The key word is “services”. Giving out a condom = 1 service. Performing an abortion = 1 service.
That’s why that statistic is silly:
“…a pack of pills, an STD test and an exam are three separate services.”
Planned Parenthood is a non-profit, so they aren’t doing anything for profit margins. Your “abortion industry” posts are just silly. No one is pro-choice for all the money in it.
That doesn’t contradict anything.
Abortions are a small percentage of the services PP provides.
Just as oil changes may be a large percentage of the services that a Grease Monkey franchise provides, though they may well provide more than one service per customer per visit at least some percentage of the time.
It’s the “self-defense enhancement” found only in the Bible Belt.
/s
It’s not a “law”. It’s a proposed bill. The author says a clarifying amendment will be added.
The “clarification” can only be accomplished with a lit match.
~VOW
Well, since you claim that ectopic pregnancy terminations aren’t abortions, can you explain why they are mentioned in the proposed bill at all? Do you think that felony enhancement should just come out completely?
Playing devil’s advocate here, but my take is the following:
bolding mine this time.
It seems to me that this law does not apply if the abortion devices/drugs are used in a legal abortion. As well, it would make sense for the punishment to be higher for someone providing an illegal abortion to a woman who has an ectopic pregnancy.
I appreciate that these are people who want to make abortions illegal, but I don’t think this law does that.
Well you have to factor in that there will be a few Kermit Gosnell type “doctors” who will suddenly start claiming that all their abortions are actually treatments of ectopic pregnancies.
My guess is that this is one of those ‘trigger laws’ that are designed to take effect if Roe is overturned.
They seek to codify all kinds of behavior that would be criminalized in that event.
Some/much of which is just repugnant.
But diagnosis requires blood tests and – primarily – an ultrasound.
Just how deep does this CT go ?
You can’t have an illegal abortion that terminates an ectopic pregnancy by your definition of the termination of an ectopic pregnancy not being an abortion. A doctor can claim they were all ectopic pregnancies, but unless they have proof, they will likely be in trouble.
This section is about illegal abortions, not (by your definition) the termination of an ectopic pregnancy.
Why? That’s my question.
I agree it doesn’t make any abortions illegal and it doesn’t apply for a legal abortion. And most of the responses here are overlooking that fact. (But, note that the provisions on mailing abortion drugs/devices directly to a patient from a non-resident pharmacy or out-of-state drug distributor applies to any abortion).
But why does it make sense to have a higher punishment for ectopic pregnancies? Why would that be a particularly egregious type of illegal abortion?
Not sure what there is to ‘clairfy’. The text is perfectly clear as it is.
“A person or entity is guilty…if such a person or entity… prescribes, administers, or dispenses… any means or substance to be used for the purpose of performing or inducing an abortion on another person in violation of any state or federal law.” Nothing in there about mail or delivery service or any other caveats.
Subsequently:
“The offense… is a class A felony if…The abortion was performed or induced or was attempted to be performed or induced on a woman who has an ectopic pregnancy”
It is stated clearly that performing or attempting to perform an abortion on a woman with an ectopic pregnancy is a Class A felony: trafficking abortion-inducing drugs or devices. To do so is therefore clearly a violation of state law. Therefore any person who “prescribes, administers, or dispenses… any means or substance to be used for the purpose of performing or inducing an abortion on another person” who has an ectopic pregnancy is “performing or inducing an abortion on another person in violation of any state or federal law.” QED.
0)A person who
1)Administers any means or substance
2)To induce abortion
3)On a person with an ectopic pregnancy
4)Is committing a Class A felony.
If they meant something else, they should have said something else.
Yes it would be illegal to perform an “abortion” on someone who has an ectopic pregnancy. That would be the loophole exploited by the abortion industry. A ectopic pregnancy is treated (medical condition, disease, etc.) not aborted.
I disagree. It may be that, somewhere else, Missouri makes performing an abortion for an ectopic pregnancy illegal. But that doesn’t come from here.
The text, as you note, is perfectly clear: A person is guilty of the crime if they prescribe, etc., a drug, etc., to perform an abortion on another person “in violation of state or federal law.”
The elements are simple.
- A person who
- Prescribes, etc.
- A drug etc.
- For an abortion
- On another person
- That is in violation of state or federal law.
The enhancement is similarly straightforward: The above etc. is done on a woman who has an ectopic pregnancy.
The bill makes it a crime to supply the drugs used for an already illegal abortion. It has an enhancement when that illegal abortion is performed on a woman with an ectopic pregnancy.
Assuming that I’m living in a sane world where legal abortions are available… I want people with potentially deadly pregnancies to get proper medical care from licensed providers, rather than illegal services from back alley providers. That’s not to say that this increase to an A felony is actually necessary, but it isn’t ridiculous either.
I have nothing positive to say about the >10 week upgrade in charges, that seems pretty ridiculous on its face.
You can’t do those things by mail order.
It is an interesting question, actually. Missouri defines “abortion” as “[t]he act of using or prescribing any instrument, device, medicine, drug, or any other means or substance with the intent to destroy the life of an embryo or fetus in his or her mother’s womb.” Mo. Rev. Stat. 188.015.
There does not appear to be a definition of “womb,” but dictionary.com tells me that a womb is “the uterus of the human female and certain higher mammals.”
So, I guess one would argue, that performing an “abortion” on an ectopic pregnancy isn’t an abortion under state law – because the embryo/fetus is not being destroyed in the womb. (Right? That’s the whole point, it’s implanted outside the uterus).
(And, the statute permits abortions for “medical emergencies” which would seem to include – at least eventually – an ectopic pregnancy).
But that doesn’t really help answer my question – in fact, the provision makes less sense to me.
The statute isn’t limited to mail order. Or, for that matter, to abortion drugs.