Ranvier @ Ranvier @sopuli.xyz

Posts

9

Comments

928

Joined

2 yr. ago

Unfortunately the courts have been ruling against using EMTALA in this way, letting these ridiculous state laws stand instead (that are totally oblivious to medical reality and think there's some magic point where a doctor can say, now they're gonna die if I don't do something and then still be able to save them 100% no problem).

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/02/texas-abortion-fifth-circuit/

Currently the Biden admin has two different lawsuits trying to apply EMTALA more aggressively already.

https://www.vox.com/scotus/2023/12/4/23984674/supreme-court-abortion-emtala-emergency-medically-necessary-idaho

The supreme court is allowing the state laws to stand in the meantime though. A bad sign for how they will eventually rule. Unfortunately unless we see the supreme court rule in favor of the Biden admin's position to use EMTALA more aggressively (which seems unlikely with this court), they're not able to do much here.

For the United States, it's not even just some risk of future harm. The standard is much stricter, it's if "a provider determines that there is a serious and imminent threat of a patient physically harming self or others." Has to be something very specific and imminent for confidentiality to be breached.

There are a few more edge cases though, for instance doctors and other healthcare workers are usually mandatory reporters by law, so if they suspect child abuse they are legally obligated to report it. Another one is for infectious disease tracking and reporting, there may also be confidentiality exceptions.

Oh absolutely, I did not mean to imply I agreed with that original poster that all Jewish people should have been forcibly emigrated to the United States or whatever bad take that was. I just thought it was bizarre they were saying "why didn't this happen?" about Jewish people leaving for America when it literally did happen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_United_States

It's just a bit of a weird time to criticize the United States tolerance of Jewish people in a thread about "why didn't they all move to America?" when in actuality millions of them did for exactly that reason. The improved tolerance in the United States in comparison to Europe throughout the 19th and 20th centuries is why they now have the largest Jewish population in the world second only to Israel. Not that the United States is perfect or shouldn't keep working on improving tolerance of others by any means.

Commenter above you doesn't know what they're talking about. The reason why the United States has such a large Jewish population is they were escaping ethnic cleansing and anti semitisim in Europe. Not saying the United States is perfect by any means and no anti semitisim exists there, but yes increased tolerance is a principal reason why they were emigrating to the US.

I mean that kind of happened already. There's a reason why the United States has the second highest Jewish population in the world, less only than Israel and not by much. Rampant anti semitisim in Europe among other reasons drove many to emigrate to the US. Between 1880 and 1914 alone, 2 million Ashkenazi Jewish people immigrated to the United States to escape ethnic cleansing pogroms in Eastern Europe.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_United_States

I've posted a summary of what the Biden admin has done this term to protect reproductive rights, not just "repeated the same arguments." The senate made an attempt to codify it in 2022 and it failed, blocked by republicans.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/11/1097980529/senate-to-vote-on-a-bill-that-codifies-abortion-protections-but-it-will-likely-f

You've offered no suggestions on what you think the Biden admin should be doing differently right now.

You're not even reading, just denying everything that has been done to improve things, offering no criticisms for the politicians who actually created this situation, and doing your best to encourage voter apathy. Forgive me if I'm skeptical of your motives.

No they're actually in NATO unlike Ukraine. If NATO didn't defend them directly it would be the end of NATO. Even if Trump or someone uncooperative with NATO was president of the US, I think Europe would still engage in a collective defense if Russia started attacking EU countries.

Supporting Ukraine now is the best way to prevent any of this from coming to pass though.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-highlights-commitment-to-defending-reproductive-rights-and-actions-to-protect-access-to-reproductive-health-care-one-year-after-overturning-of-roe-v-wade/

If you have any other ideas besides the ones linked above of what the president can do to protect reproductive rights with executive actions alone I'd like to hear them.

And with a republican president at the helm instead? They could wreak havoc with basically opposite orders of everything in that linked list, even in the states where it's legal. Or sign a republican federal law banning abortion nationwide. Like, just look at what states are passing laws to protect reproductive rights and what states are doing the opposite, there's obviously a party trying to protect abortion access and one trying to eliminate it.

Criticize away that democrats didn't use that few weeks in 2009 or the last super majority before that in 1979 to codify roe v wade (though they didn't have pro choice super majorities at either of those times by any means so I'm not sure how they would have gone about that), but I'm skeptical of anyone who focuses on that and not obvious current events and actions the Biden admin has taken since roe v wade was struck down. Encouraging voter apathy and flipping elections to republicans is going to make everything a whole lot worse. Give pro choice (and ideally pro overturning the filibuster and pro reform the supreme court) candidates enough control of congress though and hopefully we can get some more change for the better.

"Voters won't be fooled"

/gestures toward substantial portion of the country that believes an elaborate plot involving Venezuelans hacking into voting machines to rig the election

I'm not so sure I'd be that confident in the voters

You'd be surprised, it's really not that bad. And even if you've only remembered one but got everything else it's still a pass

It's not hard, here it is for anyone curious

There are some slightly different versions, though I'm not aware of any with a whale on it.

And it's a screening test for dementia, not some kind of iq test. Raging narcissist took this and decided he's the smartest person ever though.

Hardest question on there is the date imo.

Eh, that's a bit of a stretch. Poland is one of the stronger militaries in Eastern Europe. If somehow Russia got out of their war in Ukraine with anything resembling a semi-intact military, they'd probably be trying to roll into either Georgia or Moldova next. I mean, more than they already are in those countries. I think if they were really going to test NATO's mutual defense treaty (like if Trump was elected, who has repeatedly refused to affirm he would support article 5), they'd probably start with attacking a Baltic state after some heavy interference and hybrid warfare first, maybe trying to carve a land bridge to kaliningrad or "protecting russian speaking peoples" or something as an excuse.

Interestingly China would also be quite upset if Taiwan stopped claiming sovereignty over the mainland. To them that would signal an end to the one China policy. So Taiwan maintaining its claim to the mainland is actually to keep China happy. I don't think the Taiwan government is under any illusion that they will someday take over the mainland.

Periodic reminder to please directly subscribe to quality news sources to help fund good journalism. Especially local newspapers which have been really struggling. They are often the only ones holding your local elected officials accountable or reporting on them to any degree.

How about now. Now is good.

Just to be clear on the first two points, you can designate anyone as your health care proxy. Check your state for specific applicable forms. In general if no one is designated though it will default to a spouse.

Health care proxy is also different than power of attorney, which sometimes people get confused on.

Wait, there was a Democrat that rejected it?

When Louisiana rejected the lunch program, a Democrat was still the governor; on Jan. 8, a Republican took over.

Oh, Louisiana, right, that adds up

Google it yourself for other sources then, not hard to find info on the many anti democratic actions Hungary's leader has taken or his rollbacks on human rights over the past decade. I don't think even his supporters contest that, they just contest if it's wrong to do or not.