Jump to content

Talk:Abortion clinic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BattyBot (talk | contribs) at 06:47, 30 January 2021 (→top: Added Template:WikiProject banner shell and other General fixes). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2020 and 10 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jcbarrett31 (article contribs).

Comment

I'm wondering if the 'Attacks on Abortion Clinics' section should be split off into it's own article. It seems like there is enough information out there for just this. I'd like to see what some other people think though. Malo 02:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The term "Abortion Clinic" is NOT in any way NPOV. Planned parenthood would never refer to themselves as an "Abortion clinic." They perform the full range of women's health services including referrals for adoption, STD prevention and treatment, contraception, and general gyn care for women who lack insurance or can't afford private practitioners. This article should not exist in its present form, or should be redesigned to reflect that "abortion clinic" is not a universally accepted term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.67.178.11 (talk) 01:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clean Up

This article is severely slanted for while most of it's content is true it is written is such a way that it blames Pro-life people. Also it doesn't fully explain why there is such violence towards the abortion clinics. Chooserr

Removed POV tag

I can't really see how the article could be made more neutral, though specific suggestions are welcome. It's not that helpful to just say it's "slanted" since the article as it stands seems to present the facts, more or less. Demi T/C 00:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

==Actually there are plenty of ways the article could be made more NPOV. The main section of the article is about violence against such clinics, rather than about how they work and run. E.g.

-what they actually do -impact of medical technologies, such as ultrasound, on such clinics over the years -The various methods clinics use to perform abortions -statistics on why people choose to go there for abortions -how they are funded -how they typically operate (what actually happens start to finish when a patient requests and has an abortion) -patient care -typical costs for abortion procedures -what happens to the body parts of the foetuses (e.g. Examination? Are records taken? Are they placed in medical waste? Can parents take them for burial?) -information on "successful" and "unsuccessful" abortions -the history of such clinics e.g. where and when was the first one, and who founded it -key people in the movement -clinics and government legislation over the years -information on such clinics worldwide -moral and ethical arguments presented from both sides of the argument

Also the statistics are worded from the POV that abortion providers perform an essential service to the community, and that it is undesirable when such services are not required. There is an opposing POV which regards abortion as the willfull killing of an unborn human being. It may be possible to avoid POV bias by using wording such as (for example only - I'm making up the facts here): -"In 25 US states, abortion is legal, and state funding is available. In the other 25 states, it is illegal to perform abortions, and thus abortions are not funded." -"At 45 OB/GYN training colleges, abortions are seen as the taking of human life, and thus these colleges, which train 60 percent of OB/GYN practitioners, do not train students in any abortions. At 47 colleges, abortions are seen as an essential service, and thus these colleges, which train 40 percent of OB/GYN practitioners, train studnets in both first and second trimester abortions.

Having said all this, actually improving the article will take a lot of time. Good luck! Also language such as "abortion services" is POV on the pro-abortion side. More neutral would be "abortions", "medical/surical abortion" or "abortion procedures" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.148.223.14 (talk) 07:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add Content?

Should this article contain specific terms to define why it is a "clinic?" And what makes the clinicians different from Doctors or RNs? What is the medical background of a typical abortion clinic? These are questions i've asked myself. Has anyone else wondered, or know the answers? Renee 01:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Presence of clinic directory, and which one?

I'm not convinced this article needs to link to a directory of abortion clinics; Wikipedia's primary job isn't to enable people to find services of any kind. On the other hand, we do point to directories for things like books or other things. If we decide a directory link is necessary, we then have to decide which one. The current link is misleading, since it is labeled "Abortion.com" but actually links to abortiion.com. It looks like both have appeared in the article.

I'm concerned that either or both of these sites might be selective (for pay) in their listings, or may reflect a hidden agenda. abortiion.com seems to cover less and might be paid listing. I'm looking for other opinions on whether a directory link should be included at all, and if so, what would be most appropriate (perhaps a directory not used yet).

Demi T/C 23:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected the error. I assume it was a typo or the result of vandalism which previously went undetected. Being that this article's pro-life corollary, Crisis pregnancy center, contains links to relevant organizations and services, I think it's fair that a similar link be included upon this page. It's also included at Abortion. -Severa (!!!) 23:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Patterson on the list?

The police concluded that Patterson's death was a mob hit associated with his gambling debts.70.16.89.105 20:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first Dutch abortion clinic

Does this belong in this article? It would make sense only in a history section. -- davidz (talk) 03:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

or in an article on Abortion in the Netherlands, such as the article on Abortion in Finland. -- davidz (talk) 03:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why the need for abortion clinics?

