cause of expenses in the healthcare industry and that tort reform is necessary.


How much is "major"? Of all the dollars spent on health care in the U.S., what's the percentage that goes to lawsuits? Since you brought it up, I presume you have some numbers handy...


i think its generally estimated at around 2%   http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2010/09/07/the-true-cost-of-med i cal-malpractice-it-may-surprise-you/ when you add in the unnecessary defensive medicine costs

btw that took 8 seconds to look up on google, you should try it
 
2014-02-28 05:54:14 PM  
The "pro-life" coalition is getting preposterously creative with its legislation. In Iowa, a new bill would allow women to sue their doctors for malpractice up to 10 years after their abortion-not because they suffered physical injury (those rare cases are already covered under existing malpractice law), but because they experienced regret.

Retarded law is retarded. Now, you're going to have women getting abortions just to cash in. Nice. This is not going to have the effect you think it will. And there is no way that this bill will pass. Why not put up a bill that says fathers can sue the mothers for emotional distress, for murdering their child without the father's input? If the mother gets an abortion, it's legal, if a father punches his pregnant woman in the stomach and she loses the baby, its murder. Not saying either is right, but why does the father, who put up 50 percent of the dna, have no say at all?

I had a gf long ago, who got an abortion behind my back, and killed my baby son. I would have taken him in myself and raised him, but no. I had no right to even KNOW she was pregnant, and no say in if the baby lived or died, but am expected to pay through the nose if she has it. That doesn't piss me off as much as i had 0 say at all, effectively, a non person until it's time to write the checks. Bullshiat.
 
2014-02-28 05:57:48 PM  

Gentoolive: Lawsuits bad, killing baby's good.


Killing baby's good what?
 
2014-02-28 06:00:45 PM  

Shirley Ujest: Random Anonymous Blackmail: I think we are nearing the event horizon.

I think all that is needed is a RAPE-RAPE REGRETS LAWSUIT action. For the rapers to sue the women they rape for the distressed caused by the harlots for allowing themselves to be rape-raped and not fighting hard enough to (whatever the farking word is that I can't spel.)  the raper from raping.

 Don't laugh, it's going to happen.

/Rape


I got drunk last night and raped-raped a girl. Woke up next to her this morning and realised that she was super ugly. I now regret raping her, can I sue?

I got some dope from my dealer, It was so superstrong that I freaked out. I now regret smoking it. Can I sue my dealer?

I also spent my last 100 grand on a Lambo, now I'm homeless, pennyless and sleeping on the street (can't afford to get the car dirty). I now regret getting that car, can I sue?

This is farking retarded...
 
2014-02-28 06:01:55 PM  
I regret his Mom didn't have several abortions.  Can we sue?
 
2014-02-28 06:05:04 PM  
The group most responsible for "abortion regret" are those that go around trying to convince women that a 2 month old fetus is an actual person.
 
2014-02-28 06:09:22 PM  

Robin Hoodie: phaseolus: The Stealth Hippopotamus: ...if it would finally get people to admit that lawsuits are a major cause of expenses in the healthcare industry and that tort reform is necessary.


How much is "major"? Of all the dollars spent on health care in the U.S., what's the percentage that goes to lawsuits? Since you brought it up, I presume you have some numbers handy...

i think its generally estimated at around 2%   http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2010/09/07/the-true-cost-of-med i cal-malpractice-it-may-surprise-you/ when you add in the unnecessary defensive medicine costs

btw that took 8 seconds to look up on google, you should try it


Which part of "Since you brought it up" don't you understand?
 
2014-02-28 06:12:06 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: You know what women regret more than having an abortion? Being denied one.


Sleeping with me in the first place?
 
2014-02-28 06:17:00 PM  
I want my tonsils back!
 
2014-02-28 06:19:00 PM  

Calmamity: I regret going in to debt to pay for college. I don't feel that I was very well informed about the consequences of signing those loan checks. Gimme $.


