I'm curious if those on this thread that felt this was not a 'sticky' issue for physicians and medical facilities, still think this issue is as cut and dry as some wanted to make it out.


https://www.ksat.com/news/politics/2022/07/15/texas-hospitals-delaying-care-over-abortion-law-letter-says/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=snd&utm_content=ksat12

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/02/1109557947/some-abortions-are-necessary-to-save-the-life-of-a-patient

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/doctors-fearing-legal-blowback-are-denying-life-saving-abortions

Macarthur said:

---

I'm curious if those on this thread that felt this was not a 'sticky' issue for physicians and medical facilities, still think this issue is as cut and dry as some wanted to make it out.


https://www.ksat.com/news/politics/2022/07/15/texas-hospitals-delaying-care-over-abortion-law-letter-says/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=snd&utm_content=ksat12

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/02/1109557947/some-abortions-are-necessary-to-save-the-life-of-a-patient

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/doctors-fearing-legal-blowback-are-denying-life-saving-abortions

---

Sounds like the admins should be fired considering how much lead time they've had since dobbs was filed, heard, and the opinion was leaked. Probably should fire legal as well, unless of course it was strategy that they didn't come up with alternatives as a way to punt and whine to news stations to pressure politicians. With how quick pro-abortion doctors break hipaa to score points I'm sure they're smart enough to figure it out.

Yeah, so you think all the admins and legal in healthcare are just worrying for no reason?

Oh no, a woman in Kentucky had to drive across a river to Indiana because some murderers with an MD were afraid of their legal protection/safety if they killed her child, the horror!

Many nazi death camp prison guards lived long, happy lives with no regrets, but kept their actions secret, ya know, 'right to privacy' and all. Just fyi.

Macarthur said:

---

Yeah, so you think all the admins and legal in healthcare are just worrying for no reason?

---

You could at least read what I said. It's their job to game plan for this. This isn't exactly a fringe issue. Nothing stopped them from reaching out to the AG's office to outline their course of action and ask for a blessing or guidance. People in my industry deal with regulators all the time and pick up the phone and call when they're uncertain to cover their butts. I'm 100% sure hospitals do too so why didn't they in these cases?

What's the old saying? A lack of planning on your part doesn't constitute and emergency on mine?

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

It's already changed from the folks that were just saying a few weeks ago, 'hey, nothing to worry about, this is just a states issue.' Now those same people are working overtime to get total bans and even prosecute for those that cross state lines.

Macarthur said:

---

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

---

Correct, that is my assumption. And the reason why is that if that happened it would be the headline and feature prominently in the article with the letters included for proof. But we don't have any of that, just like we don't have names so it seems to be a pretty sound assumption that it didn't happen and it doesn't exist.

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

---

Correct, that is my assumption. And the reason why is that if that happened it would be the headline and feature prominently in the article with the letters included for proof. But we don't have any of that, just like we don't have names so it seems to be a pretty sound assumption that it didn't happen and it doesn't exist.

---

So, are you saying the Texas Medical Association is lying?

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-abortion-law-hospitals-clinic-medication-17307401.php?t=61d7f0b189

Yeah it's a state issue so states can ban and prosecute people who break their laws. You act like it being a state issue precludes that.

States prosecuting people for things done in other states was what was meant, but you knew that.

If they're breaking a state law it doesn't matter. It's still a state issue. You don't like it? Change the law or move to a state that matches your views.

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

I guarantee you that if I was a patient who knew that I wasn't being treated because they were concerned about being sued or acting illegally due to the ramifications of Roe, I would be a) on the phone with lawyers in Texas who specifically worked on this bill and others like it because I know them but B) SCREAMING EVERYWHERE THAT COULD HEAR ME NOT TO GO TO THIS DOCTOR/HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY ARE REFUSING TO TREAT ME. BY NAME. not "ooh the boogeyman republicans won't allow the nice defenseless doctor to help me"

but it's not happening, so no one is naming names.

---

Swimmer, are you a lawyer or a medical provider?

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

---

Correct, that is my assumption. And the reason why is that if that happened it would be the headline and feature prominently in the article with the letters included for proof. But we don't have any of that, just like we don't have names so it seems to be a pretty sound assumption that it didn't happen and it doesn't exist.

---

So, are you saying the Texas Medical Association is lying?

