Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 18:27:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2019 14:43:26 GMT
Republicans Confirm Lifetime Federal Judge Opposed To Fertility Treatments "Pitlyk, who is special counsel to the Thomas More Society, a conservative, anti-abortion law firm based in Chicago, argued in a 2017 amicus brief that in vitro fertilization, or IVF, and surrogacy lead to “diminished respect for motherhood and the unique mother-child bond; exploitation of women; commodification of gestation and of children themselves; and weakening of appropriate social mores against eugenic abortion.” In a related 2017 interview with the National Catholic Register, she said that “surrogacy is harmful to mothers and children, so it’s a practice society should not be enforcing.” Nearly one in six U.S. couples face infertility, according to a 2014 National Institutes of Health study. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) is among them. She had been urging her colleagues to oppose Pitlyk over her “deeply insulting” views on fertility treatment. “As a mother who struggled with infertility for years and required IVF to start my family, I would be one of the many Americans who could never enter Ms. Pitlyk’s courtroom with any reasonable expectation that my case would be adjudicated in a fair and impartial manner,” Duckworth wrote in a letter to her 99 Senate colleagues.
Pitlyk fits the mold of many of President Donald Trump’s court picks: young, white and a member of the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyers’ group that has served as a pipeline for judges for this White House. Most Federalist Society-backed nominees also tend to have records of opposing abortion, LGBTQ rights and voting rights."Trump as appointed approximately 25% of the Federal Bench. "Trump’s victory lap came as the Senate neared confirming the 44th appeals court judge of his presidency. It’s a benchmark that means he’ll have filled one-quarter of such judgeships in under three years in office. By comparison, President Barack Obama nominated 55 circuit judges who were confirmed over eight years.... The Republican victories on judges came after Congress nearly shut down the confirmation process during Obama’s final two years in office, leaving federal courts with more than 100 vacancies when Trump took office. Democrats complained that Republicans have disregard Senate norms and traditions to rig the judicial system for partisan gain. They noted that some nominees have refused to answer senators’ questions, while Republicans have pushed others through without the consent of their home state senators." apnews.com/7d0c948029a54dab940e4c986cfa01a3Cheat and steal - the Republican way. The decisions they will make in the next 20-30 years will likely set back personal freedoms, air and water safety, employment safety, transportation and building safety and thousands of other dangerous judicial decisions in the twin pursuits of theocracy and greed/profits. Remember that when they come for your family's freedoms and safeties. Elections have consequences. Butter emails. |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Dec 5, 2019 16:42:00 GMT
It’s all very disheartening. When the Democrats are back in charge, they’re going to need to make some systemic changes to how we do things in DC. We should not be appointing unqualified judges just because they’re young and ultra-conservative.  |
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,170 
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Dec 5, 2019 16:44:59 GMT
This stuff is what gives me nightmares. How anyone could confirm someone as a judge who has never tried a case in court absolutely baffles me. Ideology seems to be all that matters to the Republicans right now. And these people are getting lifetime appointments!
|
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Dec 5, 2019 16:53:08 GMT
This absolutely infuriates me and makes me want to laugh in the face of any Republicans or conservatives who try and bring up process arguments. We see through you.
Also? She can go f herself with this nonsense
I wonder how she feels about adoption?
|
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Dec 5, 2019 16:57:57 GMT
This is scary. Truly it is. Qualified people only should be appointed to the bench. Both sides should know that.
I am failing to understand why you think IVF will be taken off the table as a choice couples can make? Just because this one person doesn’t believe it should be available doesnt mean they are going to make and enact policy to ban it. Have there been any legal challenges to the practice of IVF? I feel like I am missing something.