In many countries, abortions are performed routinely at ordinary hospitals, so why do some countries have abortion clinics? Is it a legal requirement? a cultural thing? or just historical accident? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.62.162.197 (talk) 19:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's no different than a dialysis clinic or an eye clinic: Like the lede says, an abortion clinic would be a clinic that primarily provides or specializes in that particular procedure. The real question is, do such clinics really exist, or is this just a pejorative anti-abortion term? Given the unsourced (and probably inaccurate) statement about Planned Parenthood in the lede, I suspect the latter. Groupthink (talk) 22:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, after further review, this entire article appears to be a POV fork of clinic, and I am proposing a merge accordingly. In the meantime, I am removing all unsourced and inaccurate material. Groupthink (talk) 00:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You fail to see my point.In many countries dialysis and eye doctoring would take place in an ordinary hospital as well. Why is it in the USA for example, that abortions are done in a clinic rather than a hospital. AFAIU, the reason is political, in order to ostrasize and shame women who have abortions. I think that is an important issue that should be covered by the article. As far as the the whole article goes, for people in countries that have abortion clinics, it seems to be a subject that is quite distinct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.62.162.197 (talk • contribs) 01:37, March 5, 2010
I do fail to see your point, because I don't understand your point, and I apologize for that. I think we may be running into some "cross-pond" terminology confusion here. Just to clarify: Clinic in American English is analogous to surgery in British English. One is not required to go to a special "abortion clinic" in order to obtain the procedure. In fact, that's why I oppose this article because it propagates that myth. Abortions are but one of many medical procedures offered by clinics and hospitals in the U.S. Groupthink (talk) 08:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no cross-pond confusion. I read that only a third of US OBGYN residency programs offer abortion training and only 10 percent of hospitals offer the procedure. If this is true, then it follows that a woman wanting an abortion can't just go to any hospital to have an abortion. 95% of US abortions are performed at abortion clinics, which is why this article is warranted. My original question still isn't answered. After Roe Vs. Wade almost all abortions were performed in hospitals, but today 95 percent are performed outside of hospitals... Why is that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.62.162.197 (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. Could you provide a citation for those 33%/10%/95% statistics? As to your inpatient vs. outpatient question – I'm not an expert in the field, but I would bet dollars-to-donuts that the answer, in a nutshell, is Christianity. A large number of hospital conglomerates in the US are run by various Catholic, Lutheran, and Baptist organizations.

Now I'd like to elaborate further on my original point. What exactly is an "abortion clinic"? Is it any clinic where abortions are performed? That seems like way too broad a generalization to me, like calling Cedars-Sinai an "ulcer clinic" or the Mayo Clinic a "diabetes clinic". On the other hand, I think it would be fair to say that a facility like LensCrafters is an "ophthalmology/optometry clinic" because it is dedicated solely to procedures relating to the eye. Which brings me to my (admittedly rhetorical) question: Where are all of these facilities devoted strictly or primarily to abortions? Are these clinics staffed by Abortionologists? Is their motto "Abortions in about an hour"? Groupthink (talk) 11:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

