Don’t confuse me with the facts

by Susan Olsen



Nationwide in 2011, mothers, aided and abetted by physicians, murdered their unborn children at a rate of 1 every 2.28 minutes.  HB 483-FN (which the legislature didn’t have to time calculate) seeks to insert 24 hours between an unborn child and its destruction by adapting,  for all extents and purposes, the American Medical Association’s concept of informed consent below (emphasis mine): 

Informed consent is more than simply getting a patient to sign a written consent form. It is a process of communication between a patient and physician that results in the patient’s authorization or agreement to undergo a specific medical intervention.

In the communications process, you, as the physician providing or performing the treatment and/or procedure (not a delegated representative), should disclose and discuss with your patient:

    • The patient’s diagnosis, if known;
    • The nature and purpose of a proposed treatment or procedure;
    • The risks and benefits of a proposed treatment or procedure;
    • Alternatives (regardless of their cost or the extent to which the treatment options are covered by health insurance);
    • The risks and benefits of the alternative treatment or procedure; and
    • The risks and benefits of not receiving or undergoing a treatment or procedure.

In turn, your patient should have an opportunity to ask questions to elicit a better  understanding of the treatment or procedure, so that he or she can make an informed decision to proceed or to refuse a particular course of medical intervention.

This communications process, or a variation thereof, is both an ethical obligation and a legal requirement spelled out in statutes and case law in all 50 states.

 Abortion is not birth control.

The hearing is today in the HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE at 1:30, in the Legislative Office Building, Room 201-203

Leave a Comment



    • Emanations from penumbras, or is there a point, pro or anti, contained in above nugget?

    • nhsteve

      I appreciate your brevity but…what is your point?

      • Bubbles

        I think it’s his head, Steve.


    My point is that one-trick-pony Suze needs to get a life and realize that Roe V Wade is the law of the land. It’s settled law. It’s Constitutional. It’s been verified by SCOTUS. And it ain’t goin’ nowhere.

    • granitegrok

      Yeah, the Teacher Union Protection Racketeers (otherwise known as Democrat legislators) have a funny definition of “settled law” residing in Concord. The law that was “settled” in the last session? Overturn it this session.

      Such models of “definition” they are. One thing they have settled for the rest of us – settled law is only settled if you agree with it. Otherwise, as the Dems are demonstrating – settled law is defined as “does it agree with our ideology?”

      If the Rs ever get the triple play like the Dems did in DC in 2008/2009, I’d love to see it overturned – and send it back to the States.

      • IWKAGGP

        Never gonna happen. The trend in a Democracy is towards freedom. And overturning Roe v. Wade goes against this trend.

Previous post:

Next post: