Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


ShibsStories -> Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 3:50:09 PM)

Be warned, it's heartbreaking.

I wanted to cry for this poor woman who WANTED her baby so badly, but due to complications had to choose to terminate.
I find it so sad that the doctors and nurses at the clinic are so very against what the law is forcing them to do, but are still left with no choice but to make women suffer even more through such an agonizing time.
How can someone see anything ok with a law that not only makes a difficult choice harder for the women, but forces medical staff to do something they clearly find wrong and unethical?
Every doctor and nurse shown in this story comes across as reluctant, apologetic, or ashamed.

I don't want this war against women to fade in the background.
I want these cruelties in everyone's face, so no one can plead ignorance, or pretend it has nothing to do with them.
This is not some "greater good" thing- these are individuals suffering.

http://www.texasobserver.org/cover-story/the-right-not-to-know

From the article:

Halfway through my pregnancy, I learned that my baby was ill. Profoundly so. My doctor gave us the news kindly, but still, my husband and I weren’t prepared. Just a few minutes earlier, we’d been smiling giddily at fellow expectant parents as we waited for the doctor to see us. In a sonography room smelling faintly of lemongrass, I’d just had gel rubbed on my stomach, just seen blots on the screen become tiny hands. For a brief, exultant moment, we’d seen our son—a brother for our 2-year-old girl.

Yet now my doctor was looking grim and, with chair pulled close, was speaking of alarming things. “I’m worried about your baby’s head shape,” she said. “I want you to see a specialist—now.”

My husband looked angry, and maybe I did too, but it was astonishment more than anger. Ours was a profound disbelief that something so bad might happen to people who think themselves charmed. We already had one healthy child and had expected good fortune to give us two.

Instead, before I’d even known I was pregnant, a molecular flaw had determined that our son’s brain, spine and legs wouldn’t develop correctly. If he were to make it to term—something our doctor couldn’t guarantee—he’d need a lifetime of medical care. From the moment he was born, my doctor told us, our son would suffer greatly.

So, softly, haltingly, my husband asked about termination. The doctor shot me a glance that said: Are you okay to hear this now? I nodded, clenched my fists and focused on the cowboy boots beneath her scrubs.

She started with an apology, saying that despite being responsible for both my baby’s care and my own, she couldn’t take us to the final stop. The hospital with which she’s affiliated is Catholic and doesn’t allow abortion. It felt like a physical blow to hear that word, abortion, in the context of our much-wanted child. Abortion is a topic that never seemed relevant to me; it was something we read about in the news or talked about politically; it always remained at a safe distance. Yet now its ugly fist was hammering on my chest.

My doctor went on to tell us that, just two weeks prior, a new Texas law had come into effect requiring that women wait an extra 24 hours before having the procedure. Moreover, Austin has only one clinic providing second-trimester terminations, and that clinic might have a long wait. “Time is not on your side,” my doctor emphasized gently. For this reason, she urged us to seek a specialist’s second opinion the moment we left her office. “They’re ready for you,” she said, before ushering us out the back door to shield us from the smiling patients in the waiting room.

The specialist confirmed what our doctor had feared and sketched a few diagrams to explain. He hastily drew cells growing askew, quick pen-strokes to show when and where life becomes blighted. How simple, I thought, to just undraw those lines and restore my child to wholeness. But this businesslike man was no magician, and our bleak choices still lay ahead.

Next a genetic counselor explained our options and told us how abortions work. There was that word again, and how jarring and out-of-place it sounded. Weren’t we those practical types who got married in their 30s, bought a house, rescued a dog, then, with sensible timing, had one child followed by another? Weren’t we so predictable that friends forecast our milestones on Facebook? Suddenly something was wrong with our story, because something was wrong with our son. Something so wrong that any choice we made would unyoke us forever from our ordinary life.

Our options were grim. We learned that we could bring our baby into the world, then work hard to palliate his pain, or we could alleviate that pain by choosing to “interrupt” my pregnancy. The surgical procedure our counselor described was horrific, but then so seemed our son’s prospects in life. In those dark moments we had to make a choice, so we picked the one that seemed slightly less cruel. Before that moment, I’d never known how viscerally one might feel dread.

That afternoon, my husband and I drove through a spaghetti of highways, one of which led us to a nondescript building between a Wendy’s and a Brake Check. This was Planned Parenthood’s surgical center, part of the organization constantly in the news thanks to America’s polarizing cultural debates. On that very day, Planned Parenthood’s name was on the cover of newspapers because of a funding controversy with the Susan G. Komen Foundation. These clinics, and the controversial services they provide, are always under scrutiny. The security cameras, the double-doors and the restricted walkways assured us of that fact.

