40 thoughts on “Monday message board

  1. Helen,
    Personally I’m a maths, physics and chemistry man, as well as appreciating rational risk/return, but I’m well aware that has its limitations. More gifted men of science than me have quickly run into that problem. For all their science, they can’t even determine why the observa is heterosexual rather than homosexual, nor why he might be a neocon trog whilst his older sister is a Margo Kingston clone. As for Anthony’s clocks, some might say they’re a curious cultural anachronism, when their God has given him the sun and moon and the stars to order his life around. Creationists, greenies and global warming scientists and ecologists may have much wisdom in common to offer. Some might even say they share a similar religious fervour.

    “It doesn’t follow that because there are risks of complications with abortion, it follows that that is an argument against abortion per se. It is actually an argument in favour of clean, safe, legal abortion….”
    Well it does follow Helen, particularly when the downside is a result of clean, safe, legal abortion, although with full knowledge of the risks now, many might be prepared to continue with business as usual. However there could be a snag on the horizon. Suppose only chemical abortion was available whereas curettage was not and the risks now identified were the same? Would/should the drug companies withdraw from the market given this new knowledge about the risks? Probably they would given the legal liability. That’s the $64000 question WRT to clean, safe, legal abortion now. What will happen if some mother wins a hefty legal claim in future for a miscarried child, as a result of prior abortion? Do you really think our medicos would continue practising abortion under that legal cloud? If not, would the women’s autonomy advocates be prepared to argue for an exemption from legal liability for all abortion procedures? Now that would be an interesting tack, in light of some recent revelations at Bundaberg hospital. Of course, all this time, the christian pro-lifers will be nipping at their heels saying they told us so. Watch that space now Helen, because I’m sure some top barristers would have spotted the opening.

  2. I’d add here Helen, that you might begin to appreciate why we in business are not exactly gushing with enthusiasm over the retrospective sorry crowd and their barristers, particularly where epidemiological risk is concerned. As far as we’re concerned, until such time as society via government, decides a practice or product is banned, then the suppliers and producers should be free from retrospective litigation to trade.

  3. Observa – conflating insurance companies and ambulance chasing lawyers with “the retrospective sorry crowd and their barristers” is an odd thing to do.

    As a plain bluff man of business I am sure you appreciate the kinds of business regulations that the news article you cited is referrring to. Jill Rush has cited a significant bit above, as the newly free and flexible workplace disintegrates into a horrid flurry of contracts.

    The outsourcing beloved of our free enterprise friends is also gruesomely legalistic.

    Not to mention, of course, GST etc. Your lawyer and your accountant are laughing.

  4. Observa, your remarks at 23 have already come true to some extent, in relation to haemophiliacs who were forced into receiving AIDS-infected products by the threat of all treatment being withheld. This happened in the early AIDS days, when focussed haemophiliavs knew more about the risks than the medical establishment. I don’t know if any JW haemophiliacs were court-ordered into a death sentence that way, though.

  5. “conflating insurance companies and ambulance chasing lawyers with “the retrospective sorry crowd and their barristersâ€? is an odd thing to do.”

    Not when I qualified it by talking about epidemiological risks David. Engineering and regulatory safety risk is fairly well policed, quantifiable and insurable. The problem is the slow elucidation of risk eg drugs, tobacco, asbestos and perhaps now abortion? Courts are wise after the event with hindsight that our society via govt never possessed at the time.

  6. What are these ? please. Is it some sort of virtual secret handshake?
    Helen appears to be busy so, Observa apart from material on propaganda sites I can’t identify these risks of induced abortion which I assume are considered to be greater than birth? As spontaneous abortion is measured at 1 in 36 women will have 2 abortions due to nothing more than chance this is clearly a considerable health risk, (pregnancy,) if it is the case that there are the adverse health outcomes you hint at.
    Your scenario of chemical abortion only, with, I assume you are saying, suction curettage being banned? Have I missed pressure for that to happen. Or are you referring to the possibility that raped women in war zones might be given chemical abortions without the facilities to follow through with curettage if it should be necessary? Hence the possibility of the full term delivery of severely deformed foetuses. Incomplete spontaneous abortions would presumably have to take their chances in such developments or circumstances in medical care availability..
    Thanks PM, my husband thought you were very witty.

  7. Ros,
    The research on increased risk of miscarriage due to previous abortion was described in the Age article I linked to in comment 7 above. I subsequently raised the hypothetical notion that IF this sort of result was solely due to abortion by chemical means, then most likely the drug companies would run a mile from it and withdraw from the market-place. (think VIOX recently) That is not the case, but there may be some legal complications with the current method in future. One successful litigation case would ruin any medico’s ability(think indemnity insurance) to continue to carry out abortions. This could prove to be the economic fait accompli that pro-lifers are morally seeking.

    Now you might think that is all a bit far fetched, but let me provide you with a little anecdote from the Adelaide news tonight. The Central Districts private hospital has advised prospective mums that all birthing at its hospital will cease at the end of the year when its last obstetrician retires. Private patients can deliver their bubs at the public Lyell McQuewin hospital and transfer back for after delivery private care. Do you get the picture about indemnity insurance for high risk obstetrics now? If you think govts are going to foot the bill for 100,000 high litigious risk abortions a year, then I’d suggest you haven’t been listening to Tony Abbott and Co lately(think IVF cost restrictions). In any case abortions don’t exactly sit well with 2-3 yr waiting lists for public elective surgery now. Cross your legs girls, the barristers aren’t too quick off the mark, drumming up business armed with the latest research. Welcome to the businessman’s dilemma me lefty darlin’s. User pays for ‘retrospective sorry’ indemnity premiums or you don’t get served.

