> at least be able to provide a reference to a controversial prosecution.
Why? This is all relatively recent changes, there are doctors on record saying they've been unwilling to perform abortions for a variety of reasons and at risk of the mothers health.
That doesn't at all imply the necessity for the existence of a prosecution - but it does woman's health is suffering due to fear of prosecution.
An equally likely explanation is that these doctors are simply grandstanding and using the opportunity to stoke some moral panic. This is one of the most divisive political issues in the country, and the link you posted would support the claim that “some doctors are passionately unhappy about the change”. But if you want to claim that it’s a “legal minefield” then you should be able to offer some proof.
As far as I know there have been zero controversial prosecutions resulting from this change, so all you’ve managed to provide is somebody’s speculation that it might turn into a legal hazard at some time in the future. Given how massively politicised this issue is, I think it would be pretty stupid to just accept people’s baseless speculations as fact.
Going to have to jump in here, defrost. You did indeed claim it is a "legal minefield", only later to say "Well, actually, I meant this single, one paper claims that."
Hyperbole is what this paper likely is engaging in. It's certainly presenting a "worst case scenario" examination. And even if not, it's only presenting possible issues.
Issues which may or may not come up, and all of these states have differing legislation.
I did indeed accurately paraphrase the part of the brief that discussed the current legal status of medical abortion issues in some US states.
> only later to say "Well, actually, I meant this single, one paper claims that."
I certainly referred to that paper. I did not make the claim that you're asserting via paraphrasing my comment.
> Hyperbole is what this paper likely is engaging in.
In your opinion. An opinion you seem uncertain about. By my reading it presents as measured and as quoting the actual concerns of actual people.
> Issues which may or may not come up,
All the issues raised do indeed come up in real life - medical cases can get messy and mother | child health issues are not always as neat, well packaged, and clear cut as some seem to think.
There are always edge cases in any given state in any given month.
Don't take my word for it, go and ask several practicsing OBGYN's.
Do try and avoid the likes of Dr. Christina Francis & Co. who appear comfortable dodging and outright misleading the US Senate: https://youtu.be/T-5Gym8Mq1Y?t=104 & t=168
> at least be able to provide a reference to a controversial prosecution.
Why? This is all relatively recent changes, there are doctors on record saying they've been unwilling to perform abortions for a variety of reasons and at risk of the mothers health.
That doesn't at all imply the necessity for the existence of a prosecution - but it does woman's health is suffering due to fear of prosecution.