I'm getting a kick out of reading your comment, because my student loans got discharged and finished up the last part of that yesterday.

Of course, it's because I'm on disability, and haven't been about to work this century, which kind of really sucks, but at least I don't have the albatross of student loans hanging around over my head anymore after 10 years+ of trying to get them discharged and a ruined credit history (I once had a great credit rating).  But least for today, not fml.
 
2014-02-28 06:19:16 PM  
Personal Responsibility My Ass
Self Serving Hypocrites
They will burn in hell


/if it exists
 
2014-02-28 06:20:07 PM  

Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.


My fu*k doll never gets pregnant, no matter how much load i dump in her, which reminds me...I really gotta get some latex cleaner.
 
2014-02-28 06:21:20 PM  

phaseolus: How much is "major"? Of all the dollars spent on health care in the U.S., what's the percentage that goes to lawsuits? Since you brought it up, I presume you have some numbers handy...


Link


DrBenway: Which part of "Since you brought it up" don't you understand?


Some people arnt smart enough to use the Google. These people should be pitied and helped
 
2014-02-28 06:28:43 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Actually you can sue if the bartender kept serving you after he knew you were drunk. I'm not sure if it has ever worked on hangovers but car accidents and injury due to alcohol poisoning has worked. I'm not sure if a lawyer would bother with trying to get compensation for a headache


Can you sue, or is it just your victim who can sue?  I've never heard of the person who was actually drinking suing the bartender (although I suppose parents might sue if their underaged kid was served).

A better comparison might be if the fetuses were suing the doctor, which, if you think about it, may be why the anti-abortion camp is always trying to get fetuses declared human beings.
 
2014-02-28 06:31:01 PM  
Im ok with this. Its not banning or infringing on Roe V Wade in any way. Plus it will be fun to watch the libs that usually love lawyers pipe bombing lawyer offices for them sueing an abortion clinic out of existince.
 
2014-02-28 06:48:02 PM  

Oldiron_79: Im ok with this. Its not banning or infringing on Roe V Wade in any way. Plus it will be fun to watch the libs that usually love lawyers pipe bombing lawyer offices for them sueing an abortion clinic out of existince.


If only your grasp of the English language were as powerful as your imagination.
 
2014-02-28 06:49:41 PM  
Farkin' stubborn misogynistic narrow-minded old men.
The worst kind of human to be placed in-charge, or to pander to.
The sooner we stop listening to the old guys, the sooner we can move on.
 
2014-02-28 06:53:23 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: DrBenway: Which part of "Since you brought it up" don't you understand?

Some people arnt smart enough to use the Google. These people should be pitied and helped


It's common practice to require the one making the claim to provide evidence. Though if you had done that you wouldn't have made the "major" statement in the first place because you were clearly wrong.
 
2014-02-28 06:55:02 PM  
Bottom line:  The definition of a frivolous lawsuit is any lawsuit but mine.
 
2014-02-28 06:55:39 PM  
This is a stupid bill. What could she possibly get from the physician that would compensate her for a fetus? Dibs on the next available orphan?
 
2014-02-28 07:12:58 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: phaseolus: How much is "major"? Of all the dollars spent on health care in the U.S., what's the percentage that goes to lawsuits? Since you brought it up, I presume you have some numbers handy...

Link


DrBenway: Which part of "Since you brought it up" don't you understand?

Some people arnt smart enough to use the Google. These people should be pitied and helped


In what world is $5.4 billion a major part of $3500 billion?

From your link,
"... save as much as $54 billion over the next decade by imposing an array of new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits"

The other link presented in the thread says,
"A new study reveals that the cost of medical malpractice in the United States is running at about $55.6 billion a year - $45.6 billion  "

But still, how the hell is $55.6 billion a major part of $3500 billion.

