Remix.run Logo
eur0pa 3 hours ago

Abortion is legal in this country, and any woman can go to the hospital (as in the ER), or at a consultorio familiare to initiate the process. Both options are free of charge and free of judgement, especially the latter. As to why these two websites were rendered inaccessible it beats me, as there are many other local alternatives one may peruse, and they're all accessible. Hell, even the Italian Government Website has resources[1][2]!

[1] https://www.salute.gov.it/new/it/tema/salute-della-donna/

[2] https://www.salute.gov.it/new/it/tema/salute-della-donna/int...

ordu 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Both options are free of charge and free of judgement, especially the latter.

Maybe they are free of charge, idk, but they doesn't seem to be free of judgement. From the article:

Even if an abortion seeker is within the 12 week gestational limit and has access to a local hospital, a doctor can turn them away on the basis of conscientious objection, which legally allows any doctor to deny a patient an abortion on moral grounds. In 2019, it was reported that 67% of Italian gynecologists were registered as conscientious objectors and multiple hospitals reported having a 100% conscientious objection rate.

Even finding a doctor seem to be an issue, because most of them would tell you that they are more moral than you think and wouldn't do an abortion.

If a care seeker can find a doctor who is willing to perform an abortion, they must endure a 7-day waiting period between their initial request for an abortion and the procedure (which can push care seekers past the 12 week gestational limit).

So they believe that women are probably mistaken and don't know what they want, don't they? Or maybe they just want to make it harder to fit abortion in the 12 week limit?

In April 2024, the Italian parliament passed a measure allowing anti-abortion activists to enter abortion consultation clinics.

These activists I'm sure wouldn't judge. No way. Would they?

exolymph 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

Should doctors be forced to perform abortions they don't condone?

DaFranker 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Let me help answer that question by abstracting away the charged element and disambiguating the most common point of actual logical contention:

Should doctors be forced to perform <P:procedure> they don't ~~condone~~[A:believe is medically safe and appropriate for a diagnosis|B:wish to support or endorse on non-medical grounds].

To me, and for most reasonable people I've properly been able to have a conversation with on this subject, the answer is universally an emphatic NO for the vast majority of possible procedures P, in both cases A and B. However, where things diverge is that most people believe there should be consequences for the doctor refusing on grounds B to perform a procedure other doctors would consider to fit the criteria of A, for virtually every P I've thought of. These consequences typically include removal of their license to practice medicine, and may include civil or criminal penalties in egregious cases where a doctor might claim religious objection to something like CPR in a situation where they were the only doctor working at an ER and the CPR was clearly medically necessary, for example.

secretsatan 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Depends how you define a doctor i guess, one that refuses to do the job isn’t.

lelanthran 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> As to why these two websites were rendered inaccessible it beats me, as there are many other local alternatives one may peruse, and they're all accessible.

Because, presumably, abortion is legal only in specific circumstances (first trimester, I imagine) and these websites are bypassing that.

FTFA:

> Today, Women on Web facilitates online access to abortion pills

I'd expect any website that provides access to non-over-the-counter pills is operating against the law. I mean, it'd be nice if I can buy antibiotics online, but I can't in my jurisdiction.

eur0pa 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Ah that does it. Abortion pills are not candies. There's a reason why they are expected to be used in a hospital setting, with medical personnel nearby. If these websites facilitate the distribution of prescription meds, they're no different from other "online pharmacies" and get the same treatment

bragr 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>There's a reason why they are expected to be used in a hospital setting, with medical personnel nearby.

Not really true. They've been repeatedly shown in studies to be safe for home use. They're evaluating packaging and instructions for possible OTC sale in the the future:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articl...

lelanthran an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> They've been repeatedly shown in studies to be safe for home use.

In that case I fully support the organisations involved to campaign to make abortion pills OTC legal. That does not mean that I support them skirting the law as it is now.

toomuchtodo an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

https://www.plancpills.org/

https://www.plancpills.org/guide-how-to-get-abortion-pills

(US centric)

lokar 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is ample evidence that video appointments followed by pills through the mail are safe and effective with very low rates of complications that can be addressed in a local ER if needed.

chpatrick 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In Hungary abortion is technically legal but only surgically, and the public health system is mental torture including being forced to listen to the heartbeat of the fetus (thanks to our local fascist party). Women on Web is a million times more humane. It's not like anyone thinks "oh I'm pregnant I'll just pop a pill and it's solved".

ktm5j 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[flagged]

throw-qqqqq 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don’t think any woman who seeks an abortion, is unaware that it will kill the foetus. Having to listen to the heartbeat seems performative IMO.

The heartbeat develops in weeks 5-6 and can be heard from around week 10. You can have a legal abortion in Italy until 90 days/~13 weeks.

AFAIK it’s 14 weeks in France and Spain, 18 weeks in Denmark and Sweden, 22 in NL etc. just for some context.

Tade0 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Friendly reminder that at the 6th week, when the heartbeat is detectable, the body is still undecided whether it will keep the fetus. It's not an indicator of anything - just something we're emotionally attached to as humans.

