https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274
.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274
There were 10 post Dobbs…how many were pre-Dobbs? If they can estimate rapes couldn’t they do that too if no data exists? Did they have a control population?
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274
There were 10 post Dobbs…how many were pre-Dobbs? If they can estimate rapes couldn’t they do that too if no data exists? Did they have a control population?
The last question has officially ruled you out of any discussion pertaining to biomedical science.
In the 14 states that implemented total abortion bans following the Dobbs decision, we estimated that 519 981 completed rapes were associated with 64 565 pregnancies during the 4 to 18 months that bans were in effect (Table 2). Of these, an estimated 5586 rape-related pregnancies (9%) occurred in states with rape exceptions, and 58 979 (91%) in states with no exception, with 26 313 (45%) in Texas.
Fucking hell that’s a lot of rape.
I wonder how that overlaps with the 25 states that still require criminal conviction of the rapist for parental rights to be terminated. I’m guessing quite a bit.
God bless America.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274
There were 10 post Dobbs…how many were pre-Dobbs? If they can estimate rapes couldn’t they do that too if no data exists? Did they have a control population?
The last question has officially ruled you out of any discussion pertaining to biomedical science.
Like a different state that didn’t change their laws
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274
There were 10 post Dobbs…how many were pre-Dobbs? If they can estimate rapes couldn’t they do that too if no data exists? Did they have a control population?
The last question has officially ruled you out of any discussion pertaining to biomedical science.
Like a different state that didn’t change their laws
As in read the paper. Maybe the answer is in it? Eye roll emoji.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274
There were 10 post Dobbs…how many were pre-Dobbs? If they can estimate rapes couldn’t they do that too if no data exists? Did they have a control population?
The last question has officially ruled you out of any discussion pertaining to biomedical science.
Like a different state that didn’t change their laws
As in read the paper. Maybe the answer is in it? Eye roll emoji.
Since you read it just let us know…unless you didn’t
Predictable. And predictably awful. Fucking hell.
I live in one of those states, and just took care of one as the patient was in absolutely no position to carry a healthy child to term, and even worse position to care for the child. Just worse concoction of scenarios you can imagine leading to a critical illness. Things have been salvaged for now. But just awful. And it will continue.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Where I live, this decision has empowered our legislature to further intrude into other aspects of medical and end of life care.
I live in one of those states, and just took care of one as the patient was in absolutely no position to carry a healthy child to term, and even worse position to care for the child. Just worse concoction of scenarios you can imagine leading to a critical illness. Things have been salvaged for now. But just awful. And it will continue.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Where I live, this decision has empowered our legislature to further intrude into other aspects of medical and end of life care.
Agreed on all points. Truly despicable how far back this is sending us as a country.
I live in one of those states, and just took care of one as the patient was in absolutely no position to carry a healthy child to term, and even worse position to care for the child. Just worse concoction of scenarios you can imagine leading to a critical illness. Things have been salvaged for now. But just awful. And it will continue.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Where I live, this decision has empowered our legislature to further intrude into other aspects of medical and end of life care.
Agreed on all points. Truly despicable how far back this is sending us as a country.
I know the GOP is very proud of themselves for getting Roe overturned, but I truly believe they’ve done lasting damage to their future. We saw it with the weak midterms and I think we’ll see it again this fall.
I live in one of those states, and just took care of one as the patient was in absolutely no position to carry a healthy child to term, and even worse position to care for the child. Just worse concoction of scenarios you can imagine leading to a critical illness. Things have been salvaged for now. But just awful. And it will continue.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Where I live, this decision has empowered our legislature to further intrude into other aspects of medical and end of life care.
Agreed on all points. Truly despicable how far back this is sending us as a country.
I know the GOP is very proud of themselves for getting Roe overturned, but I truly believe they’ve done lasting damage to their future. We saw it with the weak midterms and I think we’ll see it again this fall.
Not as confident as you are.
I live in one of those states, and just took care of one as the patient was in absolutely no position to carry a healthy child to term, and even worse position to care for the child. Just worse concoction of scenarios you can imagine leading to a critical illness. Things have been salvaged for now. But just awful. And it will continue.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Where I live, this decision has empowered our legislature to further intrude into other aspects of medical and end of life care.
Agreed on all points. Truly despicable how far back this is sending us as a country.
I know the GOP is very proud of themselves for getting Roe overturned, but I truly believe they’ve done lasting damage to their future. We saw it with the weak midterms and I think we’ll see it again this fall.
Not as confident as you are.
Not as confident near term either, but long term the GOP is likely sowing the seeds of their demise. Demographics are not in their favor, and their whole strategy now is to appeal to old, white voters. Especially men. Turning off young women is not going to help their cause. More gerrymandering will be necessary for them to cling to power.
Not sure what next. But in the short term, it certainly feels like we are creating two different countries. And states that are far right are maximizing this opportunity.