Link for the $3500 billion cost of healthcare in 2012:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2012/12/30/2012-the-year-in-hea lt hcare-charts/
 
2014-02-28 07:14:18 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: phaseolus: How much is "major"? Of all the dollars spent on health care in the U.S., what's the percentage that goes to lawsuits? Since you brought it up, I presume you have some numbers handy...

Link



Okay, $54bn savings over ten years. $5.4bn saved per year, more or less. I see that health care's a $1.668 trillion business in the U.S. every year, according to this Link. So doing the math, it looks like the CBO's saying that "tort reform" might reduce health care costs by 0.3%.

Granted, $tens of billions is nothing to sneeze at, and sure, let's talk about it as *part* of a solution to lowering health care costs. But pretending it's the magic bullet is proven wrong when you look at the numbers. It's one of those myths that only conservatives believe. Reform all the torts and the U.S. will *still* be paying almost double per capita on health care than the rest of the world.


Some people arnt smart enough to use the Google. These people should be pitied and helped

Of course I know about web searches. I was using a rhetorical technique -- you took something quantifiable and judged it qualitatively ("major cause of health care expenditures"), and even though I knew I could look up the actual numbers and had heard before that lawsuits accounted for maybe 1-2% of all the health care dollars, I wanted to hear *you* explain how a percent or two was a major component of the total... which of course you ran away from.

Me, I'm not much for pity -- the Buddhists tell me that pity's not good for anything -- but I think people who think 0.3 - 2% is a "major" proportion of anything ought to be helped a little with their math and reading comprehension...
 
2014-02-28 07:15:24 PM  
I weep for my home state. Bob VanderPlaats is probably tugging one off right now.
 
2014-02-28 07:18:14 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: The "pro-life" coalition is getting preposterously creative with its legislation. In Iowa, a new bill would allow women to sue their doctors for malpractice up to 10 years after their abortion-not because they suffered physical injury (those rare cases are already covered under existing malpractice law), but because they experienced regret.

Retarded law is retarded. Now, you're going to have women getting abortions just to cash in. Nice. This is not going to have the effect you think it will. And there is no way that this bill will pass. Why not put up a bill that says fathers can sue the mothers for emotional distress, for murdering their child without the father's input? If the mother gets an abortion, it's legal, if a father punches his pregnant woman in the stomach and she loses the baby, its murder. Not saying either is right, but why does the father, who put up 50 percent of the dna, have no say at all?

I had a gf long ago, who got an abortion behind my back, and killed my baby son. I would have taken him in myself and raised him, but no. I had no right to even KNOW she was pregnant, and no say in if the baby lived or died, but am expected to pay through the nose if she has it. That doesn't piss me off as much as i had 0 say at all, effectively, a non person until it's time to write the checks. Bullshiat.


Because it is not his body, and you can't force a woman to bear your child or abort it against her will.  How often does this need to be explained?
 
2014-02-28 07:20:27 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: RedPhoenix122: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: RedPhoenix122: Calmamity: DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?

Of course not! It's all about the health of the breeding cattle, or fu*k dolls, or women or whatever you call them.

Hosts.

Fetus factories

I was referring to this

Oh, they actually came out and said it?


Yes, although that's not really shocking.  It's how most pro-lifers view women - unable to make choices and only fit to make sammiches or throw dinner parties. It's disgusting.

My opinion on the matter is, if you don't want an abortion, then don't farking get one. But that does not give you the right to make that choice for someone else.
 
2014-02-28 07:26:27 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


How is this different from other medical fields. Look at the number of obstetricians after John Edwards got done with his lawsuits. Abortion doctors should be exempted from not informing their patient of possible consequences?

Not saying I support the law, but you seem to be carving out exemptions.
 
2014-02-28 07:27:44 PM  

indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.


After 7 years no liberal can tell me which Bush policy is responsible for the real estate bubble. Not one.
 
2014-02-28 07:31:28 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


Motivate isn't the right term here - it's 'intimidate'.  This is purely a form of intimidation - since they can't ban the procedure, they're going to make life as hard as possible for the providers.

