╌>

Infant mortality rose in 2022 for the first time in two decades

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  perrie-halpern  •  6 months ago  •  75 comments

By:   Aria Bendix

Infant mortality rose in 2022 for the first time in two decades
The U.S. infant mortality rate rose last year for the first time in two decades.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


The U.S. infant mortality rate rose last year for the first time in two decades. The rate refers to the number of infants who died before their first birthdays out of every 1,000 live births.

The U.S. recorded 5.6 infant deaths per 1,000 live births in 2022, a 3% increase over the previous year, according to a report Wednesday from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The last year-to-year increase was from 2001 to 2002, when the rate similarly rose by 3%.

The 2022 data are estimates based on birth and death records submitted to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. The CDC will most likely release a final report next year following a more comprehensive review of the data.

According to Danielle Ely, a co-author of the report and a health statistician at the health statistics center, "there were a number of states that had increases in the number of infant deaths and in their rates from 2021 to 2022."

But the rise in infant mortality rates was most pronounced in four states, she said: Georgia, Iowa, Missouri and Texas.

Reproductive health experts who weren't involved in the CDC report have a few theories about why the trend reversed course last year.

According to Dr. Pat Gabbe, a clinical professor of pediatrics at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, some pregnant people may not have received proper medical care during the Covid pandemic because they were seeing doctors virtually or hesitated to visit hospitals for pregnancy complications.

"Every time we've measured infant mortality, it has trended down, and what's changed? Covid. It's disrupted all the community support we developed that helped women access prenatal care," Gabbe said.

The pandemic also led to job loss and economic instability, which can increase stress levels among pregnant people, said Martine Hackett, an associate professor of health professions at Hofstra University.

"One of the leading factors that contribute to babies born too small and babies born too early is stress," Hackett said.

But Dr. Tracey Wilkinson, an associate professor of pediatrics at the Indiana University School of Medicine, said the increase in infant mortality is a byproduct of ending the constitutional right to abortion. Georgia, Missouri and Texas all instated new abortion bans around the time Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022.

"I look at this data and it breaks my heart as a pediatrician, of course. But I also could tell you that anybody who's in the reproductive health space could and did warn that this is the type of data we were going to start seeing when we took away the federal protections to abortion access," Wilkinson said.

Why are infants dying?


Birth defects are the leading cause of infant deaths, followed by preterm births (before 37 weeks' gestation) and low birth weight. But those rates didn't change much in 2022, according to the CDC report.

Instead, the report found an increase in infants who died from pregnancy complications, such as the cervix's opening too early or the amniotic sac's rupturing before labor begins. Such complications can lead to premature birth, miscarriage or infection.

The report also detected an increase in the number of infants who died from bacterial sepsis — a life-threatening response to infection — in 2022.

Hackett said the fatal health outcomes could be triggered by stress during pregnancy, while Wilkinson said they're likely to be driven by limited access to specialists who can treat complicated pregnancies.

Around 2.2 million women of childbearing age and nearly 150,000 babies live in counties where there are no hospitals or birth centers that offer obstetric care or have obstetric providers, according to a report last year from March of Dimes, a nonprofit group that researches premature birth.

"While some of those places could probably deliver a straightforward, non-complicated pregnancy, the minute it becomes complicated, you are not going to have the expertise within that building to care for either the pregnant person or the infant," Wilkinson said.

Specialists are becoming even less available now that abortion bans limit certain types of reproductive care, she added.

"We're starting to see graduating medical students choose not to go into OBGYN, and then we're starting to see OBGYN residents choose not to train in states where it is hard for them to get comprehensive training," Wilkinson said.

Rates rose for white babies despite higher overall rates for Black infants


Overall, the U.S. infant mortality rate has been declining for at least a century, but racial disparities persist: Black infants still die at more than twice the rate of white infants, and they are nearly four times more likely to die from complications related to low birth weight.

In 2022, infants born to Black women had a mortality rate of 10.9 per 1,000 live births, though the rate didn't increase measurably compared to 2021.

Infants born to white women, on the other hand, had a mortality rate of 4.5 per 1,000 live births — a nearly 4% increase.

Infant mortality rates also rose last year for male infants, infants born to women ages 25 to 29 and preterm infants, according to the CDC report.

Reproductive health experts said male babies have historically been more vulnerable to early death than female babies, perhaps because they are biologically more susceptible to diseases or more likely to be born prematurely.

But the rise among white babies and babies born to women in their late 20s is unusual, they said, and it may be driven by the same factors that influenced the national trend.

Experts predicted that infant mortality would also rise this year, because many people still have limited access to prenatal care. The 12-month period ending in March of this year had a higher infant mortality rate than the 12-month period ending in March 2022, according to CDC data.

"We have to be committed to turning this back," Gabbe said. "There's no excuse."


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1  sandy-2021492    6 months ago
Specialists are becoming even less available now that abortion bans limit certain types of reproductive care, she added. "We're starting to see graduating medical students choose not to go into OBGYN, and then we're starting to see OBGYN residents choose not to train in states where it is hard for them to get comprehensive training," Wilkinson said.

So, the "pro-life" movement and it's legislation turned out to be not so pro-life, eh?  Funny, I remember legislators being told this would happen.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1    6 months ago

But they didn't listen

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.1    6 months ago

It was never about saving lives.  It was about controlling women.  If it had been about saving lives, legislators would have listened when they were told that their proposed laws were going to endanger lives.  They just told us not to worry our pretty little heads about important things and that they'd make sure we were ok.  Such bullshit.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
1.1.2  evilone  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.1.1    6 months ago
It was never about saving lives.  It was about controlling women.

It's all about a mythical way of life some people built up in their heads. White patriarchal leaders of family, community and government. Populists aren't good at... well, much of anything but shooting off their mouths.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.3  devangelical  replied to  evilone @1.1.2    6 months ago
Populists aren't good at... well, much of anything but shooting off their mouths.

... their aim sucks.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  evilone @1.1.2    6 months ago

Some folks live in a time in the past that never really was and they want us to join them in their land of denial and delusion.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.1.1    6 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2  devangelical  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1    6 months ago

I'd love to comment on all the negative repercussions that policies of the religious right are imposing upon america, but I don't want to start off the month with a ToS, so you'll need to use your imaginations. it shouldn't be too difficult...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.2    6 months ago

lol, I hear ya!  I need to avoid certain 'articles' altogether when it comes to that.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  devangelical @1.2    6 months ago

Aw c'mon! Live a little!

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.3  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.2    6 months ago

no thanks, not yet... the boss and her wing girl beat the shit out of me last month.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.3  Ozzwald  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1    6 months ago
So, the "pro-life" movement and it's legislation turned out to be not so pro-life, eh?

You have to remember that pro-lifers are only pro-life up to the moment of birth.  After that it's "screw 'em".  No insurance, no welfare, or anything else to help out already born individuals.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @1.3    6 months ago
After that it's "screw 'em".  No insurance, no welfare, or anything else to help out already born individuals.

Gee, I'll alert my reps that they can vote to end funding for all the things we already pay for for some folks.

You know, these things:

WIC

Medicaid

CHIP

TANF

Headstart

CCDF

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.2  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.1    6 months ago

but, but, but, what about...

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.3  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.3.2    6 months ago

Please continue your comment if it is something worthwhile.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.4  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.3    6 months ago

you go first...

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.5  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.3.4    6 months ago

I said what I wanted to.

care to dispute what I said now?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.6  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.5    6 months ago

no thanks, I don't want to follow you off topic.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.7  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.3.6    6 months ago

off topic?

Don't think Ozzwald is going to like you characterizing his post that way.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
1.3.8  George  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.7    6 months ago

So the fact that you can't kill them before they are born is getting blamed for them dying after they are born? Are they less dead if you kill them before they are born?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3.9  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.7    6 months ago

show me where I replied directly to him here.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.10  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.3.9    6 months ago

if my reply was off topic, logic dictates that his was also.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.11  Texan1211  replied to  George @1.3.8    6 months ago

Who knows?

