Originally posted by Raptor22
or they could he discussing the mother keeping the baby, adoption, foster homes etc...
That's what I'd guess.
For me, the words "delivery" and anything that ends in a dead infant is a non starter.
The right may be cucks, but they're right: Once you deliver a baby and alllow if to die, that is infantcide.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that.
And why would they wait until after a baby is born before discussing adoption? I'm confused. Is the implication that the woman wanted it, but since it was a threat to her during labor she might change her mind?
Originally posted by Silent Masterlol its honestly as simple as common sense, but here u go.
Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that.
"Adoption is a commonly used alternative strategy for family building. Although adoption is not a medical event per se, obstetrician–gynecologists may find themselves at the center of adoption issues because of their expertise in the assessment and management of infertility, pregnancy, and childbirth. There are several specific roles that the obstetrician–gynecologist may be asked to assume regarding adoption. Physicians commonly provide information, advice, and counsel, and they refer birth parents and prospective adoptive parents to adoption agencies. Sometimes, they are asked to provide information about prospective adoptive parents to adoption agencies. Additionally, the obstetrician may deliver the infant to be relinquished."
Are there any other stupid questions u would like me to help u out with today bud?
Originally posted by Surturnone of which has anything to do with the incredibly stupid question posed to me by silent thatl i was answering, which was -
All of that sounds like it would be planned in advance though, as opposed to discussing it once you've confirmed the baby is alive.
"Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that."
As for ur point. Terminating it also sounds like it would be planned in advance, yet in ur opinion thats what they would be discussing.
Also why would they want to terminate it at that point in the hypothetical in ur quote. It flat out says it would be resuscitated if the mother and family desires. Why would the mother/family decide to resuscitate it if they wanted it terminated?
Originally posted by Raptor22
none of which has anything to do with the incredibly stupid question posed to me by silent thatl i was answering, which was -"Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that."
As for ur point. Terminating it also sounds like it would be planned in advance, yet in ur opinion thats what they would be discussing.
Also why would they want to terminate it at that point in the hypothetical in ur quote. It flat out says it would be resuscitated if the mother and family desires. Why would the mother/family decide to resuscitate it if they wanted it terminated?
I don't know why they'd want to terminate it it then. I asked for an alternative explanation and so far nobody has given one that makes sense.
Originally posted by Surtur
All of that sounds like it would be planned in advance though, as opposed to discussing it once you've confirmed the baby is alive.
He is purposely misconstruing my point. it's one of his favorite tactics.
The context of the discussion makes it obvious that we aren't talking about prenatal advice.
Originally posted by Raptor22👆
none of which has anything to do with the incredibly stupid question posed to me by silent thatl i was answering, which was -"Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that."
As for ur point. Terminating it also sounds like it would be planned in advance, yet in ur opinion thats what they would be discussing.
Also why would they want to terminate it at that point in the hypothetical in ur quote. It flat out says it would be resuscitated if the mother and family desires. Why would the mother/family decide to resuscitate it if they wanted it terminated?
Originally posted by Raptor22
none of which has anything to do with the incredibly stupid question posed to me by silent thatl i was answering, which was -"Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that."
As for ur point. Terminating it also sounds like it would be planned in advance, yet in ur opinion thats what they would be discussing.
Also why would they want to terminate it at that point in the hypothetical in ur quote. It flat out says it would be resuscitated if the mother and family desires. Why would the mother/family decide to resuscitate it if they wanted it terminated?
Maybe because some Doctor's think it IS their jobs to SAVE LIVES!
This kind if FILTH is what happens when you let POLITICIANS decide how MEDICAL Practice and or Science WORK!!!!!!!
Originally posted by Surturu cant be serious right now. So in the scenerio where the mother/family decide to resuscitate their baby, then have a discussion with her doctor. U think it makes sense for them to be discussing terminating the baby they just resuscitated, and u think it makes no sense for them to be discussing possible alternatives such as adoption, foster homes etc... for the baby they just decided to resuscitate?
I don't know why they'd want to terminate it it then. I asked for an alternative explanation and so far nobody has given one that makes sense.
Originally posted by Silent Masterinteresting claim. I assume u have some proof of this.
He is purposely misconstruing my point. it's one of his favorite tactics.The context of the discussion makes it obvious that we aren't talking about prenatal advice.
So sounding dumb wasnt enough, ur going to go for dumb and pathetic now? Go big or go home i guess.
I clearly wasnt talking about prenatal advice either, since, u know, the entire discussion revolves around a hypothetical scenerio where the infant is already delivered. Every comment has been referencing a discussion happening post natal, the link provided discusses a doctors role in the adoption procedure both pre and post natal, and the part i quoted even talks about the freaking dr occasionally personally delivering the infant to the adoptive parents (which would happen post natal). But in ur opinion they wouldnt discuss adoption with the parent because thats what counselors are for. Lol.
Your words. No misconstruing-
"Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that."
I disproved that stupid notion then u try to muddy the waters with your nah i wasnt talking pre natal. No shit, nobody was. Ur attempt at obfuscation was as transparent as it was pathetic.
U ever hear the saying "its better to keep silent and have someone think your stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt". Its good advice. Take a cue from ur screen name and try it sometime.
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]According to the Law. YES. That Is what is Now Legal in some states.
But don't worry. They will soon make Post Birth Abortions Legal Too. [/B]
Honestly, I'm about as triggered that whenever New York does something, other states have to follow suit.
It's like New York is the Don, that every state has to prostrate themselves before.
Originally posted by Silent Mastergod ur dense. No u fool the first claim u made in the post.
Do I have proof of what I meant? yeah. I just told you what I meant. me >>>>>>>>>>>>> anybody else in terms of knowing my point.
"He is purposely misconstruing my point. it's one of his favorite tactics."
Maybe show a few times of me doing it, maybe enough to warrant it being a favorite tactic of mine like u claimed. Also some proof of me purposely doing it would be nice too since that was also part of ur claim. Unless it was just another one of ur baseless claims.
A few words on ur part about me dismantling this-
"Why would a physician be talking about adpotion etc with a patient, that isn't their job. hospitals have counselors for that."
-debacle of a post for a 2nd time would be nice as well. Or are u just going to ignore it and scurry away with ur tail between ur legs?
Originally posted by Silent Mastergotcha. More worthless drivel and baseless assertions from u. Ill remember this thread next time i see u ask h1 or josh or anyone else to provide proof of one of their claims, back up a statement, call them a hypocrite or troll. Since that basically makes up the majority of ur schtick this should be quite entertaining.
Why would I waste my time searching your posting history?
Still no response for the rest? Tail between the legs it is. Id say i expected more from u, but we both know thats not true.