Stay classy, party of small (as in 'uterus-sized') government...
 
2014-02-28 07:36:07 PM  

MyRandomName: indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.

After 7 years no liberal can tell me which Bush policy is responsible for the real estate bubble. Not one.


But it was a deregulated free for all!
 
2014-02-28 07:56:22 PM  

DamnYankees: So this is basically a bill who's purpose is to motivate doctors to not perform abortion for fear they'll be sued, right?


Yes
 
2014-02-28 08:00:33 PM  
So, what do you call it when someone uses unethical behaviour to support what they say is an ethical position?

It seems to me that hypocrisy just isn't a strong enough word for this.
 
2014-02-28 08:01:51 PM  
Okay, why are all the crazy States now acting in lockstep with stupid plans? It's like they're all synchronizing.
 
2014-02-28 08:12:32 PM  
As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for many years upon this important subject, and maturely weighed the several schemes of other projectors, I have always found them grossly mistaken in the computation. It is true, a child just dropped from its dam may be supported by her milk for a solar year, with little other nourishment; at most not above the value of 2s., which the mother may certainly get, or the value in scraps, by her lawful occupation of begging; and it is exactly at one year old that I propose to provide for them in such a manner as instead of being a charge upon their parents or the parish, or wanting food and raiment for the rest of their lives, they shall on the contrary contribute to the feeding, and partly to the clothing, of many thousands.
There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us! sacrificing the poor innocent babes I doubt more to avoid the expense than the shame, which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhuman breast.
 
2014-02-28 08:26:07 PM  

Pichu0102: Okay, why are all the crazy States now acting in lockstep with stupid plans? It's like they're all synchronizing.


Synchronized Derpistania.
 
2014-02-28 08:27:50 PM  
Alright, so going by their "logic", women should be given the right to sue crisis pregnancy centers for giving them false information and employing fear tactics in order to keep women from getting abortions. There are far more women who regret parenthood than they do abortions. This law is ridiculous, let's start suing tattoo artists because we regret getting that tattoo years ago.
 
2014-02-28 08:30:44 PM  
Clearly Iowans have had one abortion too few.
 
2014-02-28 08:55:48 PM  
Well, I guess that is why the abortionplex went to Kansas.
 
2014-02-28 09:28:15 PM  

MyRandomName: indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.

After 7 years no liberal can tell me which Bush policy is responsible for the real estate bubble. Not one.


Now pay close attention. I am going to use small words that even you can understand.

They allowed the ratings companies - which were essentially unregulated - to rate mortgage back securities at AAA status. The handsome return of this moderately risky investment created a huge surge in investment dollars being made available. With more and more money being fed into buying these securities the banks lowered their lending standards to increase volume. That meant more unqualified borrowers, nothing-down speculator, and lower rates. This demand and depressed rates caused property values to skyrocket - fueling even more speculation. The leverage here started working backwards with quick bankruptcy filings as prices dropped. The more it dropped, the more bankruptcies, the lower it dropped.

Proper regulation of the bogus ratings would have prevented the whole thing. Without that there would be far less money available, preventing the formation of bubble growing faster than the overall economy.
 
2014-02-28 09:35:00 PM  
I'm really enjoying all the liberals who suddenly realize that by when you do harm to a business --even by allowing customers to sue frivolously -- you do harm to its customers.

If you harm landlords, you harm tenants.

If you harm employers, you harm employees.

If you harm restaurants, you harm diners.
 
2014-02-28 11:11:12 PM  
To be fair, the abortion lobby makes it seem like abortion is perfectly safe with utterly no downsides despite the massive evidence to the contrary.
 
2014-02-28 11:31:01 PM  

mlorton: I'm really enjoying all the liberals who suddenly realize that by when you do harm to a business --even by allowing customers to sue frivolously -- you do harm to its customers.

If you harm landlords, you harm tenants.

