Vive La France!

[motorbiking]

That's never going to happen.

because I'm not.

It's so obvious to anyone who has read the act and has ever been required to provide a certificate of opinion.

 

[denso13]

There is no requirement for a consultation of any kind.

How do they determine she is less than 24 weeks gone?

 

[motorbiking]

No medical considerations? Give your head a shake...

(1)Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith—

[F1(a)that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or

(b)that the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or

(c)that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or

(d)that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.]

How can someone give a medical opinion without having seen or examined a person?

good to see you reading the act though - good job.

 

[motorbiking]

How do they determine she is less than 24 weeks gone?

You are the one claiming they need to perform a medical assessment - look at the form. its super clear

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7bfdb0e5274a7202e18dc6/HSA1-form.pdf

 

[denso13]

good to see you reading the act though

You criticised me a long time ago for quoting from it. Did you forget?

 

[denso13]

You are the one claiming they need to perform a medical assessment - look at the form. its super clear

You are swerving again.

C the pregnancy has NOT exceeded its 24th week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman;

How is the 24 week thing determined? Or the possible risks?

 

[motorbiking]

This is your argument. you are the one saying they are required to make a medical assessment. I think you are slowly getting to the difference between an opinion and an approval.

Read the words in C carefully against the back drop of abortion risk vs labour risk.

All things being equal this will always be the case. As a reminder, there is no minimum risk criteria, this was changed in the 1991 amendment.

 

[JonathanM]

As a reminder, there is no minimum risk criteria, this was changed in the 1991 amendment.

I don't think it was. They altered the wording to turn one sentence into two, but there was no change to the effect or the meaning.

 

[JonathanM]

because I'm not.

I'm not suggesting you should!

 

[JonathanM]

I don't think it was. They altered the wording to turn one sentence into two, but there was no change to the effect or the meaning.

Look at the two versions.

Original from 1967 with one sentence:

that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, or of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated;

1991 amendment with two sentences:

that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family

that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated

All they have done is turn one sentence into two, but the meaning is exactly the same (obviously apart from the additional part about the 24 week limit).

 

[denso13]

This is your argument.

You are still swerving. You say a consultation is not required, fine. How then do they determine if the criteria are met, in their opinion, for example, less than 24 gone?

 

[motorbiking]

Why are you asking me? You are arguing that they need to give a medical and legal opinion. I have stated this is not the case. It's not the case in the abortion act and its clear on the forms that they can give their opinion without either doctor seeing or examining the woman. Why don't you do some research to see how they do it.

or is irrelevant since they are not being asked to give approval as the best course of action medically?

I think we know the answer

 

[noseall]

You really do need to read the whole report and of course the actual law.

You can be legally accountable for an approval, there is no recourse to an opinion formed in good faith. It's why Lawyers give "legal opinion" all the time.

I have read it. It changes nothing.
It's approval. It says so in the report. The rest if your post is irrelevant waffle

 

[denso13]

Why are you asking me?

Ok, I'll answer my own question, again. You claimed the doctor can say they have not examined the patient, that is correct. It does not mean they have not looked at, for example, medical records and come to their opinion that way.

The criteria they take into consideration are clear. They certify whether the criteria are met, and the abortion is approved to proceed, or not.

 

[motorbiking]

I actually said do some research, but you'd rather go with the content of your confused head again..