Logic is seemingly in very low supply.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  George @1.3.8    6 months ago

The fact that women can't receive prenatal care from doctors who no longer practice in states that restrict abortion is a problem, don't you think, George?  You do recognize that quality prenatal care leads to healthier mothers and babies, yes?  And that lack of prenatal care can lead to the reverse?

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
1.3.13  George  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.12    6 months ago

So doctors who don't provide abortions are leaving because they can't do procedures they don't do? that is some retarded logic. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.14  Texan1211  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.12    6 months ago

Come on, there are other doctors they can see.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
1.3.15  George  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.14    6 months ago

In Utah for example, there were 4 offices that provided abortions, 3 are still open providing care, 1 closed.  

Maybe they are angry because it turns out PP was more about killing minorities and less about pre-natal care.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.16  Texan1211  replied to  George @1.3.15    6 months ago

California, with its own set of abortion laws I believe proponents support, also has a shortage of obgyns.

Go figure!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.17  Sean Treacy  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.14    6 months ago

Come on, there are other doctors they can see.

nope, only abortionists can prevent what’s actually caused the increase In deaths from occurring:

such as the cervix's opening too early or the amniotic sac's rupturing before labor begins. Such complications can lead to premature birth, miscarriage or infection. The report also detected an increase in the number of infants who died from bacterial sepsis — a life-threatening response to infection — in 2022.
 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.18  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.17    6 months ago

If the infant mortality rate is increasing, and folks want us to believe it is because abortion services are limited, then states without those limits should show a lower rate if infant mortality.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.19  Sean Treacy  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.18    6 months ago

And would also have caused a higher mortality increase among blacks, who have a much higher abortion rate  than whites, where the  increase actually occurred.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.20  sandy-2021492  replied to  George @1.3.13    6 months ago
So doctors who don't provide abortions are leaving because they can't do procedures they don't do? that is some retarded logic. 

Many obstetricians do provide abortions when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the pregnant woman.  The pro-forced birth crowd prohibits saving the lives of women endangered by pregnancy.  But don't take my word for it.  Obstetricians are saying the same.

While many OBGYNs across the country have seen an impact of  Dobbs   on their practice, the effect on some of these measures varies widely between states ( Figure 9 ). For example, 55% of OBGYNs in states with abortion bans and 47% in states with gestational limits say their ability to practice within the standard of care has worsened since  Dobbs , much higher than 23% among OBGYNs in states where abortion is available under most circumstances. Similarly, three in ten OBGYNs in banned states (30%) and one in five in gestational limit states (20%) say their patient-provider relationships have worsened since  Dobbs , compared to one in ten in states where abortion is available under most circumstances (11%).
A significant portion of OBGYNs say they have personally experienced limits on their professional care since the  Dobbs   ruling ( Figure 10 ). Nationally, one in five say they have been constrained in providing care for miscarriages (20%) and pregnancy-related emergencies (19%) since the  Dobbs   ruling. About a quarter (24%) of OBGYNs say they have had a patient who tried to obtain an abortion and could not obtain one. However, all of these are more commonly reported among OBGYNs in states where abortion is banned or limited by gestational restrictions than in states where abortion is permitted under most circumstances. About four in ten OBGYNs in states where abortion is banned say they have been constrained in providing care for miscarriages (40%) and pregnancy-related medical emergencies (37%), compared to less than one in ten OBGYNs in states where abortion remains available under most circumstances. Fewer OBGYNs say a patient has asked them about how to have an abortion on their own (14%), but the share is slightly higher in states with gestational limits (18%).

And doctors respond by going where they can practice medicine that adheres to the standard of care, which sometimes includes abortion.

As obstetricians do so, prenatal care becomes less available in areas where abortion is restricted.

None of this is especially difficult to understand.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.21  Texan1211  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.20    6 months ago

Are infant mortality rates significantly lower in states more favorable to abortion?

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
1.3.22  charger 383  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.21    6 months ago

Children that are wanted are usually taken better care off so that might make rates lower

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.23  Texan1211  replied to  charger 383 @1.3.22    6 months ago

yes, but that isn't what I was asking.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.24  sandy-2021492  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.14    6 months ago
Come on, there are other doctors they can see.