If you harm employers, you harm employees.

If you harm restaurants, you harm diners.


If you impose minimum safety standards on a landlord who is mostly profit taking, yes, he may raise rent, but if he does so he risks losing tenants to other landlords.  In general, the extra safety the tenants gain through regulation greatly outway the minimal cost increase.  In practice, the landlord eats the cost in most market conditions.  Same for employees and diners.  I for one, don't want to go to a restaurant that isn't inspected and doesn't at least have some fear of a lawsuit if they give me food poisoning.

Sure, there are frivolous lawsuits out there, but the cost of filing a lawsuit balances that.  What is the solution?  Not allow lawsuits?  Maybe you could set up a system that examines the evidence of both sides of the claim before allowing it to go to trial?

Of course, we already do that, but don't let that get in the way of your indignant narrative.
 
2014-02-28 11:58:53 PM  
The best argument most women who have had abortions can come up with for nobody else to have an abortion, ever, has been "you're obviously not a mother."

They're a sad bunch.
 
2014-03-01 12:02:52 AM  

Terrible Old Man: To be fair, the abortion lobby makes it seem like abortion is perfectly safe with utterly no downsides despite the massive evidence to the contrary.


To be fair, you're making very brash statements while offering no substantiation whatsoever in support of them.

Also, it's "Big Abortion," not "the abortion lobby". Sorry, but we'll have to dock you a couple of points for that.
 
2014-03-01 12:04:40 AM  

SundaesChild: Bit'O'Gristle: The "pro-life" coalition is getting preposterously creative with its legislation. In Iowa, a new bill would allow women to sue their doctors for malpractice up to 10 years after their abortion-not because they suffered physical injury (those rare cases are already covered under existing malpractice law), but because they experienced regret.

Retarded law is retarded. Now, you're going to have women getting abortions just to cash in. Nice. This is not going to have the effect you think it will. And there is no way that this bill will pass. Why not put up a bill that says fathers can sue the mothers for emotional distress, for murdering their child without the father's input? If the mother gets an abortion, it's legal, if a father punches his pregnant woman in the stomach and she loses the baby, its murder. Not saying either is right, but why does the father, who put up 50 percent of the dna, have no say at all?

I had a gf long ago, who got an abortion behind my back, and killed my baby son. I would have taken him in myself and raised him, but no. I had no right to even KNOW she was pregnant, and no say in if the baby lived or died, but am expected to pay through the nose if she has it. That doesn't piss me off as much as i had 0 say at all, effectively, a non person until it's time to write the checks. Bullshiat.

Because it is not his body, and you can't force a woman to bear your child or abort it against her will.  How often does this need to be explained?


It needs to be explained in every abortion thread. Someone always tells this story. Not sure if it's the same guy and he's just too bitter to get it or if it's just trolls being trolls.
 
2014-03-01 12:11:18 AM  

DrBenway: Oldiron_79: Im ok with this. Its not banning or infringing on Roe V Wade in any way. Plus it will be fun to watch the libs that usually love lawyers pipe bombing lawyer offices for them sueing an abortion clinic out of existince.

If only your grasp of the English language were as powerful as your imagination.


"It would be fun to watch people bomb others for reasons and therefore."

What a sick puppy that one is.
 
2014-03-01 12:16:50 AM  

SundaesChild: Bit'O'Gristle: The "pro-life" coalition is getting preposterously creative with its legislation. In Iowa, a new bill would allow women to sue their doctors for malpractice up to 10 years after their abortion-not because they suffered physical injury (those rare cases are already covered under existing malpractice law), but because they experienced regret.

Retarded law is retarded. Now, you're going to have women getting abortions just to cash in. Nice. This is not going to have the effect you think it will. And there is no way that this bill will pass. Why not put up a bill that says fathers can sue the mothers for emotional distress, for murdering their child without the father's input? If the mother gets an abortion, it's legal, if a father punches his pregnant woman in the stomach and she loses the baby, its murder. Not saying either is right, but why does the father, who put up 50 percent of the dna, have no say at all?