20-25% otherwise healthy pregnancies end spontaneously before the 12th week and it's a mechanism used in non-surgical abortion.

At the 8th week my SO's gynecologist made an offhand remark not to get attached just yet, because we were still within the window where that happens.

Forgeties79 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> but I also think that it's a good idea to know what you're doing

Why do so many people say this about women and their bodies? You seriously think the vast majority of women considering an abortion haven’t given it much thought? Should they all have to face more obstructions and guilt trips and patronizing lectures because a handful maybe don’t? It’s ridiculous.

As for the “heartbeat” standard, I’m not getting in to it, suffice to say that should not be a bar here for deciding a woman’s rights.

> I stand by this comment, downvote all you like folks.

I wasn’t going to until this part of your comment.

true_religion 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They are just applying the same logic behind all prescription medication to abortion pills.

To this day, despite having taken them for the past 30 years, I still require a new prescription for Adderall because society deemed the addiction risk too high to avoid inserting a doctor into the equation every 30 days.

Abortifacients can cause the death of the person taking them. That’s something no one wants.

Can some people manage the risks of prescription medication on their own? Yes, but like with Adderall, society tends to lean towards caution and considers a doctor’s visit to be morally neutral as doctors aren’t expected to moralize and guilt but perform a medical service.

Personally, I think a doctor who guilts someone over medication should have their license revoked. There’s a time and place for such feelings but medical interventions are life and death.

Forgeties79 an hour ago | parent [-]

He is talking about abortion writ large, not the relative risk of a specific medication. He’s even making an appeal to the “heart beat rule.”

true_religion 27 minutes ago | parent [-]

When writing my comment, I did think to myself that the commenter might be biased, but it was borderline.

So I deliberately chose to steel-man the argument.

They are of course free to destroy their credibility and end civil discussion, but I didn't want to do it for them.

Woshiwuja 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

lelanthran 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> In Hungary abortion is technically legal but only surgically, and the public health system is mental torture including being forced to listen to the heartbeat of the fetus (thanks to our local fascist party). Women on Web is a million times more humane. It's not like anyone thinks "oh I'm pregnant I'll just pop a pill and it's solved".

Hang on, how is listening to the heartbeat mental torture?

Look, I'm generally pro-abortion, but I consider it a continuous spectrum and not a binary switch. At some fuzzy point the foetus is more than a collection of cells. The whole argument is "where is that point?"

Abortion 1 month after conception? I can't really argue against. Abortion 1 day before birth? That's clearly already a child and I will object.

If it was so clear-cut the issue wouldn't be so polarising.

Freak_NL 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> That's clearly already a child and I will object.

Not your body, not your choice.

Late stage abortions in order to protect the live of the pregnant woman happen. Unviable pregnancies happen. You know what happens in countries where abortion laws are so strict that even a medical emergency will land the doctor in legal trouble? The pregnant woman dies during or before childbirth.

> Hang on, how is listening to the heartbeat mental torture?

It's guilt-tripping based on an unscientific view of pregnancy. A foetus' heart starts beating way before it is even remotely close to being a child rather than a lump of cells.

> If it was so clear-cut the issue wouldn't be so polarising.

It's polarising because the topic is so very useful to get religious people who want to impose their holy book on everyone else to vote for you.

munk-a 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's torture because abortion is never a trivial decision to make - by the time a person has decided to get an abortion and not become a parent we should respect their wishes. If a decision has been made there's no reason to cause pointless emotional grief before executing the operation.

drdaeman 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It is mainly so because of lack of education and emotional manipulation into mixing up human biology and human personhood. Heartbeat doesn’t make a person. It’s not even a requirement to be a person (people with continuous-flow artificial hearts lack it). The first specks of personhood appear a lot later in the process.

A normal sane reaction is “yeah, there’s already a working cardiovascular system, better stop it before the organism develops even further.”

This said, it’s an obviously pointless and harmful delay. There is no reason to check a heartbeat of a fetus if a mother decides she doesn’t want to carry it.

chpatrick 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It has absolutely no medical function apart from further traumatizing a woman who's already in a really shitty situation.

No one's saying abortion should be possible at 8 months. At 6 weeks when there's a heartbeat it's barely a bag of cells.

lelanthran 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> No one's saying abortion should be possible at 8 months.

Sibling poster actually did say that; even moved the line further out.

>> Abortion 1 day before birth? That's clearly already a child and I will object.

> Not your body, not your choice.

reducesuffering an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> No one's saying abortion should be possible at 8 months.

Yes people do, what? It's legal in like at least 8 US states

mullingitover an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Hang on, how is listening to the heartbeat mental torture?

How about if the state decided that it wouldn't force you to donate your organs to some dying person who needed them, but every time there was a person who needed your your organs and you declined you would have to sit and listen to their heartbeat for 20 minutes. Really sit and think about the person you're deciding to kill. After all, if you don't give your body to someone who needs it, you've killed them.

You'd be cool with that, right?

qsort 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Torture" is definitely hyperbolic, but being forced to listen to the heartbeat of the fetus is not something that's based on any kind of science or rational argument, it's quite transparently emotional manipulation.

