- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Some select paragraphs:
Across Idaho, doctors are leaving, looking for states where politics don’t dictate how they practice medicine. The consequences of Idaho’s anti-choice laws hit Sandpoint fast and hard, hollowing out medical care for women within months. For years, the town had a maternity ward that delivered as many as 350 babies every year – now it has nothing. The OB-GYN ward shut down this spring and doctors have been fleeing the state in a steady stream, seeking shelter in places where their work doesn’t put them at risk of criminal charges or big lawsuits.
It’s become a gamble, getting pregnant and giving birth in a place that no longer has a maternity unit or any obstetricians. Sandpoint is small, fewer than 10,000 people, but it’s been a medical hub for a rural region of 50,000 in north Idaho, Montana and Washington.
Idaho is one of several states that had trigger laws: immediate abortion restrictions that went into effect when Roe v Wade fell a year ago. In August of 2022, the state enacted a near-total ban on abortion with exceptions only if the mother’s life is in danger, or in the case of rape and incest. Those instances require a police report to be filed. The state also adopted what it called an “abortion trafficking” ban, which bars taking minors to other states for abortion care. Family members can sue doctors for thousands of dollars if they perform an abortion, and doctors may face criminal fines and even prison time.
Idaho also became the only state in the country to stop tracking maternal mortality rates. Activists say it’s like they don’t want anyone to know how deadly their decisions might be.
How is saying every person in Idaho is representative for the whole of Idaho any better, though?
I mean, that is how a representative democracy works. I’m a two party system you get 50%+1 and you win. Getting more than 52-53% of the vote is very hard. Idaho is voting 60-70% + for this. Obviously individuals are individual but what is your argument? That there is nothing to be said about voting blocks because you have to consider each individual persons thoughts on a vacuum? Either you’re being obtuse or naive.
That it’s not only cold (and awful) but also wrong to say this is the consequence everyone in Idaho should have to suffer just because majority of people there voted like that.
Cold, sure. Awful, for these women yes. But this is explicitly the consequences of the vote of the overwhelming majority of this states population. In no way have I said that women deserve sub standard health care. I have said this is the exact outcome that the voting population was warned of, ie consequences. You have been talking about morality, but just my morality not the morality of the situation. So again, what’s your argument? That we shouldn’t call this the consequences of the state of idaho voting for this? That the state shouldn’t be allowed to enact or enforce these laws? That doctors should be forced to stay?what are you trying to add to the conversation other than to say that my comment is mean because not everyone wanted to ban abortion and prosecute doctors?
Why do I need something else to add other than your comment is mean and awful to those who didn’t vote like that, can’t vote yet and still have to suffer the consequences?
What does it add to the conversation that you feel Schadenfreude for those people who now have to deal with that?
Not schadenfreude, ambivalence. And if there is nothing else you want to add then we are just strangers arguing each other’s morals, morals which we really have no idea about. And there is no point or value in arguing the perceived morals of people you don’t and never will know.
I think it matters beyond individual’s morals. Caring (or not) for people who get dragged down by dumb decisions of others arguably has consequences beyond just your opinion on these people.
These dismissive opinions on people living in a certain town / state / country / etc. could change your perception of the magnitude of the problem, for example. It’s easy to brush the whole problem aside when you simply decide that it’s just a bunch of idiots getting what they deserve. From there it’s not far to “this would never happen in my place”.
It could also lead to wanting to silence discussion about the issue. After all, that people get what they deserve is just right. What’s there to talk about?
It’s also very hard for me to believe that people with this mindset don’t also judge individuals from that place. Which again has consequences…