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-abortion-law-hospitals-clinic-medication-17307401.php?t=61d7f0b189

---

Like swimmer said: post the receipts! Should be real easy to document policy changes and communication with regulators. Should be able to show revisions and internal discussions since the leaked draft. It ain't hard to prove.

---

Which regulators, specifically, are the ones making these decisions? Because it seems like this is all going through Paxton and he's a maniac.

GQaggie said:

---

I work for a Christian hospital which does not provide elective abortion services, a policy in existence long before the recent Dobbs case. We routinely perform ectopic pregnancy removals, and that will not change. This is nonsense fear mongering.

---

How about the situations in Malta and Ireland where the amniotic sac ruptures, the fetus is non viable but still has a heartbeat? In any place with a heartbeat law you essentially have to wait for the woman to become septic.

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

---

Correct, that is my assumption. And the reason why is that if that happened it would be the headline and feature prominently in the article with the letters included for proof. But we don't have any of that, just like we don't have names so it seems to be a pretty sound assumption that it didn't happen and it doesn't exist.

---

So, are you saying the Texas Medical Association is lying?

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-abortion-law-hospitals-clinic-medication-17307401.php?t=61d7f0b189

---

Like swimmer said: post the receipts! Should be real easy to document policy changes and communication with regulators. Should be able to show revisions and internal discussions since the leaked draft. It ain't hard to prove.

---

Which regulators, specifically, are the ones making these decisions? Because it seems like this is all going through Paxton and he's a maniac.

---

I specifically said earlier in the thread they had lots of time to contact the AGs office for guidance or blessing. This isn't sneaking up on anyone with a brain, hence fire the admins and lawyers.

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

I guarantee you that if I was a patient who knew that I wasn't being treated because they were concerned about being sued or acting illegally due to the ramifications of Roe, I would be a) on the phone with lawyers in Texas who specifically worked on this bill and others like it because I know them but B) SCREAMING EVERYWHERE THAT COULD HEAR ME NOT TO GO TO THIS DOCTOR/HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY ARE REFUSING TO TREAT ME. BY NAME. not "ooh the boogeyman republicans won't allow the nice defenseless doctor to help me"

but it's not happening, so no one is naming names.

---

Swimmer, are you a lawyer or a medical provider?

---

Is her opinion as a woman not good enough man?

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/07/16/abortion-miscarriage-ectopic-pregnancy-care/

This is way more complicated than she assumes. Which is why I asked.

nortex97 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

I guarantee you that if I was a patient who knew that I wasn't being treated because they were concerned about being sued or acting illegally due to the ramifications of Roe, I would be a) on the phone with lawyers in Texas who specifically worked on this bill and others like it because I know them but B) SCREAMING EVERYWHERE THAT COULD HEAR ME NOT TO GO TO THIS DOCTOR/HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY ARE REFUSING TO TREAT ME. BY NAME. not "ooh the boogeyman republicans won't allow the nice defenseless doctor to help me"

but it's not happening, so no one is naming names.

---

Swimmer, are you a lawyer or a medical provider?

---

Is her opinion as a woman not good enough man?

---

Not unless she is a tenured academic. Titles are sooooo important to 'those people.'

---

Rent. Free.

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

---

Correct, that is my assumption. And the reason why is that if that happened it would be the headline and feature prominently in the article with the letters included for proof. But we don't have any of that, just like we don't have names so it seems to be a pretty sound assumption that it didn't happen and it doesn't exist.

---

So, are you saying the Texas Medical Association is lying?

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-abortion-law-hospitals-clinic-medication-17307401.php?t=61d7f0b189

---

Like swimmer said: post the receipts! Should be real easy to document policy changes and communication with regulators. Should be able to show revisions and internal discussions since the leaked draft. It ain't hard to prove.

---

Which regulators, specifically, are the ones making these decisions? Because it seems like this is all going through Paxton and he's a maniac.

---

I specifically said earlier in the thread they had lots of time to contact the AGs office for guidance or blessing. This isn't sneaking up on anyone with a brain, hence fire the admins and lawyers.

---

Medicine is not cut-and-dry. You don't always have time to wait for a lawyer to return to his office to offer expert opinion on a medical matter. And legal issues can emerge beyond a simple yes-or-no regarding a procedure. Especially once you start involving multiple specialties and other individuals like pharmacists, who work under their own guidelines and regulations.