On the specific topic of healthcare, my experience over these past several years, following COVID has been like nothing I have ever encountered in my career. Women’s Health is the obvious and most pressing issue. I have noted before, we have lost more than half of our High Risk Maternal Fetal Medicine providers. The ones that remain are late career, don’t need to stay, but are doing so out of duty and altruism. Routine OB care is fading. We are about to lose a community program at one of the smaller private hospitals in my town. Due to this climate, recruitment is near impossible, for OB or otherwise as we are a physician hostile environment.
The legislature is moving to fortify language to not recognize the universally accepted and understood definition of Brain Death. This is how we often have to determine conclusion to devastating and terminal illnesses. Families now have a potential legal pathway to resist. And then, the level of mistrust or alternative opinions is gaining momentum. Over the past two months, I have been involved in two cases where terminal conditions were allowed to progress to that point because families sought “Naturopathic Physicians”. Once things deteriorated, then ICU level care was required. These Naturopaths then counseled their families to fight, resist, and demand non-evidence based care. The mental anguish on the staff is damaging and destructive. The financial cost to these families who are paying cash to these people is nothing short of criminal. And these providers are not regulated. There is little recourse.
I am part of our state Coalition for Safe Healthcare. We are fighting back. But good grief.
That is alarming to hear, especially as the US already has poor statistics on maternal care. And it’s only going to get worse in these red states.
https://jamanetwork.com/.../fullarticle/2814274
There were 10 post Dobbs…how many were pre-Dobbs? If they can estimate rapes couldn’t they do that too if no data exists? Did they have a control population?
There are serious methodological flaws with the JAMA paper that led the authors to overstate the prevalence of rape-related pregnancy. The most obvious problem is a sizable math error the authors made when calculating the number of rape-related pregnancies, inexplicably inflating their result by 250 percent.
When calculating the number of rape-related pregnancies, the authors should have simply multiplied their estimate for the incidence of rape by the post-rape probability of getting pregnant. Instead, they took the curious additional step of multiplying that result by a ratio that appears to have no relevance at all — a number generated by dividing the lifetime probability of rape-related pregnancy as reported by the CDC by the rape-related pregnancy rate per victim as reported by another study.
There is no rational basis for this decision. Barring any population-wide shifts in health, stress, smoking or other factors that can affect fertility, the probability of getting pregnant on a randomly selected day will always be about the same. As a result, the per-rape probability of pregnancy does not need to be adjusted for the lifetime probability of rape-related pregnancy or the rape-related pregnancy rate per victim. In short, this necessarily biases the results.
Based on your Heritage Foundation OpEd there have been **26,000 **rape-related pregnancies in the 14 states that have banned abortion since the bans have gone into effect.
You are cool with that number?
Based on your Heritage Foundation OpEd there have been **26,000 **rape-related pregnancies in the 14 states that have banned abortion since the bans have gone into effect.
You are cool with that number?
If we are going to assume personhood starts at conception then yes. There should not be exceptions for non-consensual pregnancy.
In fact, if the fetus is viable if given longer in the womb, there should probably not be exceptions for the life or health of the mother with that assumption. I can’t shoot you to save my life if you are innocent of wrongdoing. So it doesn’t make sense to allow you to abort if the potential mother can carry the fetus long enough for it to survive even if it eventually costs her life.
Things get all wonky when you start protecting the fetus long before it is viable or has any sort of possible sentience.
**26,000 **
Complete the calculation.
There are also other problems with this study.
We know, for example, that only a very small percentage of abortions are sought for reasons of rape or incest. In fact, according to a study from the pro-abortion-rights Guttmacher Institute, only about 1 percent of abortions are sought for reasons of rape, and less than 0.5 percent of abortions are sought for reasons of incest.
The JAMA paper’s estimates for rape-related pregnancies, however, when converted to 12-month estimates, imply that about 22 percent of all abortions in these 14 states would have been sought for reasons of rape or incest, if not for the abortion bans. Given the data we have on abortions sought for reasons of rape, this statistic is simply not credible.
**26,000 **
Complete the calculation.
There are also other problems with this study.
We know, for example, that only a very small percentage of abortions are sought for reasons of rape or incest. In fact, according to a study from the pro-abortion-rights Guttmacher Institute, only about 1 percent of abortions are sought for reasons of rape, and less than 0.5 percent of abortions are sought for reasons of incest.
The JAMA paper’s estimates for rape-related pregnancies, however, when converted to 12-month estimates, imply that about 22 percent of all abortions in these 14 states would have been sought for reasons of rape or incest, if not for the abortion bans. Given the data we have on abortions sought for reasons of rape, this statistic is simply not credible.
That piece is not being accurate. It claims that we “know†that a very small percentage of abortions were due to rape. The Guttmacher survey, from which the 1% figure is derived, cannot show that we “know†that data point. Only 58% of patients completed the survey. It is not crazy to think that rape victims might be disproportionately likely to decline the survey. And, even among the 58% who responded, there may be a disinclination to mention being a rape victim.