Oklahoma laws on abortion

[BlaqueKatt]

It's like being told you can't get buy condoms without registering yourself, or something of a similar ilk.

Like I had to fill out forms to purchase a legal product, and have that information sent to several government agencies.....oh wait handguns are evil the government should know how many I legally purchase....

but first let's go through this 40 question form, and dig into every aspect of the abortion, except asking your name, is even more invasive.

the patient never sees the form-the form is filled out and submitted electronicly by the PHYSICIAN not by the patient-all the info is gathered during the physician taking the patient's history-if you have a physician that doesn't take a history that includes most of that information, that's a really bad doctor-even ER docs get that much history on anyone......

[Gravekeeper]

Like I had to fill out forms to purchase a legal product, and have that information sent to several government agencies.....oh wait handguns are evil the government should know how many I legally purchase....

How did you get to firearms from condoms?

Here's a question for you Blaque, since you seem to be the only one defendng this: What justification is there for this law to begin with? What purpose does it serve aside from adding additional intimidation to the already ardous process of getting an abortion in Oklahoma? Statistics is a veiled excuse since its not even statistically valid for research. If gathering statitics was the point of it, individual case information should not be publically provided by the state on a website.

Hell you can easily identify everyone from the first 8 questions. You just need one pro-life nutjob outside the clinic with a camera taking timestamped photos. Simple as that. Don't think they won't either.

I've read the bill, and the questionairre and it also essentially requires a woman to justify her abortion to her doctor. Question 15 is specifically:

"The abortion provider or agent shall ask the pregnant female orally or in writing the reason(s) she is seeking the abortion."

and it's a multiple choice question.

Remember, Oklahoma's last attempt at an abortion curbing law was that ultra sound law that required doctor's to administer an ultrasound and vividly describe the fetus to any woman seeking an abortion. They only just struck that one down as unconstitutional and the state is already appealing it.

So saying this bill is for anything more than another attempt at making abortions even more difficult to obtain or indimidating women seeking abortions is naive.

[BlaqueKatt]

How did you get to firearms from condoms?

ok-my husband has to register his car BY LAW, I have To register my bicycle BY LAW-both legally purchased but I have to fill out a form, I also have to fill out a form and have my personal information copied BY FEDERAL LAW if I want to buy a box of Cold medication-that better?

I was responding to someone saying it was like having to fill out a form to purchase a totally legal product-we already do, those are just the first few I could think of.

Here's a question for you Blaque, since you seem to be the only one defendng this: What justification is there for this law to begin with?

hmm reread my posts:

*note* I'm not defending the law just pointing out how OMG! personal information on teh interwebz! This article is trying to be.

(especially with listing the website as "shameonyouwhore.com")

Question 15 is specifically:

"The abortion provider or agent shall ask the pregnant female orally or in writing the reason(s) she is seeking the abortion."

and it's a multiple choice question.

again

It also includes:
Mother was asked but declined to give a reason

Remember, Oklahoma's last attempt at an abortion curbing law was that ultra sound law that required doctor's to administer an ultrasound and vividly describe the fetus to any woman seeking an abortion.

viv·id Presented in clear and striking manner

I'll vividly describe my first ultrasound at six weeks
approximately 2 cm long, no clearly defined limbs, skull partially formed, eyes partially formed, has approximately 1 cm long tail, no well defined organs.

or we could just go with vague.....

strongly resembles a lizard....

yes and the 24-hour waiting period law has been in effect in WI for around 10 years-it can be waived in the event of a sexual assault resulting in pregnancy-you are required to receive an ultrasound and be given information on fetal development, and information on the father's financial responsibility if you elect to not have an abortion-if a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy, additional information is not going to alter her decision-the only way it would would be if she wasn't sure and she got new information that changed her mind-which would mean her previous decision was not made with informed consent(didn't have all the info could not make an informed choice).

Or would you prefer "ok it's your choice, we won't bother telling you any of the bad things that could happen"-any other doctor performing a medical procedure without informed consent would be sued to high heaven for malpractice-...."but but but it could upset a woman's "delicate sensibilities", or make her upset"

Guess what I was upset when I signed the consent form to have my wisdom teeth removed, due to all the possible complications-maybe we should all just hide our heads in the sand and think happy thoughts.