I propose that the contents of this article should be merged into abortion-related violence anti-abortion violence, abortion and clinic as is appropriate. Groupthink (talk) 00:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why? You've not given a rationale. The current article is poor, but the topic of abortion clinics is a very notable one. I fail to see how a merge would be a good idea. We should improve poor articles on notable topics, not brush them under the carpet. Fences&Windows 01:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did give a rationale in the topic above, which I'll repeat and expand upon here: This article is a POV fork of clinic, existing only for the purpose of loudly emphasizing one particular medical service over others provided by OB/GYN or women's health clinics. Groupthink (talk) 14:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. They are two quite separate and notable topics. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please clarify: Which two topics are you asserting are separate and notable? Thanks. Groupthink (talk) 09:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Abortion clinic" is a notable topic, and quite able to stand on its own - it is not the same as a generic "clinic". It's not a "POV fork", abortion clinics certainly do exist and have been written about extensively in academia; what POV is being pushed here? The POV that abortion clinics exist? We could rename the article to "Abortion provider" to allow inclusion of facilities that are not wholly abortion clinics. If you want to write an article on obs and gyn clinics, go right ahead. Fences&Windows 03:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you provide a list of clinics which rarely or never perform procedures other than abortions? Groupthink (talk) 08:50, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Fences&Windows 18:19, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Clinic and Abortion clinic are the two topics that I see as separate and notable. On closer inspection I see that article is only about the US and I have placed a {{globalize}} tag on it. Rather than merging it and causing systemic bias in other articles I think it should be moved to Abortion clinics in the United States. Is there other countries with abortion clinics? -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 19:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Maybe it isn't clear, but it seems like Groupthink is arguing that such a phenomena as an "abortion clinic" is actually a misconception or 'myth', and such a list would help refute the point, I guess. I can understand what Groupthink is getting at. Perhaps "abortion clinic" isn't the best term, especially if it is misleading, deceptive, or possibly pejorative in nature. Maybe it's like the "drug store" vs. "pharmacy" difference, or even "death tax" vs. "estate tax". Perhaps this isn't the most neutral (or self-identifying) term, and maybe we should reconsider renaming to "women's clinic", and expanding the content? The article currently is very poor, doesn't really say that much, and I could see some validity in merging the content elsewhere (though perhaps an article on full service women's clinics would be better, with a section concerning the abortion controversy/violence). As it stands, the article starts with the definition: An abortion clinic is a medical facility that primarily performs or specializes in abortions., and it seems Groupthink is asking for evidence of such a phenomena. I have my own personal anecdotal evidence, but I won't contribute that because it isn't a valid source. I think examining the scope and title of this article would help bring about better content (which hopefully we can all agree is rather poor to nil). -Andrew c [talk] 19:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is plenty of evidence that abortion clinics exist. Google gives 461,000 hits. I would be opposed to any page name change since the current title is descriptive and in common usage. We should not sanitise WP. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 21:28, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is plenty of evidence that the term "abortion clinic" exists. I'm arguing, as Andrew c eloquently sums up above, that the term is derogatory and gives undue weight to the anti-abortion POV. If this article's title is going to be kept as-is, then the lede ought to say something like "Abortion clinic is a term generally used as a pejorative descriptor of any facility which performs abortion procedures, regardless of other medical services offered" a la homosexual agenda. Groupthink (talk)
Well, I wouldn't support that either, without sources. If it is just your opinion it is a pejorative term, we shouldn't present it as such. We just need sources. Both sides. -Andrew c [talk] 22:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, as the big to-do dealing around the titles 'Catholic Church' vs. the 'Roman Catholic Church' illustrated, self-identity is an important part of the naming conventions, so considering a name change based on self-identity shouldn't be considered an attempt to "sanitise WP". But again, we shouldn't consider that without sources.... -Andrew c [talk] 22:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The topics are hard enough to address objectively without running all of them together. Perhaps Clinical abortion might be less polarizing than Abortion clinic, but in any case Abortion should not be merged.LeadSongDog come howl! 15:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Clinical abortion doesn't convey the location, which is the point of this article. To me, clinical abortion would be contrasted with say unsafe abortion or homeopathic abortion, or you know? We are trying to convey "abortion providers", or maybe even more specifically a women's clinic which specializes in (or only does) abortion. I'm OK with the current title, but not set. I could be persuaded otherwise, I guess, but not actively seeking a change. -Andrew c [talk] 15:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is the subject to be the places, the practices, the practitioners, the methods, the biology, the laws, the religious doctrines, or the politics? It's rather like a Five Ws thing. Perhaps a taxonomy would be helpful. Artificially induced abortions are rare except in humans. Spontaneous abortion is almost the only type seen in other species, yet our WP:CSB rarely goes so far as to consider them as equal subjects.LeadSongDog come howl! 17:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tags had been up for months, and there wasn't momentum (consensus) here for any change, so I've removed the tags. -Andrew c [talk] 15:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of statistics

How necessary is the list of statistics? Surely that is more suited to Abortion. Seems rather biased, also. --Thewhatofwhom (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updated numbers

The section on the United States is based on numbers from 2008. I believe that the landscape has changed significantly since then: there have been hundreds of bills passed restricting access to abortion; at least three states (North Dakota, Kansas, Mississippi) have only one abortion provider left; Mississippi passed a law in 2012 (still being disputed in court) with the goal of shutting down its last provider; several other states have passed or are trying to pass similar laws for the same purpose. Does anyone know of a relatively up-to-date list of abortion providers grouped by state? DES (talk) 12:02, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. We could compile a list of the number of abortion providers by state too. --92slim (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abortion clinic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:56, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updated statistics

I updated the United States statistics to reflect the known number of abortion providers. DataNerdMPH (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abortion_clinic&oldid=1003696782"