Author Topic: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law  (Read 51988 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rabbit of Caerbannog

  • He's Got Great Big Teeth and the Holy Hand Grenade!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Gender: Male
  • Hit me with your best shot! Fire awaaaay!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2012, 09:59:16 pm »
Speaking as an "actual" sexual assault survivor (not rape, but still a high traumatic experience; I would rather not go into the details), I would not be offended if someone referred to this as medical sexual assault. Granted, I only represent a single data point, but this kind of ranking of sexual assault really pisses me off. All unwanted touching, groping and penetration is traumatic, and how badly a person reacts doesn't work on a linear scale -- it's belittling to say, "Oh, what would REAL victims of rape/sexual assault/whatever think about this!?"

The coercion is at the hands of the government. The fact that the doctor is merely following the law does not alter the fact that this has the potential to traumatize countless women. This is medical assault, period.
Not only is it unwanted, it's unnecessary.

Offline VirtualStranger

  • Blinded with Science
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
  • Gender: Male

Offline N. De Plume

  • Mysterious Writing Implement
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1936
  • Gender: Male
  • Nom, nom, nom…
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2012, 11:30:08 pm »
Fuck Virginia.

 :-\ Its really a good state. The temperature is nice, there's a fair amount of scenario and history if you interested, the beaches in summer are amazing. Our representatives are just assholes.

Unfortunately, representatives can be real deal-killers.
-A Pen Name

Offline erictheblue

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2012, 11:32:41 pm »
Congrats....you're now a rape apologist.

Ironbite-congrats.

Or he could be correct, under Virginia law....

"If any person has sexual intercourse with a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in sexual intercourse with any other person and such act is accomplished (i) against the complaining witness's will, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person. . . he or she shall be guilty of rape."

That is the entirety of rape under VA law. Note the phrase "sexual intercourse"? That is used twice in the statute?

"Sexual intercourse" is not defined in VA law. Which would lead a jurist to common definition.
From Ballentine's Legal Dictionary: "1. The actual contact of the sexual organs of a man and a woman, and an actual penetration into the body of the latter."
From Merriam-Webster's Dictionary: "1: heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis : coitus
2: intercourse (as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis"

Since an ultrasound does not involve either definition of "sexual intercourse," the ultrasound cannot fit the legal definition of "rape" in VA law.


There is another VA statute, which could be referenced here...
"An accused shall be guilty of inanimate or animate object sexual penetration if he or she penetrates the labia majora or anus of a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, other than for a bona fide medical purpose, or causes such complaining witness to so penetrate his or her own body with an object or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in such acts with any other person or to penetrate, or to be penetrated by, an animal, and
   1. The complaining witness is less than 13 years of age, or
   2. The act is accomplished against the will of the complaining witness, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person, or through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness."

An argument could be made that the law in question would violate this law, since there is no "bona fide medical purpose." However, that would create a legal catch-22, as a doctor would be forced to violate either the statute being discussed in this thread, or the statute I just quoted. As such, I cannot see the Commonwealth actually getting convictions in such a circumstance. (It would be an interesting legal challenge to the force-ultrasound law, though...) Also, there is no "force, threat or intimidation of" the woman.


Finally, there is a third possible criminal charge...
"An accused is guilty of sexual battery if he sexually abuses. . . the complaining witness against the will of the complaining witness, by force, threat, intimidation, or ruse,..."

Well, no "force, threat, intimidation, or ruse" in play here. The "complaining witness" willingly went to the medical facility (no force, threat, or intimidation) and was told she would have to undergo this procedure (no ruse).
[Anonymous is] like... an internet Cthulu... you don't want to rouse them, but at the same time... woah think of the beautiful chaos! - SpaceProg

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10686
  • Gender: Male
  • Stuck in the middle with you.
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2012, 11:35:25 pm »
No I'm going to go with my assesment that Nickerson's scum.

Ironbite-much better that way.

Offline erictheblue

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2012, 11:39:42 pm »
No I'm going to go with my assesment that Nickerson's scum.

Ironbite-much better that way.

You can consider him scum if you want. I don't know all the comments he's made that led to that decision (though I know this discussion has come up before). You can even think of the forced-ultrasound as a kind of rape (personally, I tend to agree with you). But in this case, he is legally correct.
[Anonymous is] like... an internet Cthulu... you don't want to rouse them, but at the same time... woah think of the beautiful chaos! - SpaceProg

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10686
  • Gender: Male
  • Stuck in the middle with you.
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #36 on: February 18, 2012, 12:00:03 am »
Legally correct he might be...I don't give a fuck.

Ironbite-he's scum and I'm tired of his shit.

Offline MaybeNever

  • Got His Red Wings
  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Gender: Male
  • Possessed of a proclivity for prolixity
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #37 on: February 18, 2012, 12:04:16 am »
Legal things

I don't think people are relying on legal definitions of rape or coercion when statements of the sort are made, but rather the ethical problem of behaviors that certainly resemble, if not precisely meet the definition of, the comparisons.
"Great Britain's two most senior military officers added to the uneasiness. [...] Lord Wolseley, Adjutant General, thought that it might be possible for an enemy to invade without waiters and pastrycooks."
-Robert K. Massie, Dreadnought

Offline Eniliad

  • Sword And Shield Of The Innocent
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1265
  • Gender: Male
  • Perpetually horny cock-slave
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #38 on: February 18, 2012, 12:08:56 am »
I'm with ironbite - I almost forgot ol nicky existed until he came in here and shat all over the thread.