I have access to the lawyers who wrote the bill in Texas. I've posted the text of the law in this very thread. Then you question how I'd personally react if I was not receiving adequate medical attention?

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

AGC said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

I think it's an assumption on your part they did not. Maybe they did and the messaging they are getting now versus earlier has changed.

---

Correct, that is my assumption. And the reason why is that if that happened it would be the headline and feature prominently in the article with the letters included for proof. But we don't have any of that, just like we don't have names so it seems to be a pretty sound assumption that it didn't happen and it doesn't exist.

---

So, are you saying the Texas Medical Association is lying?

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Texas-abortion-law-hospitals-clinic-medication-17307401.php?t=61d7f0b189

---

Like swimmer said: post the receipts! Should be real easy to document policy changes and communication with regulators. Should be able to show revisions and internal discussions since the leaked draft. It ain't hard to prove.

---

Which regulators, specifically, are the ones making these decisions? Because it seems like this is all going through Paxton and he's a maniac.

---

I specifically said earlier in the thread they had lots of time to contact the AGs office for guidance or blessing. This isn't sneaking up on anyone with a brain, hence fire the admins and lawyers.

---

Medicine is not cut-and-dry. You don't always have time to wait for a lawyer to return to his office to offer expert opinion on a medical matter. And legal issues can emerge beyond a simple yes-or-no regarding a procedure. Especially once you start involving multiple specialties and other individuals like pharmacists, who work under their own guidelines and regulations.

---

We're going in circles here. When was Texas' law drafted and signed? When was dobbs filed? When was it heard? When did the draft leak? When did it come down?

How on God's green earth did no one in these medical circles discuss this before the actual decision? You and MacArthur have yet to answer this very simple question. The reason why is because the people who claim to be Very Worried About Women's Health (tm) aren't. They're keyboard warriors haggling over definitions and minutia. And they're largely incompetent because they've always relied on higher authorities to cover for them.

You seem to think this is the only profession that puts laws on multiple organizations that work together. I can assure you that's far from the case and many other highly regulated professions deal with these issues. I have a compliance department I deal with, regulatory agencies that I talk to, auditors, and of course we are a vendor of sorts to the government so we have lots of interaction with them. And my work is highly ambiguous too, it's not cut and dry. I meet with people in my industry up and down the supply chain once a year in forums to discuss impending regulations and how to handle them.

If there's no plan then it's just gross incompetence. They specialize in the ins and outs of procedures because they deal with private insurance, Medicare, and medicaid. Everything is coded. There was plenty of time to plan for this.

Sapper Redux said:

---

Okay, so you're not actually addressing my point or answering my question. And running afoul of the law in this case means serious prison time (up to murder in some states) and/or the complete loss of livelihood and license. It's not a game or something you can just wing and hope Ken ****ing Paxton understands.

---

Let's try this a different way. You've had all semester to study hard and get extra credit but didn't. You never went to office hours, didn't email the prof, didn't raise your hand in class, etc. You've got a 69 after the final. Whose fault is it? The professors? Or yours? That's where we're at.

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

What compliance department has Texas created for dealing with questions around abortion law? Serious question, because I haven't heard of one.

The fact with medicine is that even if you have prepared, the response can still be chaotic depending on how the state chooses to enforce the law and what it emphasizes. These laws never cover the ambiguity in medicine, but unlike other issues where the judgement of the doctor is key, we see politicians speaking very broadly about prosecuting doctors who even appear to violate the law. That has a chilling effect.

---

This is an emblematic response of someone who has no accountability. "They didn't tell me what to do so it didn't get done." Zero problem solving ability or ability to think outside the box. That doesn't fly in my industry as a defense; that was my and swimmer's whole point. If you've tried to contact the AG put up your email and call logs for all to see. Let's see where you tried to talk to someone instead of whining anonymously after all this wasted time. This wasn't a surprise after the leaked draft. You had months to handle it.

This industry can thread the needle on insurance coding to maximize profits and get COVID reimbursements but all of a sudden they can't decide how to handle certain procedures? That's bull****; they know what they'd put if they were getting paid. Just create a new code.

---

Of all the problems in healthcare today, in regulations, reimbursement, access etc., it's amazing someone with a college degree (LOL) would assert that 'my worry is some doctors might not kill a child because they are confused now about their legal status if they do so.' The blinders required to even assert this, baldly with no real evidence, are stupefying.