It's a medical procedure, it carries risks, your doctor should inform you of those risks, and give you all the information you need to make an informed choice on your medical decisions-it is after all a medical decision-not a "personal decision"-it should be made by you AND your doctor.

To clarify that-say you want a suction abortion but have some medical condition that precludes it-should your doctor just let you make your "personal decision" or does he/she have a MEDICAL RESPONSIBILITY to suggest a safer method?

[AdminAssistant]

There isn't a stigma to buying a bike or a car or a gun. There is a stigma to having an abortion. Why else do you think those lovely protesters hang around outside Planned Parenthood to yell at the women who enter?

I do think the doctor should go over potential complications. A discussion of the options...well, okay. But forcing her to have an ultrasound and basically have the doctor say, "AWWWW, look at the cute little baby, let me tell you allll about the baby, do you still want to KILL IT YOU EVIL WHORE??!!!!!" That is a bully tactic. This questionnaire, especially making it available on the web, is a bully tactic. Meant to belittle and shame women who are making a very difficult decision.

Personally, if we're going to publish this kind of information...how about including the father's information (if known)? How about an open database of deadbeat dads? Women who get breast augmentation? An open list of all of this information for everyone suffering with a psychological disorder??? Hm? Still seem like a good idea?

But because these are the evil evil women who are "breaking God's Law", then it's okay to discriminate them, to bully them and scare them, to shame them. Not the guys who got them pregnant in the first place. Just the women.

[Pedersen]

the state of oklahoma has a population of 3,642,361-50.6% female-saying Pt was a 21 year-old, unmarried, hispanic female, with 17 previous pregnancies that resides in the state of oklahoma does not identify anyone now does it? go ahead attempt to id someone with that information even living in a small town-because THE TOWN is not listed just the STATE.

BlaqueKatt, you've failed to keep up with the state of the art in the subject of deanonymizing data. Either that, or you have kept up with it, and are deliberately misleading people for your own ends. I'll assume the first, since I don't think you're an evil bitch and you would have to be in order for the second to be true.

Super quick summary: It turns out that, with very little information, you can be positively identified. Some choice quotes:

Boom! But it was only an early mile marker in Sweeney's career; in 2000, she showed that 87 percent of all Americans could be uniquely identified using only three bits of information: ZIP code, birthdate, and sex.

The Netflix case illustrates another principle, which is that the data itself might seem anonymous, but when paired with other existing data, reidentification becomes possible. A pair of computer scientists famously proved this point by combing movie recommendations found on the Internet Movie Database with the Netflix data, and they learned that people could quite easily be picked from the Netflix data.

You can also read the paper here (well, if you can figure out their interface, anyway. It's very badly done).

So, with those first 8 questions, I would not be surprised in the least to find out that the data is sufficient to positively identify nearly everybody on the list without having to stand outside of a single abortion clinic.

[Gravekeeper]

I was responding to someone saying it was like having to fill out a form to purchase a totally legal product-we already do, those are just the first few I could think of.

Fair enough.

It also includes:
Mother was asked but declined to give a reason

It also includes several variations on "mother is single, unwed or selfish." The question should not be asked to begin with.

Also, what Pederson said. The extreme pro-lifers will go to such lengths. No problem. The bill serves no purpose other than to make abortions more difficult to obtain. Watered down pro-life attempt jammed into law. Simple as that.

[Fashion Lad!]

I really do not agree with this legislation. It won't violate "HIPPA" and I'm sure it won't violate HIPAA.

But, I'm sure the only reason this site is up is to try and discourage women from having abortions. I fairly positive that most people do not need to know the statics when it comes to abortions.

I'm sure it's not going to violate HIPAA, but, I do believe it's a true attempt to try and reduce or eliminate abortions. Most women aren't going to be proud of an abortion (a very small minority may be) and will be fearful of people finding out.

[Savannah]

the physician fills out the form the patient does not ever even see it-and there is an option for "pregnancy resulted from rape, pregnancy resulted from incest, and termination of pregnancy medically necessary.

you're acting like the doctor says "here fill out this form"-when in reality it's physician gets patient history and fills out form

And earlier in the same post, explaining HIPAA:

* Your healthcare provider and your insurance company have to explain how they'll use and disclose health information.
...
* If someone wants to share your health information, you have to give your formal consent.