I had a gf long ago, who got an abortion behind my back, and killed my baby son. I would have taken him in myself and raised him, but no. I had no right to even KNOW she was pregnant, and no say in if the baby lived or died, but am expected to pay through the nose if she has it. That doesn't piss me off as much as i had 0 say at all, effectively, a non person until it's time to write the checks. Bullshiat.

Because it is not his body, and you can't force a woman to bear your child or abort it against her will.  How often does this need to be explained?


And he also *does* have a say, at the time of conception. He can ask the woman what she would do, and if he doesn't agree, he can keep it in his pants and save it for somebody whose views *do* mesh with his own.
 
2014-03-01 12:28:25 AM  

madgonad: MyRandomName: indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.

After 7 years no liberal can tell me which Bush policy is responsible for the real estate bubble. Not one.

Now pay close attention. I am going to use small words that even you can understand.

They allowed the ratings companies - which were essentially unregulated - to rate mortgage back securities at AAA status. The handsome return of this moderately risky investment created a huge surge in investment dollars being made available. With more and more money being fed into buying these securities the banks lowered their lending standards to increase volume. That meant more unqualified borrowers, nothing-down speculator, and lower rates. This demand and depressed rates caused property values to skyrocket - fueling even more speculation. The leverage here started working backwards with quick bankruptcy filings as prices dropped. The more it dropped, the more bankruptcies, the lower it dropped.

Proper regulation of the bogus ratings would have prevented the whole thing. Without that there would be far less money available, preventing the formation of bubble growing faster than the overall economy.


The SEC also removed the net gain rule. Allow the big 5 investment banks to over-leverage. Only 3 of those banks survived.
 
2014-03-01 12:47:49 AM  
I give him strategic credit though.  If you can't win one way, win the other.  Some will probably wind up making use of the bill if it passes.
 
2014-03-01 12:52:12 AM  

Trivia Jockey: I only have a limited supply of punches to the face, but I'm saving one for this asshat.


Punch all you want!  We'll make more.
 
2014-03-01 12:59:09 AM  

Trivia Jockey: So, more government regulation and more medical malpractice liability?  The Republican party is in its third trimester of hypocrisy.


I believe "government small enough to fit inside your uterus" is the quote.
 
2014-03-01 01:20:09 AM  

Terrible Old Man: To be fair, the abortion lobby makes it seem like abortion is perfectly safe with utterly no downsides despite the massive evidence to the contrary.


Abortion is safer than giving birth.
 
2014-03-01 01:30:05 AM  

ciberido: Clearly Iowans have had one abortion too few.


SisterMaryElephant: I regret his Mom didn't have several abortions.  Can we sue?


*shakes foetal fist of rage*
 
2014-03-01 01:43:58 AM  

ciberido: Trivia Jockey: I only have a limited supply of punches to the face, but I'm saving one for this asshat.

Punch all you want!  We'll make more.


That reminds me -- I'm thinking about putting in a bid for the cock punch concession at the next GOP convention, and I'm looking for investors.
 
2014-03-01 02:05:12 AM  

MyRandomName: indylaw: Some day 10 years from now when we finally recover from the Bush financial collapse, we're going to look at the heady years of our flirtation with the lunatic right and it will be like waking up next to a fat woman in a hungover haze.

After 7 years no liberal can tell me which Bush policy is responsible for the real estate bubble. Not one.


Maybe not for the housing bubble.

But I can tell you which Bush policy is responsible for many thousands of cases of PTSD in OIF veterans...

Can we now sue for regret?
 
2014-03-01 06:33:08 AM  
Wow, the writer of tfa really is a moron...

