Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

zbdent

(35,392 posts)
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:42 PM Feb 2012

a thought that occurred to me about the "ultrasound" before the abortion ...

I wonder how many times the "ultrasound technician" would be unavailable the day that a woman came in for an abortion (which she had already had a heart-wrenching soul-searching over anyway).

Secondary thought ... since there is plenty of obstacles for insurances to "cover" abortions (not sure how many actually do), I wonder who will have to pay for the added cost of the ultrasound ...

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
a thought that occurred to me about the "ultrasound" before the abortion ... (Original Post) zbdent Feb 2012 OP
I wondered who would have to pay for it myself... Kalidurga Feb 2012 #1
Insurance is going to flat out to refuse to pay for it since it is NOT kestrel91316 Feb 2012 #2
If I understand it correctly, the ultrasound is to be required, then the 24hr delay. n/t Mnemosyne Feb 2012 #3
The law will be widely flouted wherever it is passed... saras Feb 2012 #4
can an invasivie ultrasound 2pooped2pop Feb 2012 #5
but then you couldn't sue anybody for doing it ... zbdent Feb 2012 #6
My last baby was born in1984 libodem Feb 2012 #7

Kalidurga

(14,177 posts)
1. I wondered who would have to pay for it myself...
Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:49 PM
Feb 2012

even though the answer is obvious, women will pay for it at least they will pay in emotional damage and with increased insurance costs. I didn't think about a technician not being available though and no doubt many women won't think about that either until they are told when they come in to get an abortion that they can't even be seen that day. Hopefully, this never happens, but it won't be for the lack of effort on Republicans part.

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
2. Insurance is going to flat out to refuse to pay for it since it is NOT
Sat Feb 25, 2012, 12:02 AM
Feb 2012

medically necessary. Hell, they probably wouldn't even if it were. And I heard it runs about $2000.

 

saras

(6,670 posts)
4. The law will be widely flouted wherever it is passed...
Sat Feb 25, 2012, 01:22 AM
Feb 2012

...unless they next require that a photograph of it being done be posted to the Internet for "quality control" purposes.

 

2pooped2pop

(5,420 posts)
5. can an invasivie ultrasound
Sat Feb 25, 2012, 09:58 AM
Feb 2012

cause a spontaneous abortion? If it in itself could cause a "miscarriage" or spontaneous abortion, couldn't that be used as a weapon against using it?

zbdent

(35,392 posts)
6. but then you couldn't sue anybody for doing it ...
Sat Feb 25, 2012, 09:06 PM
Feb 2012

just watch them (Republicans) say that the fetus wasn't a human after all, and they will back the insurance company when it refused to pay.

Just say that, after you saw the ultrasound, you decided to keep the baby after all, but they're the ones who killed it ...

libodem

(19,288 posts)
7. My last baby was born in1984
Wed Feb 29, 2012, 04:00 PM
Feb 2012

I was in A&P, a core requirement for nursing school. I was leaving my exhusband at the time and being pg with two other little kids, was horrible. The A&P lab had all these pickled fetuses. Some with a uterus. Seeing that eraser sized pink brine shrimp with nubby limbs and the beginnings of a face did make me think that is what it looks like right now. I can't abort my kids' sibling.

Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Women's Rights & Issues»a thought that occurred t...