So the patient WILL know about the form, even though she won't fill it out herself.

* Health information is to be used only for health purposes. Without your consent, it can't be used to help banks decide whether to give you a loan, or by potential employers to decide whether to give you a job.
* When your health information gets shared, only the minimum necessary amount of information should be disclosed.

Seriously, how it this used for health purposes? How is this the minimum necessary? I know they say it's for research, but it seems really questionable to me. They are putting it out for anyone to see. If they were keeping a database that could be shown to researchers, that would be a completely different matter.

It also includes:
Mother was asked but declined to give a reason

Yes, but is the woman asked "Why are you getting an abortion?" or "Why are you getting an abortion? You don't have to answer if you don't want to." There is a big difference.

Ethically, psychological studies are not able to force people to answer; participants are told that they may drop out/decline to answer a question if they so choose. I don't know exactly how medical ethics work out, but I'd imagine it is similar---assuming, of course, that this is really to be used for studies, not for intimidation. I don't see anything saying that the woman will be given the option to decline.

Oh newsflash-if you are treated for any STI your health information in the same type of form(age, race, gender, etc) is sent to your state health department-freedom of information act allows me to access that info if I would so choose-so yup OMG your "private" health info is already being gathered. They also gather the demographic data on other communicable diseases-such as H1N1 infection, TB, HIV, strep throat......

Key part bolded. Those could all potentially be public health hazards. Abortions are not contagious.

Oh, and that information is being sent to the health department, not put on the internet. As I said above, keeping a database for researchers/public health officials is different from putting information out where anyone can easily get to it.

*note* I'm not defending the law just pointing out how OMG! personal information on teh interwebz! This article is trying to be.

While I agree that the linked article is presenting the law as worse than it really is, the law is still a terrible idea.

[BlaqueKatt]

So the patient WILL know about the form, even though she won't fill it out herself.

I never said the patient wouldn't know about it I said they wouldn't fill out or see the form-don't twist my words please.

[Savannah]

I didn't mean to twist words, sorry. I was trying to say that there is not that much difference, from my perspective, in filling it out yourself and in knowing that your doctor is filling it out for you. Personally, I'd rather fill the form out myself because I can't know if the doctor misunderstood or misrepresented me.

[AdminAssistant]

Personally, I'd rather fill the form out myself because I can't know if the doctor misunderstood or misrepresented me.

Exactly. If there's going to be information about me floating about on the internet, I'd rather it be correct information.

[lupo pazzesco]

Exactly. If there's going to be information about me floating about on the internet, I'd rather it be correct information.

Moreover, I'd rather it be information I had a say in. It's one thing to collect data with a person's permission, but the point of this form is, if you want the medical procedure, you've got no choice but to allow the information to be put up on the internet.

[gremcint]

I read the questionarre, it is absolutely disgusting. That is all.

[DesignFox]

I read that form. I don't see WHY that information needs to be made available to the public. Some of those questions were pretty fucking personal.

I mean, sharing the statistics with the public...just the numbers...is one thing. Posting a woman's answers to those questions is quite another. And I still don't think it's necessary.

It sounds like a scare tactic to me.

[MergedLoki]

HIPPA violation or not, I think being able to distill the fear into a woman that someone could know about her getting an abortion.....the whole idea is probably set up to be a detourent from getting abortions, especially because a lot of women get them and *at least attempt* to keep them secret for years.

That's just not right. Look, I don't think abortion should be used as birth control or a way to try to erase mistakes, but this takes it too far.

I agree it's not right. and really I think those people that THINK abortion is used 90% of the time as a form of 'birth control' are idiots.

No i'm not a woman but obviously only a VERY small (If any) percentage of females are NOT going to agonize over 'do i have an abortion or don't i?' it's not like a 'do i get my car washed today or wash it myself?' snap decision.

I honestly don't think ANY questions (beyond whatever is deemed medically necessary by a doctor) should be asked. You want an abortion? ok fine, that is your right (for now, let's see how long this lasts people :S), here's the info you'll need. etc.