8 ms·

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

by eur0pa 2mo 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/ https://www.salute.gov.it/new/it/tema/salute-della-donna/ [2] https://www.salute.gov.it/new/it/tema/salute-della-donna/interruzione-volontaria-di-gravidanza/ https://www.salute.gov.it/new/it/tema/salute-della-donna/int...

altern8 2mo ago
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 2mo ago
  Which medications were they trying to get? Plan B or something that works later?
flaviolivolsi 2mo ago
"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-coscienza-mappa-italia-diritto-ivg-regioni-destra-ru486-fd51r9le https://www.editorialedomani.it/fatti/aborto-obiezione-cosci...
- altern8 2mo ago
  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 2mo ago
    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 2mo ago
      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 2mo ago
        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 2mo ago
        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".
        altern8 2mo ago
lelanthran 2mo ago
> 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 2mo ago
  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
  - mistrial9 2mo ago
    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
  - chpatrick 2mo ago
    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 2mo ago
      [flagged]
      - Woshiwuja 2mo ago
ordu 2mo ago
> 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 2mo ago
  Should doctors be forced to perform abortions they don't condone?
  - secretsatan 2mo ago
    Depends how you define a doctor i guess, one that refuses to do the job isn’t.
  - DaFranker 2mo ago
    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.

by eur0pa 2mo ago

altern8 2mo ago

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 2mo ago
Which medications were they trying to get? Plan B or something that works later?

flaviolivolsi 2mo ago

"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-coscienza-mappa-italia-diritto-ivg-regioni-destra-ru486-fd51r9le https://www.editorialedomani.it/fatti/aborto-obiezione-cosci...

altern8 2mo ago
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 2mo ago
  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 2mo ago
    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 2mo ago
      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 2mo ago
        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".
        altern8 2mo ago

lelanthran 2mo ago

> 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 2mo ago
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
- mistrial9 2mo ago
  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
- chpatrick 2mo ago
  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 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Woshiwuja 2mo ago

ordu 2mo ago

> 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 2mo ago
Should doctors be forced to perform abortions they don't condone?
- secretsatan 2mo ago
  Depends how you define a doctor i guess, one that refuses to do the job isn’t.
- DaFranker 2mo ago
  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.