I agree with you that it's a delicate issue, I really do. I'm also tired of taking infinite psychic damage trying to steel-man the arguments of people who are clearly not interested in operating at the level of steel.

watwut 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The whole point is to imply you are killing a baby. Like literally. The only reason for that law is that.

There is no medical reason. It does not address rational part of decisiom making either. It is an attempt at forced emotional guilting by medical professional. And to drag you through it.

onethought 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Just want to point out, it’s polarising because it’s a wedge issues that divides voting blocks neatly, and nothing to do with it being The Issue that it is.

More people die from obesity, cars, flu, preventable illness, etc. But we discuss endless this one issue… it’s for political science reasons not humanity/moral/etc reasons.

chpatrick 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's different from those other cases because it's like getting in a car accident and other people saying you can't get treatment because it's against their religious values, or saying you're not allowed to lose weight because they don't like it.

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
khriss an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> That's clearly already a child and I will object.

Clearly you believe in the primacy of preserving life. I am wondering if your belief extends to after the child is born?

lelanthran an hour ago | parent [-]

> Clearly you believe in the primacy of preserving life. I am wondering if your belief extends to after the child is born?Clearly you believe in the primacy of preserving life. I am wondering if your belief extends to after the child is born?

Are you suggesting that, because I object to abortion a day before delivery, that I must be some kind of misogynistic monster?

Because that's where the line is drawn in this current subthread - 1 day before delivery. If you cannot understand that people consider that a child (i.e. 1 day before delivery) then you have no hope of swaying your audience to your side of the argument at all!

mistrial9 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

in this part of the world, Mexico is known for public pharmacies that sell wildly-strong drugs of different kinds easily.. I doubt there are any websites that list what you can actually get if you walk in with cash

setopt 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. The explanation sounds very reasonable.

munk-a 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It's an unreasonable argument because the people who treat medication like candy are far less common than the people who are restricted from seeking medical assistance due to repressive family situations.

In Italy these services are thankfully not restricted in the same way they are in, say, America - but there are still plenty of life situations (like suffering SA from a family member) where shame, social pressures and threats can cause the regular medical system to be hard to access.

That is a far more reasonable scenario than "I just love popping abortion pills!"

flaviolivolsi 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Both options are free of charge and free of judgement, especially the latter"

You sure about that? Unfortunately there's a thing called "obiezione di coscienza" (TL;DR: doctors opposing abortion because they're catholics). Feel free to translate this article: https://www.editorialedomani.it/fatti/aborto-obiezione-cosci...

eur0pa 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Finding an obiettore is a somewhat rare circumstance in a hospital, but it's unlikely in a consultorio familiare; those are structures whose only purpose is reproductive health, gynecological care, social services, and psychological consult, especially aimed at teens and women. If you're an objector you generally don't go out of your way to work there.

ron_k 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I’m sure you’re aware that it _greatly_ depends on the region you’re living in. The fact that consultori are for reproductive health doesn’t mean that there are no obiettori: for some of them the purpose of those structures are exactly to prevent abortions. There are many accounts of women who were pushed to not interrupting a pregnancy.

kamma4434 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

An “obiettore” won’t be your doctor if you want an abortion; there will be somebody else performing it.

altern8 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That's like 1 out of 1000 doctors, just go to another doctor. And even if that wasn't the case, what is the government supposed to do about that?

sllewely 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Read the article. It's 67% of registered obgyns and fully 100% of some hospitals. Why would you believe it's 1 of 1000 in a world where countries consistently successfully create legislature targeting women?

altern8 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Because I'm from Italy and I have women friends and I know that there are a lot of places where you can get a prescription for abortion pills.

We don't need random websites to hand out prescription drugs to kids.

kamma4434 2 hours ago | parent [-]

In 2022 there were about 65k abortions in Italy, two thirds of which were with ru486. All of them completely legal and paid for by the national health care. Not sure there is a need for pills over mail.

toomuchtodo an hour ago | parent [-]

It's great Italy it has the protections it does, but as long as there are practitioners or institutions that might not respect obtaining this healthcare (out of religion, belief system, whatever, the reason is irrelevant), there should be robust systems to avoid those challenges for those seeking said healthcare. Pills available by mail on demand, automated vending machines, etc.

As mentioned in the 1983 film "WarGames", "We ought to take the men out of the loop".

timpera 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> In 2019, it was reported that 67% of Italian gynecologists were registered as conscientious objectors and multiple hospitals reported having a 100% conscientious objection rate.

OkayPhysicist 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The same thing you'd do with a doctor with a penchant for harming their patients. Strip their license.

altern8 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I couldn't find any information, either. The only thing I was able to find were many posts on Reddit from women trying to get these websites to send them abortion pills.

I assume that this might be the reason why they got blocked--or if not a possibility.

I don't understand why women would need these websites, there are plenty of free resources like local hospitals and doctors who are generally completely fine with abortion.

throwway120385 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Which medications were they trying to get? Plan B or something that works later?