While my husband filled out the paperwork, I sat on a hard chair in the spartan reception area and observed my fellow patients. I was the oldest woman in the waiting room, as well as the only one who was visibly pregnant. The other patients either sat with their mothers or, enigmatically, alone. Together we solemnly marked time, waiting for our turn behind the doors.

Eventually we were called back, not to a consulting room, but to another holding area. There, the staff asked my husband to wait while a counselor spoke to me in private. My husband sat down. Posters above him warned women about signs of domestic abuse.

Meanwhile, I was enclosed with a cheerful-looking counselor who had colored hair and a piercing in her nose. Feeling like someone who’d stumbled into the wrong room, I told her between choked sobs how we’d arrived at her clinic on the highway.

“I am so sorry,” the young woman said with compassion, and nudged the tissues closer. Then, after a moment’s pause, she told me reluctantly about the new Texas sonogram law that had just come into effect. I’d already heard about it. The law passed last spring but had been suppressed by legal injunction until two weeks earlier.

My counselor said that the law required me to have another ultrasound that day, and that I was legally obligated to hear a doctor describe my baby. I’d then have to wait 24 hours before coming back for the procedure. She said that I could either see the sonogram or listen to the baby’s heartbeat, adding weakly that this choice was mine.

“I don’t want to have to do this at all,” I told her. “I’m doing this to prevent my baby’s suffering. I don’t want another sonogram when I’ve already had two today. I don’t want to hear a description of the life I’m about to end. Please,” I said, “I can’t take any more pain.” I confess that I don’t know why I said that. I knew it was fait accompli. The counselor could no more change the government requirement than I could. Yet here was a superfluous layer of torment piled upon an already horrific day, and I wanted this woman to know it.

“We have no choice but to comply with the law,” she said, adding that these requirements were not what Planned Parenthood would choose. Then, with a warmth that belied the materials in her hand, she took me through the rules. First, she told me about my rights regarding child support and adoption. Then she gave me information about the state inspection of the clinic. She offered me a pamphlet called A Woman’s Right to Know, saying that it described my baby’s development as well as how the abortion procedure works. She gave me a list of agencies that offer free sonograms, and which, by law, have no affiliation with abortion providers. Finally, after having me sign reams of paper, she led me to the doctor who’d perform the sonography, and later the termination.

The doctor and nurse were professional and kind, and it was clear that they understood our sorrow. They too apologized for what they had to do next. For the third time that day, I exposed my stomach to an ultrasound machine, and we saw images of our sick child forming in blurred outlines on the screen.

“I’m so sorry that I have to do this,” the doctor told us, “but if I don’t, I can lose my license.” Before he could even start to describe our baby, I began to sob until I could barely breathe. Somewhere, a nurse cranked up the volume on a radio, allowing the inane pronouncements of a DJ to dull the doctor’s voice. Still, despite the noise, I heard him. His unwelcome words echoed off sterile walls while I, trapped on a bed, my feet in stirrups, twisted away from his voice.


“Here I see a well-developed diaphragm and here I see four healthy chambers of the heart...”

I closed my eyes and waited for it to end, as one waits for the car to stop rolling at the end of a terrible accident.

When the description was finally over, the doctor held up a script and said he was legally obliged to read me information provided by the state. It was about the health dangers of having an abortion, the risks of infection or hemorrhage, the potential for infertility and my increased chance of getting breast cancer. I was reminded that medical benefits may be available for my maternity care and that the baby’s father was liable to provide support, whether he’d agreed to pay for the abortion or not.

Abortion. Abortion. Abortion. That ugly word, to pepper that ugly statement, to embody the futility of all we’d just endured. Futile because we’d already made our heart-breaking decision about our child, and no incursion into our private world could change it.

Finally, my doctor folded the paper and put it away: “When you come back in 24 hours, the legal side is over. Then we’ll care for you and give you the information you need in the way we think is right.”

A day later, we returned to the clinic for the surgery that had us saying goodbye to our son. On top of their medical duties, the nurses also held my hand and wiped my eyes and let me cry like a child in their arms.




Aylee -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 5:08:42 PM)

As a person that has had two high risk pregnancies, I think that this story is bullshit.

ETA:

For my pregnancies we consulted so many different doctors at so many different times and for so many different reasons. None of this sounds familiar. This just does not seem on the up and up. Unless we are talking about malpractice.




farglebargle -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 5:18:22 PM)

Carolyn Jones is a freelance writer based in Austin. Read more of her work at www.carolynjoneswrites.com.


You could -- reach out to her and clarify your concerns...




Iamsemisweet -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 6:42:17 PM)

This story made me sick. The mother fuckers who passed this can blather on about the "mother's right to know" all they want. This law was intended to be punitive.




