Ultrasound/sonograms requirement laws ineffective

[catholictiger]

atleast according article livescience.com/12886-abortion-sonogram-research.html

what are your thoughts of it, are these ultrasounds so ineffective even though the pro life movement think these are the best thing ever

btw my best explanation so far is that women who go into abortion clinics have pretty much made up their minds when going into that clinic so no sonogram or ultrasound will change.

so what are your thoughts on this data?

 

[Buck_Crosswhite]

atleast according article livescience.com/12886-abortion-sonogram-research.html

what are your thoughts of it, are these ultrasounds so ineffective even though the pro life movement think these are the best thing ever

btw my best explanation so far is that women who go into abortion clinics have pretty much made up their minds when going into that clinic so no sonogram or ultrasound will change.

so what are your thoughts on this data?

“It is my belief that some women will choose alternatives to abortion when they are armed with all the facts about their unborn baby,” Patrick wrote in a Feb. 12 op-ed defending the bill in the Houston Chronicle.

Why is PP fighting so hard against this law if it is ineffective. The fact is the young women who have never had a baby will believe the abortion provider when she is told that it is just a blob of tissue.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

It make sense to me that the laws are ineffective. Women aren’t stupid; they already know what they are killing. Pretending that the female brain is too weak to understand what an abortion is is a little condescending.

 

[catholictiger]

It make sense to me that the laws are ineffective. Women aren’t stupid; they already know what they are killing. Pretending that the female brain is too weak to understand what an abortion is is a little condescending.

so what do you do to change their mind.

I’m sure they know what they are killing, their eventual baby. But they don’t understand the development of that child. Not attacking their intelligence just saying maybe telling them some things about their baby and seeing its heart beat will make it real to them how human this thing is even if they know its human.

 

[SeaShoreGirl]

In college I overheard girls talking about having abortions. Most were fully aware it was a baby. They just didnt want it. What we’re fighting against is not that a baby is really a baby but the mother’s emotinal attachment to it.

 

[1ke]

btw my best explanation so far is that women who go into abortion clinics have pretty much made up their minds when going into that clinic so no sonogram or ultrasound will change.

Having spent a number of years sidewalk counseling outside a PP abortion site, I can tell you that this is not true. While some women certainly have set their will to abortion with nothing able to dissuade them, the majority are very conflicted and often waffling.

Women are told lies-- that it is a “blob” not a baby, that it is just a clump of cells. The ultrasound dispells these lies.

When I was sidewalk counseling, we did not have the mobile ultrasound unit like they do now. We only had brochures. But the number of women who were shocked to see fetal development photos and who then began second guessing their decision was quite numerous. The pro life mobile ultrasound units are another successful tool.

 

[1ke]

It make sense to me that the laws are ineffective. Women aren’t stupid; they already know what they are killing. Pretending that the female brain is too weak to understand what an abortion is is a little condescending.

Had I not had first hand experience that tells me otherwise, I would agree with you.

 

[St_Francis]

I don’t know about this article. For instance, it doesn’t say how many women were involved in that study they mention. Another thing they do is to say that women will just go to a different state, but they never provide statistics to show an increase in the neihboring states. (I checked up on this once regarding nations rather than states and found that not only was there no increase in the neighboring nations, there was a continued decrease.)

As to this point, it was viewing sonograms back when they were new that helped Dr Bernard Nathanson to change his mind completely about abortion–he was a co-founder of NARAL who changed his mind and eventually converted to Catholicism. And it was viewing sonograms and moving from one floor where he performed abortions to another floor where he tried to prevent miscarriages at the same gestational ages which started the process of his conversion.

So, yeah, I can see why PP is afraid of sonograms.

 

[catholictiger]

Having spent a number of years sidewalk counseling outside a PP abortion site, I can tell you that this is not true. While some women certainly have set their will to abortion with nothing able to dissuade them, the majority are very conflicted and often waffling.

Women are told lies-- that it is a “blob” not a baby, that it is just a clump of cells. The ultrasound dispells these lies.

When I was sidewalk counseling, we did not have the mobile ultrasound unit like they do now. We only had brochures. But the number of women who were shocked to see fetal development photos and who then began second guessing their decision was quite numerous. The pro life mobile ultrasound units are another successful tool.

how would you describe the results of this survey

 

[catholictiger]

I don’t know about this article. For instance, it doesn’t say how many women were involved in that study they mention. Another thing they do is to say that women will just go to a different state, but they never provide statistics to show an increase in the neihboring states. (I checked up on this once regarding nations rather than states and found that not only was there no increase in the neighboring nations, there was a continued decrease.)

As to this point, it was viewing sonograms back when they were new that helped Dr Bernard Nathanson to change his mind completely about abortion–he was a co-founder of NARAL who changed his mind and eventually converted to Catholicism. And it was viewing sonograms and moving from one floor where he performed abortions to another floor where he tried to prevent miscarriages at the same gestational ages which started the process of his conversion.

So, yeah, I can see why PP is afraid of sonograms.

it was apparently done at 2 abortion clinics. they interviewed women who were given ultrasounds before their abortion. They also interviewed 10 women a couple months after the fact it didn’t change their mind

there was also people saying it made the decision easier. I say it has to do with the way the PP clinicians talk about the ultrasound it could effect them.

 

[andrewstx]

The article is old. The Texas sonogram law was passed and of course has already been challenged in court.

The courts did uphold the law.

 

[manualman]

Consider this: Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the original pro-abortion activists in the late 1960’s performed countless abortions in his career. He somehow rationalized to himself, even as he picked up the tiny pieces afterwards (arms, legs, head…) that what he had done was prevent the completion of the process which ENDED in the creation of a human being.

It was not until he observed the behavior of a fetus on ultrasound that he was no longer able to rationalize away the truth of what a fetus is: a baby. After that he dedicated the rest of his life to helping other people see the truth of what abortion really is.

My conclusion: If it has worked on a hardened abortionist, it’s worth a try on a confused mother in a situation terribly vulnerable to rationalizing the ‘easy’ solution.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

If they are ineffective, why does Planned Parenthood spend so much time an money opposing them?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

it was apparently done at 2 abortion clinics. they interviewed women who were given ultrasounds before their abortion. They also interviewed 10 women a couple months after the fact it didn’t change their mind

there was also people saying it made the decision easier. I say it has to do with the way the PP clinicians talk about the ultrasound it could effect them.

When PP does an ultrasound, they PURPOSELY avoid showing the baby to the mother. They lie, they cover up, they do not use US except so that the doctor can know how big the baby is and where it is in the uterus. It is not for the mother to see the baby, because OF COURSE if she could, she wouldn’t have the abortion.

By an overwhelming number, if women come into the mobile US bus (with 4-D US), they choose life.

Now, the question is, who is going to make sure that women who go into PP or other abortion centers are actually shown an US of the baby? That I can’t tell you, but maybe they will have to sign a sheet stating that they either refuse the US or have been shown their baby.

The law in Texas was written that it would be MANDATORY to do an US before every abortion, but that would not pass, so it was changed to make it mandatory for the clinics to OFFER an US. It’s not as good as it was, but it’s one more tool against the murdering machine.