You're certain of that?  You know for sure that women in rural areas are always able to access prenatal care easily?

The fact that there are other doctors doesn't mean there are enough other doctors.  There was a shortage of OBs in many areas before Roe v. Wade was overturned.

Dr. Amelia Huntsberger was practicing in Idaho, where most abortions are banned. Now, she's leaving for neighboring Oregon after her rural hospital closed its maternity unit, citing both staffing shortages and Idaho's political climate.

"It's very clear that Idaho is no longer a safe place to practice medicine," Huntsberger said.

"If I'm an OB-GYN resident coming out of residency and I'm looking around at different options, why would I look at Idaho and say, 'Oh, I really want to move there to the state where I could be charged with a felony for providing medical care?'" she said.

That's not just one doctor leaving.  That's an entire maternity unit closing down.  What other doctors do those patients see?  They have to go to another hospital.  In a rural area, how far will that be?  Too far during a labor and delivery that takes a quick turn south, as labor and delivery sometimes do?  Lack of care during a complicated delivery increases the risk of maternal and infant death.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
1.3.25  charger 383  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.23    6 months ago

It could affect the statistic you are talking about 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.26  Texan1211  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.24    6 months ago

There is a shortage of obgyns in the US, including in states much more favorable for performing abortions.

Are those more favorable states showing similar rates of infant mortality?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.27  Texan1211  replied to  charger 383 @1.3.25    6 months ago

well of course it would have SOME EFFECT but not significantly enough to raise rates dramatically.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.28  sandy-2021492  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.21    6 months ago

The South and Southeast, where many states with restrictive abortion laws are located, looks a lot worse than, say, California.

Mississippi, which has a near-total ban, has the highest infant mortality rate.  West Virginia, as usual, is glad Mississippi exists, because Mississippi makes WV look, well, not good, but not quite so bad.  WV, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Indiana, South Carolina - all have high infant mortality rates, and all have restrictive abortion laws.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.29  Texan1211  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.28    6 months ago

Why is California experiencing such a shortage of obgyns?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.30  Sean Treacy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.28    6 months ago
which has a near-total ban, has the highest infant mortality rate.  West Virginia, as usual, is glad Mississippi exists, because Mississippi makes WV look, well, not good, but not quite so bad.  WV, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Indiana, South Carolina - all have high infant mortality

So some states that passed abortion restrictions had high infant mortality rates when abortions were legal....

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.31  sandy-2021492  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.29    6 months ago

According to this, most likely due to a large population, low pay for doctors (with higher pay elsewhere tempting them to move out of state), and high cost of living.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.3.32  Sean Treacy  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.18    6 months ago
then states without those limits should show a lower rate if infant mortality.

and amazingly, one of the states the article singles out for having one of the biggest increases in infant mortality, had no change in abortion restrictions. 

It's almost as if you have to ignore everything in the article except for the unsupported opinion of an  abortion activist (naturally not identified as such by NBC) to find something that supports the  obsessive bias. One would think the fact that death rates are increasing across the board, would keep anyone from making such an obvious overreach, but here we are.  

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.33  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.3.30    6 months ago

Some did.  In some of those states, abortion was already difficult to obtain due to lawsuits against abortion clinics and fear on the part of abortion providers and women seeking abortions.

In 2014, WV had only 2 abortion clinics in the entire state, and in 2017, it had only one Planned Parenthood Clinic.  The state legislature passed several restrictions that, while they didn't outlaw abortion, discouraged women from obtaining one with frequently untrue propaganda.  

The state also employed as an instructor at its largest medical school an obstetrician who is an anti-abortion activist who encouraged a frivolous lawsuit against the state's only abortion clinic.

Mississippi had only one abortion clinic, starting back in 2006, and abortion providers were required by state law to distribute false anti-abortion propaganda to their patients.

.

Oklahoma abortion providers were also required to provide false information to their patients.

.