Aylee -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 6:46:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

This story made me sick. The mother fuckers who passed this can blather on about the "mother's right to know" all they want. This law was intended to be punitive.


Yep. The story made me sick to.

That is NOT what happens in a high risk pregnancy.

It really pisses me off that it would be trivialized.





LadyHibiscus -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 6:55:01 PM)

This isn't a high risk pregnancy, it's a person with a profoundly ill fetus. It MIGHT have been high risk if she had carried the little guy to term--or it might have been a normal pregnancy with a sad outcome.




SpiritedRadiance -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 6:57:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

This story made me sick. The mother fuckers who passed this can blather on about the "mother's right to know" all they want. This law was intended to be punitive.


Yep. The story made me sick to.

That is NOT what happens in a high risk pregnancy.

It really pisses me off that it would be trivialized.





Fetus has disease that causes issues with growth. =/ high risk pregnancy

Honesty you had two, you should have some knowledge on what the difference is between you having a high risk and your child being born with a disease...




Iamsemisweet -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 7:31:01 PM)

A high risk pregnancy would be very stressful, and I am glad you and your children are healthy, Aylee. That is not what this woman's story is about. The fetus was severely deformed, based on her description.




angelikaJ -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 8:07:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

A high risk pregnancy would be very stressful, and I am glad you and your children are healthy, Aylee. That is not what this woman's story is about. The fetus was severely deformed, based on her description.


"Instead, before I’d even known I was pregnant, a molecular flaw had determined that our son’s brain, spine and legs wouldn’t develop correctly. If he were to make it to term—something our doctor couldn’t guarantee—he’d need a lifetime of medical care. From the moment he was born, my doctor told us, our son would suffer greatly."

"The specialist confirmed what our doctor had feared and sketched a few diagrams to explain. He hastily drew cells growing askew, quick pen-strokes to show when and where life becomes blighted. How simple, I thought, to just undraw those lines and restore my child to wholeness. But this businesslike man was no magician, and our bleak choices still lay ahead."





DomKen -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/21/2012 9:54:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

This story made me sick. The mother fuckers who passed this can blather on about the "mother's right to know" all they want. This law was intended to be punitive.


Yep. The story made me sick to.

That is NOT what happens in a high risk pregnancy.

It really pisses me off that it would be trivialized.



You did read the article right?

The part where it was a normal pregnancy until the sonogram detected a severe abnormality?

When you read the part about it being a high risk pregnancy were you asleep or on some sort of hallucinogen?




Aylee -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 12:46:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance


Fetus has disease that causes issues with growth. =/ high risk pregnancy


How do you define high risk then?

When my babies stopped growing they certainly considered that high risk.

Two babies with IUGR (intrauterine growth restriction) that had to be born early. By the way, what disease did the baby have in the story?

quote:

Honesty you had two, you should have some knowledge on what the difference is between you having a high risk and your child being born with a disease...


You mean like the 25% chance of CF?

Or when the baby stopped growing?

Or when the baby stopped breathing?

Or. . . what a minute. . . what disease? The woman never had an amniocenteses.

In fact, according to the story, there was a disease diagnosed before she saw the genetic counselor. (Not fisking likely, folks.)

Actually. . . the head was mis-shaped. Maybe. We never know what was the reason.




tweakabelle -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 12:53:00 AM)

Yes. This report is heartbreaking. Even more so because it's so unnecessary. There is no reason to subject mothers to such torture. This regime was specifically designed to deter mothers choosing to abort under any circumstances. So, I'm sorry to say, this is a successful outcome from the perspective of those who chose to legislate this regime and their supporters.

It's revealing that the response of supporters of the politics that created this 'successful outcome' (from their perspective) are so alarmed by the impact of the 'successful outcome' being reported that their response is a blanket denial, and a distasteful impugning of the motives of the unfortunate woman at the centre of the story.

One is tempted to conclude that, deep down, even they realise what a monster they have created - and they don't want to accept responsibility for it. And if they can't even accept a written report of a successful outcome of their machinations, just imagine the sheer hell they are forcing on thousands of reluctant mothers who have no choice but to live with the consequences of their blind dogmatism.




GrandPoobah -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 2:35:07 AM)

Let there be no illusion that these laws, and all the others like them being proposed, have nothing whatsoever to do with anything other than infliction religious beliefs upon others. A "mother's right to know" is nothing more than "I don't happen to agree with your choices, so I'm going to use my power to legally make it impossible for you to have those choices." In other words, these folks are intentionally turning the US into Afghanistan prior to 2002. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE beyond some minor clothing details.




farglebargle -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 4:16:35 AM)

You know how in the South, a slaves' master determined who she was bred with.

