I voted against it after consulting with none other than an obstetrician. Yes, there are many who voted against this because they are pro-choice, but there are many who are pro-life who also voted against it. The language was vague, and who gets to decide what is “medically appropriate“ anyway? Will the physicians’ stance on what is medically appropriate hold up in court? Some physicians think abortion is “medically appropriate”!? So does the mother ultimately decide whether she wants to snuggle her baby or have it resuscitated in futility? Reminds me of your review of “call the midwife“ when the baby only had value based on the circumstance. Like most things in healthcare, there that should be a discussion between a patient and her physician? But what if the labor and delivery nurse that day objects and reports the doctor or midwife for not following the law?
Who wrote this referendum anyway? Of course it sounds good on the surface but I don’t think it’s well written. Why should all kinds of citizens be voting on this when they don’t even understand it? Our legislature can actually write an “Abortion is illegal” bill in their next legislative session. They can even include this type of referendum after taking testimony from obstetricians perhaps. I’m probably missing something here, but I don’t fully understand why some things become a ballot measure and some don’t. I don’t think many laws should be codified by popular vote. Are we a democracy, or a republic?
My two cents. Be encouraged, this is only the beginning of an effort to protect the unborn in Montana From a legal standpoint.
Shame on the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Academy of Family Physicians, etc etc etc. Not one of our major medical associations has the backbone to stand up for the rights and wellbeing of the unborn.
Regarding our men and women serving in the Armed Forces - I have the privilege of living in a community served by an Air Force and an Army base. Many of our friends are either active or retired military. Without exception they have gained great satisfaction from work that provides logistical support and advanced training to our allies. The Ukrainian response to the Russian invasion is a textbook example of the effectiveness of their work. Let us never forget.
This made me weep. I was confused and frustrated to have three Christian friends, medical professionals, begging me to vote "no" on this referendum! "Medically appropriate" is perhaps too vague, but it certainly gives the legal framework to argue that a baby who cannot survive due to abnormalities or extreme prematurity would not need to be ripped from their mother to die in futile "life-saving" procedures, as all the scare-mongering advocates asserted. In our climate our voice needs to be FOR babies at all times, even if the language isn't perfect. That's the conclusion I came to, anyway.
I voted against it after consulting with none other than an obstetrician. Yes, there are many who voted against this because they are pro-choice, but there are many who are pro-life who also voted against it. The language was vague, and who gets to decide what is “medically appropriate“ anyway? Will the physicians’ stance on what is medically appropriate hold up in court? Some physicians think abortion is “medically appropriate”!? So does the mother ultimately decide whether she wants to snuggle her baby or have it resuscitated in futility? Reminds me of your review of “call the midwife“ when the baby only had value based on the circumstance. Like most things in healthcare, there that should be a discussion between a patient and her physician? But what if the labor and delivery nurse that day objects and reports the doctor or midwife for not following the law?
Who wrote this referendum anyway? Of course it sounds good on the surface but I don’t think it’s well written. Why should all kinds of citizens be voting on this when they don’t even understand it? Our legislature can actually write an “Abortion is illegal” bill in their next legislative session. They can even include this type of referendum after taking testimony from obstetricians perhaps. I’m probably missing something here, but I don’t fully understand why some things become a ballot measure and some don’t. I don’t think many laws should be codified by popular vote. Are we a democracy, or a republic?
My two cents. Be encouraged, this is only the beginning of an effort to protect the unborn in Montana From a legal standpoint.
Shame on the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Academy of Family Physicians, etc etc etc. Not one of our major medical associations has the backbone to stand up for the rights and wellbeing of the unborn.
Regarding our men and women serving in the Armed Forces - I have the privilege of living in a community served by an Air Force and an Army base. Many of our friends are either active or retired military. Without exception they have gained great satisfaction from work that provides logistical support and advanced training to our allies. The Ukrainian response to the Russian invasion is a textbook example of the effectiveness of their work. Let us never forget.
This made me weep. I was confused and frustrated to have three Christian friends, medical professionals, begging me to vote "no" on this referendum! "Medically appropriate" is perhaps too vague, but it certainly gives the legal framework to argue that a baby who cannot survive due to abnormalities or extreme prematurity would not need to be ripped from their mother to die in futile "life-saving" procedures, as all the scare-mongering advocates asserted. In our climate our voice needs to be FOR babies at all times, even if the language isn't perfect. That's the conclusion I came to, anyway.
Great article, Brian.