|
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Dec 5, 2019 17:05:23 GMT
This is scary. Truly it is. Qualified people only should be appointed to the bench. Both sides should know that. I am failing to understand why you think IVF will be taken off the table as a choice couples can make? Just because this one person doesn’t believe it should be available doesnt mean they are going to make and enact policy to ban it. Have there been any legal challenges to the practice of IVF? I feel like I am missing something. As of our last attempt at IVF with a surrogate, in the state of Texas, at the 5 month mark there is a preliminary hearing and the court has the right to make a ruling that my husband and I are not fit to essentially adopt the child that was made with our own genetic material. And that’s just one example, I’m sure there are many others. So someone like her on the bench? Who believes that carrying a child makes the surrogate more of a mother because of the bond? Terrifying. It’s been a while so I don’t remember the legal terms, does anyone know? |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 18:27:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2019 17:11:06 GMT
This is scary. Truly it is. Qualified people only should be appointed to the bench. Both sides should know that. I am failing to understand why you think IVF will be taken off the table as a choice couples can make? Just because this one person doesn’t believe it should be available doesnt mean they are going to make and enact policy to ban it. Have there been any legal challenges to the practice of IVF? I feel like I am missing something. I think what you're missing is she's got 20-30 years on the bench to legislate her personal fairy tales onto the lives of others in any cases that are brought before her court relating to IVF, abortion, surrogacy, etc. She has done so in the past and there is no reason to believe she will not continue to do so for the next 20-30 years. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 5, 2019 17:16:26 GMT
In a related 2017 interview with the National Catholic Register, she said that “surrogacy is harmful to mothers and children, so it’s a practice society should not be enforcing.” Society is not enforcing anything! People make choices and should be allowed to make choices for their own bodies! |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Dec 5, 2019 17:20:25 GMT
republicans fucking up and trying to control everyone else's lives. This shit pisses me the fuck off.
|
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Dec 5, 2019 17:22:31 GMT
In a related 2017 interview with the National Catholic Register, she said that “surrogacy is harmful to mothers and children, so it’s a practice society should not be enforcing.” Society is no enforcing anything! People make choices She’s an idiot. It is so scary, painful, difficult and expensive to go through IVF on your own. Then to add surrogacy to the mix where you are literally putting the health, safety, very life of your child into someone else’s hands for almost 10 months. People who go through surrogacy desire to become parents so very much.
eta: To say it’s harmful is bullshit, those children are so wanted, so treasured, so loved. To say nothing of the fact that at least you know the parents will be able to financially provide for them. Parents who have gone through this have had a lot of medical checks done, background checks, and home visits can be ordered by the judges at these hearings. Even when it is your own biological child. That can’t be said about so many people who are pregnant, but no one is trying to take away their rights to have children. (Nor should they). |
|
sueg
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,002
Location: Munich
Member is Online
Apr 12, 2016 12:51:01 GMT
|
Post by sueg on Dec 5, 2019 17:28:15 GMT
She’s an idiot. It is so scary, painful, difficult and expensive to go through IVF on your own. Then to add surrogacy to the mix where you are literally putting the health, safety, very life of your child into someone else’s hands for almost 10 months. People who go through surrogacy desire to become parents so very much. To say it’s harmful is bullshit, those children are so wanted, so treasured, so loved.  My only grandchild is an IVF baby, and I didn't realise all that it entailed until my DS and DDiL started on this route to parenthood after many years of trying to conceive naturally. You don't go to all that expense and through all those invasive procedures just for the fun of it. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 5, 2019 17:28:59 GMT
I think what you're missing is she's got 20-30 years on the bench to legislate her personal fairy tales onto the lives of others in any cases that are brought before her court relating to IVF, abortion, surrogacy, etc. She has done so in the past and there is no reason to believe she will not continue to do so for the next 20-30 years. Surrogacy and IVF are expensive, prohibitive to many, this will only add more costs. Parents will not have the ability to pay for and go through years of court cases and appeals. But of course the rich and famous will as well as those who have and have always had access to what we never did have legally. pierkiss |