There you go.




Iamsemisweet -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 5:47:28 AM)

Let's say you are right, aylee, and the whole story is fiction. Is such a scenario impossible under this law? And what is the purpose, other than being punitive? Is there some reason to believe that a woman, who in many cases has just fought her way through a group of protestors waving pictures of dead fetuses in her face, is going to change her mind about getting an abortion based on a sonogram? Isn't one of the arguments against abortion that it traumatizes women because of the guilt? Isn't this law designed to increase that guilt and trauma?




farglebargle -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 5:55:47 AM)

Carolyn Jones is a freelance writer based in Austin. Read more of her work at www.carolynjoneswrites.com.


If there's any doubt about the story, anyone can reach out to her and clarify their concerns.




angelikaJ -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 6:17:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance


Fetus has disease that causes issues with growth. =/ high risk pregnancy


How do you define high risk then?

When my babies stopped growing they certainly considered that high risk.

Two babies with IUGR (intrauterine growth restriction) that had to be born early. By the way, what disease did the baby have in the story?

quote:

Honesty you had two, you should have some knowledge on what the difference is between you having a high risk and your child being born with a disease...


You mean like the 25% chance of CF?

Or when the baby stopped growing?

Or when the baby stopped breathing?

Or. . . what a minute. . . what disease? The woman never had an amniocenteses.

In fact, according to the story, there was a disease diagnosed before she saw the genetic counselor. (Not fisking likely, folks.)

Actually. . . the head was mis-shaped. Maybe. We never know what was the reason.


It wasn't maybe misshaped, it was misshaped in a particular way that gave a clear indication that something was terribly wrong.

No, her physician spotted the abnormality and then referred her to a specialist.
The specialist confirmed what the doctor said.
Then she saw the genetics counselor.

The diagnosis had already been made/confirmed at that point.
"Instead, before I’d even known I was pregnant, a molecular flaw had determined that our son’s brain, spine and legs wouldn’t develop correctly. If he were to make it to term—something our doctor couldn’t guarantee—he’d need a lifetime of medical care. From the moment he was born, my doctor told us, our son would suffer greatly."

"The specialist confirmed what our doctor had feared and sketched a few diagrams to explain. He hastily drew cells growing askew, quick pen-strokes to show when and where life becomes blighted. How simple, I thought, to just undraw those lines and restore my child to wholeness. But this businesslike man was no magician, and our bleak choices still lay ahead."




LaTigresse -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 11:11:55 AM)

I can only say, how much I appreciate the people at that Planned Parenthood for being as compassionate and caring as they could be and still comply with an asinine law.

Kudos to them.




hlen5 -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/22/2012 1:14:49 PM)

What a total horseshit law. A pox on the POS that nightmared it up.

ETA: But there's no assualt on a woman's right of self-determination, nope, no siree.......




tazzygirl -> RE: Testimony from a victim of Texas's new sonogram law (3/27/2012 5:15:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

As a person that has had two high risk pregnancies, I think that this story is bullshit.

ETA:

For my pregnancies we consulted so many different doctors at so many different times and for so many different reasons. None of this sounds familiar. This just does not seem on the up and up. Unless we are talking about malpractice.


I posted this on another thread, didnt realize it was here too. But since I stepped into it, I will respond.

For your pregnancy, which was IUGR, you would see many physicians and specialists.

Findings related to anomalies of the skull and skull shape.
Brachycephaly is a deformity of the head in which the skull appears to round, and this is manifested with a short occipitofrontal distance. This is measured by the cephalic index, which is the ratio of the biparietal diameter over the occipital frontal diameter, and normal values should be between 75 an 85 percent. If the cephalic index is greater than 85 percent, then fetus has brachycephaly. If the head is too flat side to side, the condition is referred to as “scaphocephaly”, something that we can find in fetuses that have in-utero crowding or premature rupture of the membranes for instance. This finding is not related to aneuploidy. Brachycephaly is a reliable indicator in children with trisomy 21 but it is a less reliable criterion in fetuses.

A strawberry head is a head that has a deformity with narrowing of the frontal region and flattening of the occipital region. Strawberry heads are markers for trisomy 18 and they have not been found, at least yet, without other associated anomalies.


These are but 2 problems with fetal brain development... there are many more. And, yes, I have seen patients get in within an hour to see a specialist based upon a simple phone call from one of the L&D nurses with a referral from the attending obstetrician. Since she stated she was in the middle of her pregnancy, I assume she was between 4 and 5 months, making time essential in the diagnosis and decisions for treatment.

From a medical point of view, her story is extremely plausible.

Btw, I hope your wee ones are doing well!




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.296875E-02