Hacker News Reader

Comment by wreath | Hacker News Reader

Probably? This process started at the end of 2021 [1] why didn't you take a few minutes to do some research instead of throwing out an incorrect theory with no evidence.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/germany-moves...

I didn't provide a theory. I said "probably" for a reason.

Probably means mostly likey. What is your basis for that?

This change has been in the works for a while, certainly longer than the leaked draft of the US Supreme Court decision. The timing is purely accidental.

This was a well-known issue that interfered with doctors providing neutral information about abortions. Once the government switched to the current coalition of social democrats, greens and liberal democrats this change was put into motion. This happened simply because conservatives are not in power right now in the federal government here.

> Regardless, it's a good news/move.

This is dystopic. I'm not anti-abortion but I can't think of one reason that promoting abortion is a "good move" to make a better society. We all know that ads work. Abortion should be a (legal) last resort solution and we already know that we have that option.

No no no! Don't trust the "advertisement" translation of the NYT, this is german law legalese!

"Werbung" does mean (a promoting) advertisement, but "Werbung" in the sense of the law can also mean any mention of something at all if you perform the same something, e.g. you are a doc and peform abortions => if you mention abortions (the word alone is already enough!), it's technically "Werbung" in the sense of the law.

Thanks for the clarification. Anyway I still wonder if this law is not a pandora box.

It is information about accessing a medical procedure. It isnt as if millions of women are suddenly going to realize that abortions exist and rush out to get them who otherwise would not. It just might make things a little simpler for those who were already looking for the proceedure. Women dont make such life choices according to convenience.

The proposal was a bit more complex to care for the outcome you are probably worrying about. They extended another law that forbids misleading advertisement for pharmaceuticals and medical procedures to also cover abortions.

The situation before the change was that everyone could publish any information's , true or false, about abortions except doctors and clinics. Now misleading information's are prohibited and doctors are alowed to inform about abortions and publicise that they perform the procedure.

> I can't think of one reason that promoting abortion is a "good move"

So that people can compare their options when they do need it? So that people can see that the option does exist in the beginning?

If they can promote any other medical procedure, why not this?

The law was so strict that a clinic couldn't even mention in a single sentence somewhere on their website that they also provide abortions.

This isn't about TV advertisement campaigns telling you to get your weekly abortion.

German doctors weren’t allowed to list terminations as one of their services, nor even write posts on their websites giving factual information about abortion, which you’d know if you’d read the article.

The definition of “promotion” here is bad enough that simply listing abortion as a provided service at a clinic would be illegal.

We do not know who provides these services, because they’re not allowed to tell us they provide these services.

Nobody is about to go get an ad campaign on TV telling women to get abortions here now, buy one get one free. That’s not how the medical system here works.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com