  8. The Central Districts thing, this South Australian has been conscious of the problem for rural families of the inaccessibility to obstetric care in rural hospitals for some time. As to the particular litigiousness of parents re birth, eg I heard a Melbourne obstetrician last year making the point that 50% of Melbourne practitioners at that time were facing litigation.

    Symptomatic of something more than damaged children? The high risk averse nature of affluent Australians combined with the primitive view that if something is not right it must be someone’s fault maybe. Vaccinations still and will continue despite a falling off and the hysteria about autism for example. As an aside I always found the, we haven’t vaccinated because of the risks mob extremely galling. Those who make that choice rely on sufficient others doing it to ensure that the far greater risk of diseases such as whooping cough or diphtheria (see what happened after the break up of the USSR) to their children are avoided by the actions, and risks taken, of the rest of us. Alternatively they are rather stupid.

    100,000 high litigious risk abortions a year, that figure of course includes treatment for incomplete spontaneous abortions, and clearly not all induced abortions result in further pregnancies being premature. There are a lot of questions re that study. To start with there are studies that show that race in the US means that there is a difference in premature birth rate, which of course just returns us to the initial discussion re abortion crime and poverty.

    Haven’t been listening to Tony Abbott. Oh yes this RWDB has. And her RWDB mates. If there is any attempt to scale back women’s right to abortion these RWDBs will be hitting the streets for the first time in their lives. Yep so RWDB that we didn’t join reconciliation or peace marches despite the opportunity for a chatty alfresco lunch and wine as a reward for our virtue. And Tony Abbott will now never be an acceptable leader of the Liberal Party for us ageing conservatives. And we have advised our husbands that the same applies to them. This is an issue of huge importance to a usually quiet mob and their daughters, even if most of said daughters could afford the plane trip to India as one choice if the need should arise.

    Any hope that certain religious may hold that such one off studies would give them an opportunity to repress women is a pipe dream.

    And I did vote Labor once. When only fourteen federal members voted for a relaxing of abortion availability and they were all Labor.

    I don’t know what these acronyms with question marks are.

  9. According to this article, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi may well be injured. The articles goes onto quote a website attributing a comment to one of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s ‘associates’: “”Islamic nation, brothers in unity, we pray God that our sheikh, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, recover from the wounds he has sustained,” said the statement issued in the name of the “information department” of Zarqawi’s militant organisation. May God heal you, the most dear of the mujahedeen (Islamic fighters). May God give you strength,” said the al-Qaeda Organisation in the Land of Two Rivers, without giving details on the extent of Zarqawi’s injuries or how they were inflicted.”

    Now, how come innocent Iraq’s butchered and maimed aren’t affored the same regard, as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is afforded? How come Abu Musab al-Zarqawi isn’t rushing towards matrydom? Why should this pathertic butcher’s life be spared?

    Rhetorical questions I know, but felt I had to vent.


  10. Maybe AMaZ doesn’t like black-eyed virgins.

    When, on the eve of GWII the Columbia space shuttle crashed and burned, Saddam Hussein opined that it was a judgement of God on the United States.

    Let me hasten to explain that Saddam’s opinion bemused me.

    However, this opinion enraged Bush. Now, if one believes in a God given to editorial comment, it seems that shuttle disasters might be the precise means by which S/He expresses Her/His opinion on current affairs. After all, the Old Testament is full of such instances.

    Perhaps Bush protested too much. Maybe he detected a germ of truth in Saddam’s divination of Divine Judgement.

    And, given the course of events in Iraq, just maybe …

    No, I must resist the temptation to compass God’s purposes.

  11. Anyone read this article?
    I don’t have an AFR subscription so I’ll probably buy the printed version later today, but here’s a snippet…

    “World property prices on a knife-edge” reports Corinne Lim. “The private sector is polarised about the global real-estate juggernaut. Bubble or no bubble? Gentle descent or crash? Safe bet or ticking bomb? Most economists have steered clear of disaster scenarios. But the froth in many markets refuses to subside despite the best efforts of policymakers, and some observers are rightly sweaty-palmed about a recent flare-up in speculative activity.”

  12. Here’s a possible essay topic for a course in Comparative Political Ideologies:

    “A hypothetical political ideology maintains that a young woman who:

    “(a) has green eyes and pale skin;

    “(b) has a facial structure and body shape which conform to dominant Anglo-Celtic cultural standards of beauty;

    “(c) behaves in a manner which conforms to gender stereotypes of how the “weaker sex” should behave when in a stressful situation (e.g. weeping, fainting, etc.);

    “(d) conspicuously converts to Christianity;

    “is entitled to special efforts being made on her behalf by the government of her white Christian nation which would not be made on behalf of people in similar circumstances without this combination of attributes.

    “This ideology further maintains that the government of a nation inhabited by brown-skinned, brown-eyed Islamic people, in which the aforesaid woman has encountered legal difficulties, should defer to the wishes of the government of its white, Christian neighbour in a manner and to an extent which it would not do for others in similar circumstances without her combination of attributes.

    “Discuss the differences (if any) between this ideology and classical European fascism.”

  13. Ros,
    I was talking to a relative high up in health in an Adelaide metro hospital and she tells me their only gyny carrying out abortions is overdue for retirement with no prospective replacement. The litigation problem is not about the high profile court awards we hear about in MSM from time to time. That’s the tip of the iceberg, compared to what’s negotiated behind closed doors. We stopped all our construction work in kindys and schools after the HIH collapse due to horrendous liability premia we were quoted to continue any work in that field. You have to specialise and charge accordingly.

    Trips to India for obstetrics may not be that far away. Either that or offshore floating abortion clinics in international waters coming to a coast near you soon. You wants to play you gots to pay.

  14. You wants to play you gots to pay.

    I hope you are including the male partner in that gleeful aside, Observa.

Comments are closed.