Jump to content

Talk:Abortion in Georgia (U.S. state)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Post-Dobbs pregnancy related deaths: Misleading statement

[edit]

The line "The hospital waited too long to provide a dilation and curettage due to Georgia's abortion ban, which classified the procedure as a felony." is misleading and false.

The WSAV article being referenced pulls its information from the initial report by Propublica which states that the D&C procedure was criminalized by GA abortion law.


However, the Washington Examiner and the Abortion Defense Network both state that D&C are not restricted by the referenced abortion laws and are specifically excluded by the state's definition of abortion. On top of this, the ultrasound Thurman received confirmed that both of her twins were deceased-additionally distancing the required D&C from the defined terms of an abortion.

My intent is to remove the portion of the statement after the word "curettage" and beginning with the word "due".


ProPublica: https://www.propublica.org/article/georgia-abortion-ban-amber-thurman-death

Abortion Defense Network: https://abortiondefensenetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Georgia_ADN-Know-Your-State_Feb-2024.pdf

Washington Examiner: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/3161886/fact-check-harris-blames-womans-death-georgia-abortion-law/ Bbfacts (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Line relating to Post-Dobbs related deaths

[edit]

The following line is misleading: "In Georgia, a D&C abortion is a felony, unless it is performed under certain circumstances, and a doctor can face up to 10 years in jail for performing it."

Per the sources below, a D&C is specifically separate from the acts required to terminate a pregnancy.

In Thurman's case, the D&C was not an act of abortion, as her pregnancy had already been terminated by the pills she had taken previously, and therefore falls into the "circumstances" that would allow for the procedure to be performed without threat of criminal prosecution.


The short version is that the "circumstances" referenced that would allow for this procedure to be legal are in fact the only circumstances that apply to Thurman-making the line in question extremely misleading.


E.g. Apples are poisonous to humans except in specific circumstances.

In the same way, this is misleading because the applicable circumstance/norm is being framed as an exception.


The line in question should be removed. The only other appropriate action would be to greatly expand the line to properly explain the applicable legislation. However, this section is not the proper location for such an expansion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbfacts (talkcontribs) 21:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]



ProPublica: https://www.propublica.org/article/georgia-abortion-ban-amber-thurman-death

Abortion Defense Network: https://abortiondefensenetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Georgia_ADN-Know-Your-State_Feb-2024.pdf

Washington Examiner: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/3161886/fact-check-harris-blames-womans-death-georgia-abortion-law/ Bbfacts (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]