And of course, many of those states have seen attempts by their legislatures at criminalizing abortion, even when Roe v. Wade was in effect.  No physician really wants to be the test case in overturning such a law - they'd rather practice medicine than worry about whether their next procedure will land them in court not because they committed malpractice, but because what was legal yesterday is illegal today.

There's more than one way to restrict access to abortion, and those states have been pretty inventive in doing so, to the detriment of their own citizens' health.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.34  Tessylo  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.20    6 months ago

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.3.35  Trout Giggles  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.3.24    6 months ago

People who don't live in rural areas don't understand about the lack of health care. Fortunately, I live in the Little Rock Greater Metro where there are many types of medical providers. But in the rural areas of Arkansas, rural hospitals are almost non-existent. They are trying all kinds of incentives to get Nurse Practitioners, Physician Assistants, and Family Medical physicians to sign on for a 5-6 year commitment to a rural area.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Expert
1.3.36  sandy-2021492  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.3.35    6 months ago

I'm in rural Virginia.  We have a hospital, but there is no maternity department there, and no Ob/Gyns in the county.  If you have a baby, you're having it somewhere else.  And there are occasional births in ambulances when women don't make it to the hospital on time.  I personally know a woman who gave birth on the interstate in the passenger's seat of the family vehicle - her husband just barely got pulled over onto the shoulder and onto her side of the car to catch the baby.  Not ideal, especially if there are complications.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.4  cjcold  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1    6 months ago

Defunding Planned Parenthood destroyed lives.

Far right wingers can't think ahead.

They have no idea of the ramifications of their fascist actions.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.4.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @1.4    6 months ago

Planned Parenthood receives a whole lot of federal money to this day.

No fascists involved---of course.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.4.2  Tessylo  replied to  cjcold @1.4    6 months ago

They don't care cj.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2  Buzz of the Orient    6 months ago

As soon as I saw the headline I assumed this to be a cause for the increase:

"But Dr. Tracey Wilkinson, an associate professor of pediatrics at the Indiana University School of Medicine, said the increase in infant mortality is a byproduct of ending the constitutional right to abortion. Georgia, Missouri and Texas all instated new abortion bans around the time Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022.
"I look at this data and it breaks my heart as a pediatrician, of course. But I also could tell you that anybody who's in the reproductive health space could and did warn that this is the type of data we were going to start seeing when we took away the federal protections to abortion access," Wilkinson said."
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2    6 months ago

n as I saw the headline I assumed this to be a cause for the increase:

No shit. Obsessives on one topic cherry pick one quote from an abortion activist, accept it as gospel and ignore everything else.

Who could have seen that coming? 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1    6 months ago

LOL. You know, Sean, you really amaze me.  I just spent the past few weeks voting up almost everything you had to say about the Israel-Hamas conflict and although all my comments on that issue were ones that would have agreed with you, you made sure you ignored me, but now that I made a comment on this issue that 5 other members agreed with by voted it up you chose to post a comment designed to insult me and nobody agrees with you.  

My positive feelings about women having the right to be in control over their own bodies and bodily functions has been the same since long before the SCOTUS preferred to turn them into "handmaidens" so yes, I DO pick and choose what I agree with and what I don't, no matter how much you want to disparage that right.  So here, Sean, here is a pinup I'm sure you consider righteous to post on your refrigerator.

af1.jpg

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.1.1    6 months ago
men having the right to be in control over their own bodies and bodily functions has been the same since long before the SCOTUS preferred to turn them into "handmaidens" so yes, I DO pick and choose what I agree with and what I don't, no matter how much you want to disparage that right.  

I don't give a shit what you believe. Truly. If you  made  a rational argument based on evidence I wouldn't say anything..  When you post ignorant, inflammatory nonsense,  I'm going to comment on it.  

here is a pinup I'm sure you consider righteous to post on your refrigera

Why do you mock pregnant woman? Do you think they aren't real women because they don't conform to your stereotypes?    I actually support women's right to choose how they live. They can be stay at home moms. Or single professionals. Or a mix of both. They are all equally valid paths  to me.  Unlike you, I don't mock women for their choices. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2.1.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.2    6 months ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
2.1.4  charger 383  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.2    6 months ago