By embracing a narrative of abortion regret-which the American Psychological Association does not recognize as a condition

Just because it isn't an APA acknowledged "condition" doesn't mean it isn't real. I regret buying a hdmi cable with my new graphics card without checking if my screen had an hdmi port. The regret is real, even if it isn't a "recognised" psychological issue.

and which the Guttmacher Institute characterizes as extremely rare-

So are people who die from faulty lightning rods. The rarity of an occurrence has no effect on legal issues.

Heartsill and co. are advancing the myth of the fickle woman who doesn't know her own mind. They're implying that in the moment of decision-making, a stranger still has a better grasp of a woman's psychology than she does.

And this is where it gets good. Where are they saying women don't know their own mind? By acknowledging that women sometimes feel regret? Katy is a moron with a cause. An idiot with an hammer seeing nails everywhere.

Doing something as trivial as ordering a new chair online I get a 14 day window in which to decide whether or not I actually like it or if I regret buying it. Within that time period I get to send it back and the store needs to give me a refund. Does this mean that the law maker decided that I was a fickle man who doesn't know his own mind? Or that the law maker knows the psychology of my mind better than I do? It doesn't. Then why would it mean that when talking about something important and life influencing like having an abortion?

The law isn't about women's mental states or actual regret or any pseudo-feminist outrage at assumed male motivations for the law. The man who wrote this law doesn't like abortion and wants to throw up barricades to people having them. It is as simple as that.
 
2014-03-01 08:50:46 AM  

Pichu0102: Okay, why are all the crazy States now acting in lockstep with stupid plans? It's like they're all synchronizing.


A shady organization called "ALEC".  Organizing evil for fun and profit.
 
2014-03-01 02:03:49 PM  

DerAppie: Wow, the writer of tfa really is a moron...

By embracing a narrative of abortion regret-which the American Psychological Association does not recognize as a condition

Just because it isn't an APA acknowledged "condition" doesn't mean it isn't real. I regret buying a hdmi cable with my new graphics card without checking if my screen had an hdmi port. The regret is real, even if it isn't a "recognised" psychological issue.

and which the Guttmacher Institute characterizes as extremely rare-

So are people who die from faulty lightning rods. The rarity of an occurrence has no effect on legal issues.

Heartsill and co. are advancing the myth of the fickle woman who doesn't know her own mind. They're implying that in the moment of decision-making, a stranger still has a better grasp of a woman's psychology than she does.

And this is where it gets good. Where are they saying women don't know their own mind? By acknowledging that women sometimes feel regret? Katy is a moron with a cause. An idiot with an hammer seeing nails everywhere.

Doing something as trivial as ordering a new chair online I get a 14 day window in which to decide whether or not I actually like it or if I regret buying it. Within that time period I get to send it back and the store needs to give me a refund. Does this mean that the law maker decided that I was a fickle man who doesn't know his own mind? Or that the law maker knows the psychology of my mind better than I do? It doesn't. Then why would it mean that when talking about something important and life influencing like having an abortion?

The law isn't about women's mental states or actual regret or any pseudo-feminist outrage at assumed male motivations for the law. The man who wrote this law doesn't like abortion and wants to throw up barricades to people having them. It is as simple as that.


The only barricade I see are the number of lawsuits forcing some clinics into bankruptcy assuming people make use of being allowed to sue abortion providers.

If however, nobody uses said allowance. There isn't a barricade.
 
2014-03-01 02:24:45 PM  

cwolf20: The only barricade I see are the number of lawsuits forcing some clinics into bankruptcy assuming people make use of being allowed to sue abortion providers.

If however, nobody uses said allowance. There isn't a barricade.


Doctors will be less eager to perform abortions if they can be sued at a later point in time for up to 10 years.

Just look at what economic trouble does to petty law suits. Economy goes down? News reporting on people getting sued 4 years after the fact goes up. Now add thousands of women who, having gotten an abortion at a previous time, feel the wallet lighten. The chances of a few of them going after the clinic for an easy pay day is is pretty substantial.
 
Displayed 132 of 132 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report