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Dec 5, 2019 17:29:55 GMT
This is appalling. Thank you dewryce for shedding some light on how these things work and could be impacted. |
|
peabay
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,589
Jun 25, 2014 19:50:41 GMT
|
Post by peabay on Dec 5, 2019 17:35:12 GMT
republicans fucking up and trying to control everyone else's lives. This shit pisses me the fuck off. And they accuse Democrats of trying to impose a "nanny state." |
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Dec 5, 2019 17:40:46 GMT
This is scary. Truly it is. Qualified people only should be appointed to the bench. Both sides should know that. I am failing to understand why you think IVF will be taken off the table as a choice couples can make? Just because this one person doesn’t believe it should be available doesnt mean they are going to make and enact policy to ban it. Have there been any legal challenges to the practice of IVF? I feel like I am missing something. As of our last attempt at IVF with a surrogate, in the state of Texas, at the 5 month mark there is a preliminary hearing and the court has the right to make a ruling that my husband and I are not fit to essentially adopt the child that was made with our own genetic material. And that’s just one example, I’m sure there are many others. So someone like her on the bench? Who believes that carrying a child makes the surrogate more of a mother because of the bond? Terrifying. It’s been a while so I don’t remember the legal terms, does anyone know? What the actual fuck!?!?! I am SO sorry that this is even something that you have to spend any time even thinking about, let alone actually live through and paying for. I had absolutely no idea that this was something that could happen with IVF and a surrogate. |
|
|
|
Post by Scrapper100 on Dec 5, 2019 18:32:06 GMT
WTF. As someone who struggled with infertility and knowing many others that did as well. This is disgusting. We were so close to trying IVF luckily I got pregnant in my last cycle using AI. I know friends who used IVF and another that used surrogates and even knew someone that was a surrogate twice. How does this take away from motherhood? This allows women who couldn’t naturally become mothers.
I really hope this doesn’t pass. I don’t understand their thinking at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by malibou on Dec 5, 2019 18:33:58 GMT
Political threads are not my stomping grounds on this board, therefore my comment is going off topic.
Please pardon my interruption.
I recently read that the first "test tube" baby, Louise Brown, is now 40. Her parents received death threats amongst their congratulations when they brought their biological daughter home. Since then, more than 8 million babies world wide have been born via IVF. That's the population of New York City. That's incredible!
I bet the ones in the U.S. have some thoughts on this.
Oakley doakley, back to your regularly scheduled ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Scrapper100 on Dec 5, 2019 18:38:44 GMT
This is scary. Truly it is. Qualified people only should be appointed to the bench. Both sides should know that. I am failing to understand why you think IVF will be taken off the table as a choice couples can make? Just because this one person doesn’t believe it should be available doesnt mean they are going to make and enact policy to ban it. Have there been any legal challenges to the practice of IVF? I feel like I am missing something. As of our last attempt at IVF with a surrogate, in the state of Texas, at the 5 month mark there is a preliminary hearing and the court has the right to make a ruling that my husband and I are not fit to essentially adopt the child that was made with our own genetic material. And that’s just one example, I’m sure there are many others. So someone like her on the bench? Who believes that carrying a child makes the surrogate more of a mother because of the bond? Terrifying. It’s been a while so I don’t remember the legal terms, does anyone know? It’s crazy to think someone should have to go through this. It didn’t used to be this tough knowing people that did this 12-20 years ago. I know it was a lot of hoops and maybe we just don’t know all they went through as we had a newborn at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Dec 5, 2019 19:57:47 GMT
As of our last attempt at IVF with a surrogate, in the state of Texas, at the 5 month mark there is a preliminary hearing and the court has the right to make a ruling that my husband and I are not fit to essentially adopt the child that was made with our own genetic material. And that’s just one example, I’m sure there are many others. So someone like her on the bench? Who believes that carrying a child makes the surrogate more of a mother because of the bond? Terrifying. It’s been a while so I don’t remember the legal terms, does anyone know? I am SO sorry that this is even something that you have to spend any time even thinking about, let alone actually live through and paying for. I had absolutely no idea that this was something that could happen with IVF and a surrogate. Those might have been the exact words that fell from my mouth when the lawyer explained it to me  |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 18:27:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2019 20:22:05 GMT
