There's no such thing as a stupid question, but they're the easiest to answer.
JoinTour
Login
 
Tag Cloud
blue screen blue screen of death boot computer connection cpu crash css dell display driver drivers email error ethernet excel firefox firefox 3 game hard drive hardware internet internet explorer itunes laptop lcd malware monitor network networking nvidia outlook outlook 2003 outlook express partition printer problem problems router security slow sound trojan usb video virus vista windows windows xp wireless
Civilized Debate
Search
Search in:
 
Advanced Search
Tech Support Guy Forums > Community > Civilized Debate >
Asscroft wants to see you medical records


HELLO AND WELCOME! Before you can post your question, you'll have to register -- it's completely free! Click here to join today! We highly recommend that you print a copy of our Guide for New Members. Enjoy!

 
Thread Tools
bassetman's Avatar
Computer Specs
Moderator with 47,147 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great White North (WI)
Experience: Getting somewhere I hope
26-Apr-2004, 02:42 PM #1
Asscroft wants to see you medical records
well at least if you are a woman.

He wants to find out if any women had a late term abortion, who didn't really didn't need it for health reasons.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_ro...2/27/ashcroft/
slickoe's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 2,206 posts.
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in a house with a roof and 4 walls
Experience: not as smart as I think
26-Apr-2004, 02:59 PM #2
I remember reading this. Ironic how a breast made of marble offends him but not an X-ray of a cervix.
bassetman's Avatar
Computer Specs
Moderator with 47,147 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great White North (WI)
Experience: Getting somewhere I hope
26-Apr-2004, 03:00 PM #3
Lol
angelize56's Avatar
Always remembered in our hearts with 82,268 posts.
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Goddess of Random/Resident Angel
Experience: Learning it all here!
27-Apr-2004, 12:10 PM #4
U.S. to Drop Fight for Hospital Abortion Records
Mon Apr 26, 2004 06:30 PM ET
By Gail Appleson

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. government said on Monday it planned to drop its fight to obtain patient abortion records from a Manhattan hospital so a widely watched trial challenging a 2003 federal abortion ban could conclude.

Litigation over a government subpoena for confidential medical records from New York-Presbyterian Hospital has delayed a ruling by a Manhattan federal judge on the constitutionality of the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003."

The bench trial in the case began last month on the same day similar challenges to the ban began in San Francisco and Lincoln, Nebraska.

A key issue in all three cases is a congressional finding that the procedure is never medically necessary to protect a woman's health. The law was signed by President Bush on Nov. 5, 2003.

Abortion providers, who have sued to overturn the law, say the language is so vague and broad that it applies to a range of abortions performed as early as 13 weeks into a pregnancy.

They argue the ban is unconstitutional because it lacks an exception that would allow the procedure to protect a woman's health.

Proponents of the ban say it applies only to one kind of late-term procedure involving the destruction of a "living fetus" that is at least partially outside the mother's body. The government maintains the procedure is not only medically unnecessary but is an "inhumane procedure that causes pain to the fetus."

The government's decision to drop the subpoena will allow U.S. District Judge Richard Casey to set a date for closing arguments in the New York case.

New York-Presbyterian has resisted turning over patient records it considers confidential. Although Casey ordered the hospital to comply with the subpoena, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the order last month.

The appeals court heard arguments in the case last week and asked for further briefs.

Although the testimony phase of the trial has ended, Casey said he would reopen the case if the appeals court ruled the hospital had to turn over the records.

A government lawyer told Casey there was no way to know how long it would take the appeals process to conclude.

"The trial is over, the evidence is in. There is an important and substantial public interest in having a prompt decision on the constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003," said Sheila Gowan, assistant U.S. attorney.

"The government would like resolution of the important issue before your Honor as quickly as possible. To that end ... we have determined to voluntarily withdraw the subpoena."
__________________
June 18, 2007: My niece Christi had her baby GIRL! 10:15 a.m.....Emily Debra....7 Lbs. 10 Ozs....21" in length. She has a little dark hair...moves her lips and mouth so sweetly...has pretty petite features...thank you God!!
bassetman's Avatar
Computer Specs
Moderator with 47,147 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great White North (WI)
Experience: Getting somewhere I hope
27-Apr-2004, 12:22 PM #5
I guess a little public pressure works!
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
WELCOME TO TECH SUPPORT GUY! Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question -- for free! Our site is run completely by volunteers who help people like you solve computer problems. See our Welcome Guide to get started.



Thread Tools


You Are Using:
Server ID
Advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:54 AM.
Copyright © 1996 - 2008 TechGuy, Inc. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin, Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0
Powered by Cermak Technologies, Inc.