Member that 2.12.1.2 was addressed to responded so comments stands, charger  

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
3  evilone    6 months ago
Experts predicted that infant mortality would also rise this year, because many people still have limited access to prenatal care.

and as more and more health care providers pull out of rural areas. Health care, in the US, is now more about how much money it can make than caring for people. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  evilone @3    6 months ago

I was watching a news story this morning about a young woman in Idaho who's fetus had many abnormalities such as organs growing outside the body. Of course, she couldn't get an abortion in Idaho because they had no clause for health of the mother. She traveled 7 hours to Oregon to get an abortion and ended up giving birth in her hotel room. That was too risky for both the fetus and the mother. She survived and is pregnant again. They interviewed her OB-GYN about the abortion law and choked up over what happened to her patient. Many OB-GYNs are leaving Idaho and going to states where the abortion laws aren't as restrictive. Idaho is already very rural, and now access to health care will be very limited unless you live in Boise.

Sad state of affairs

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
3.1.1  evilone  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1    6 months ago
Many OB-GYNs are leaving Idaho and going to states where the abortion laws aren't as restrictive.

I've read that about other states too. I think I read of 1 specialist left in Louisiana and that person was thinking of leaving too. The laws will change again when it starts affecting the wealthy donor class. 

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
4  charger 383    6 months ago

Unwanted and burdensome things usually are not well taken care off.  Those who want to take choice away don't seem to understand this fact. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Expert
4.1  Gordy327  replied to  charger 383 @4    6 months ago

Indeed. Abortion has no negative effect on society. But restricting abortion seems to have s negative effect.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5  cjcold    6 months ago

Learned many years ago that anything involving a lady's body was the lady's choice.

Fuck a bunch of old male redneck fascists who think otherwise. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5    6 months ago
Fuck a bunch of old male redneck fascists who think otherwise

And who exactly are these imaginary fascists?. 

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.1.1  cjcold  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1    6 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.1.1    6 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.1.1    6 months ago

See, that is an EXTREMELY ignorant comment as I am in favor of abortions. I think a woman should have as many as she wants and can afford.

Maybe reading more posts will help you understand things better.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.1.1    6 months ago
Likely you.

I am neither a fascist or imaginary.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
5.1.5  charger 383  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.3    6 months ago

So if abortion is covered by insurance you do not mind it

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  charger 383 @5.1.5    6 months ago

doesn't make any difference to me. Like I have stated, I think a woman should have all the abortions she desires and can afford.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.1.7  cjcold  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.6    6 months ago
should have all the abortions she desires and can afford.

Pretty sure that no woman ever wants to have an abortion. 

You make it sound like a casual choice. It's far from that.

Only a far right wing misogynist would phrase it like that.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.1.7    6 months ago
Pretty sure that no woman ever wants to have an abortion.

Sure are lots of abortions then by people who you claim don't want them. Weird shit.

You make it sound like a casual choice. It's far from that.

I can't help your personal perceptions, but maybe reading what I wrote would help.

Only a far right wing misogynist would phrase it like that.

Your insult isn't surprising beyond it didn't contain the word "fascist".  I'll take small steps of progress when I can.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.1.9  cjcold  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.8    6 months ago

So you have no idea what a woman goes through making a decision to abort or keep a pregnancy?

It's a serious life altering decision for a woman.

Judging from our long history here, I wouldn't expect for you to have the empathy to understand.

Right wing FASCISTS wouldn't get it. (happy now?)

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.1.9    6 months ago
So you have no idea what a woman goes through making a decision to abort or keep a pregnancy?

Sure I do, [deleted]

It's a serious life altering decision for a woman.

Yes it is, and one for her alone to make. 

Judging from our long history here, [deleted]

Based on you not knowing what my position is regarding abortion, your 'expectations' aren't surprising.

Right wing FASCISTS wouldn't get it. (happy now?)

Not at all. 

Very disappointed.

I thought maybe you had turned a corner for a second there, but alas, back to the same lame juvenile tactics.

Sigh.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
6  George    6 months ago

[Deleted

 
 

Who is online










82 visitors