Political threads are not my stomping grounds on this board, therefore my comment is going off topic. Please pardon my interruption. I recently read that the first "test tube" baby, Louise Brown, is now 40. Her parents received death threats amongst their congratulations when they brought their biological daughter home. Since then, more than 8 million babies world wide have been born via IVF. That's the population of New York City. That's incredible! I bet the ones in the U.S. have some thoughts on this. Oakley doakley, back to your regularly scheduled ... There was a lot of publicity about Louise Brown last year, when she was celebrating her 40th birthday but I don't recall anyone mentioning that they had hate mail at the time. Her mum kept everything concerning the conception/pregnancy and the birth and she's donated it all to the Bristol Archives link |
|
|
|
Post by malibou on Dec 6, 2019 1:13:19 GMT
@dottyscrapper Here is an article referencing it link |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 18:27:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2019 1:29:30 GMT
@dottyscrapper Here is an article referencing it linkThanks, I hadn't seen any mention of that. Honestly, some people are quite sick in the mind to do such a thing. |
|
|
|
Post by bothmykidsrbrats on Dec 6, 2019 2:13:15 GMT
If IVF and surrogacy lead to "diminished respect for motherhood", adoption must be a real middle finger to the birth and adoptive moms  . You can't have it both ways crazy pants lady. I would wish for Mitch McConnell to rot in hell for what he has done to this country, but I'm sure he would find it to be paradise.  |
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Dec 6, 2019 2:25:57 GMT
If IVF and surrogacy lead to "diminished respect for motherhood", adoption must be a real middle finger to the birth and adoptive moms . You can't have it both ways crazy pants lady. I would wish for Mitch McConnell to rot in hell for what he has done to this country, but I'm sure he would find it to be paradise. At least he won’t be lonely. He’ll no doubt have a lot of his Republican comrades to keep him company! |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Dec 6, 2019 2:34:37 GMT
She sounds appalling. And she has never tried a case! Typical of those bastard R’s in the Senate.
|
|
amom23
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,328
|
Post by amom23 on Dec 6, 2019 2:41:55 GMT
Well I'm pretty sure just as many declared Republicans and their friends and family seek fertility treatments including IVF as do Democrats and Independents.
|
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 6, 2019 3:22:27 GMT
Well I'm pretty sure just as many declared Republicans and their friends and family seek fertility treatments including IVF as do Democrats and Independents. And many are not against choice. |
|
|
|
Post by travelsoul on Dec 6, 2019 4:00:31 GMT
Without IVF my four year old would not be with me today. I can’t wait to discuss this news with my very republican family at Christmas.
|
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Dec 6, 2019 4:22:51 GMT
At bowling today, one of the women was showing me pictures of her daughter’s family posing with their surrogate’s family at a Thanksgiving get-together. The daughter discovered aggressive breast cancer while breast-feeding her first child at the age of 30. The chemotherapy and radiation were going to make it unadvisable to have any more children. So, before treatment she had her eggs harvested. She then went through grueling treatment for her cancer. After treatment was successful, she and her husband found a wonderful surrogate - a woman with two teenage kids of her own - to carry their child developed from their sperm and egg. The child was born this past summer.
That baby is so loved and there is in no way a “diminished bond” between the baby, her mother and father, older sibling and extended family.
That judge is an idiot.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 26, 2024 18:27:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2019 6:50:40 GMT
At bowling today, one of the women was showing me pictures of her daughter’s family posing with their surrogate’s family at a Thanksgiving get-together. The daughter discovered aggressive breast cancer while breast-feeding her first child at the age of 30. The chemotherapy and radiation were going to make it unadvisable to have any more children. So, before treatment she had her eggs harvested. She then went through grueling treatment for her cancer. After treatment was successful, she and her husband found a wonderful surrogate - a woman with two teenage kids of her own - to carry their child developed from their sperm and egg. The child was born this past summer. That baby is so loved and there is in no way a “diminished bond” between the baby, her mother and father, older sibling and extended family. That judge is an idiot. And yet she will be on the FEDERAL BENCH for 20-30 years making decisions that affect our lives. Thanks, Hillary haters!! |
|