Oh, and VA's legal system might not technically make this rape - but over 40 states legally say that gay love doesn't amount to shit, so you'll excuse me if I don't take the law's word with the same weight as, say, Newton's Laws.
<Miles> "If dildoes are outlawed then only outlaws will have dildoes."
Quote from: Mlle Antéchrist
Yeah, gays cause hurricanes, tits cause earthquakes, and lack of prayer causes tornadoes. Learn to science, people.
Quote from: Mlle Antéchrist
Porn peddlers peddling pedal porn? My life is complete.

Offline The Right Honourable Mlle Antéchrist

  • The Very Punny Punisher and Owner of the Most Glorious Chest
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4316
  • Gender: Female
  • And I fired two warning shots... into his head.
    • Tumblr Image Blog
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #39 on: February 18, 2012, 01:12:25 am »
Yeah, I'm not overly concerned with the legal definition. It's the pap smear and "actual" victims of rape comments that I take issue with.

As a side note, I'm hoping that someone will sue and get this overturned as unconstitutional. As far as I know, there's some legal precedent for barring laws which interfere with a patient's right to refuse invasive medical procedures, provided that they're competent -- that, along with the gross violation of women's sexual rights, could work in favour of getting this law off the books.
"Je me presse de rire de tout, de peur d'être obligé d'en pleurer."

My Blog (Sometimes NSFW)

Offline Shane for Wax

  • Official Mosin Nagant Fanboy, Crazy, and Lord of Androgynes
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Gender: Male
  • Twin to shy, lover of weapons, pagan, wolf-brother
    • Game Podunk
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #40 on: February 18, 2012, 01:47:02 am »
Laws do not always make morals. I'm not concerned with the legal definition either.

Invasive medical procedures are under the right to refuse for patients especially when it's not medically necessary (this is defined as being something to see a tumor or making sure everything is working right). I am also concerned about things being put into a permanent record like we were threatened with in school.

As someone who has been asked constantly by their doctor if I'd like something omitted from my record, I find it disturbing that if I were to live in Virginia, have this law forced on me, I'd have that added to my chart. There is no medical reason for that at all! It's like having my favorite color placed in my medical record. It is not medically relevant to my knowledge. All putting the information that I was forced to have a vaginal ultrasound is that I had one. This isn't shot records or a scan of my head, people. It's unnecessary info in my med chart. It may be more info but it's not needed.

&
"The human race. Greatest monsters of them all."
"Ke barjurir gar'ade, jagyc'ade kot'la a dalyc'ade kotla'shya."
Fucking Dalek twats I’m going to twat you over the head with my fucking TARDIS you fucking fucks!

Offline Osama bin Bambi

  • The Black Witch
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10167
  • Gender: Female
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #41 on: February 18, 2012, 01:56:05 am »
Invasive and costly for poor women? Anti-choicer's dream come true! It must be their birthday.
Formerly known as Eva-Beatrice and Wykked Wytch.

Quote from: sandman
There are very few problems that cannot be solved with a good taint punching.

Offline Rabbit of Caerbannog

  • He's Got Great Big Teeth and the Holy Hand Grenade!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Gender: Male
  • Hit me with your best shot! Fire awaaaay!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #42 on: February 18, 2012, 02:08:19 am »
Legally correct he might be...I don't give a fuck.

Ironbite-he's scum and I'm tired of his shit.
...meet in the Angry Multiverse everyone?

I'd start the thread there myself but I feel it's not my place to do so. I also feel that this is the wrong place to be hurling personal insults.

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #43 on: February 18, 2012, 09:25:20 am »
Yes, everyone can call it rape if they want to.  Just like the pro-life side calls abortion murder.  They're in the same vein.  You know the one where people use words loosely so to make the other side as horrible as possible.  I know it's not possible at all for anyone to express how much they think this law is wrong without calling it rape, so you all have fun with that. 
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline TenfoldMaquette

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
Re: Legally required invasive procedure and Medical Scarlet letter Law
« Reply #44 on: February 18, 2012, 11:29:46 am »
Finally, there is a third possible criminal charge...
"An accused is guilty of sexual battery if he sexually abuses. . . the complaining witness against the will of the complaining witness, by force, threat, intimidation, or ruse,..."

Well, no "force, threat, intimidation, or ruse" in play here. The "complaining witness" willingly went to the medical facility (no force, threat, or intimidation) and was told she would have to undergo this procedure (no ruse).

At least in my opinion, "Get this unnecessary and invasive medical procedure (ruse) done at your own expense OR we'll deny you legal medical care (threat) and force you to bear the physical, mental, and financial cost of gestating an unwanted child (threat)." could certainly be seen as coercive or threatening in nature.