by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

9

DispatchBulletinPolicy

by The 🍪 Tropical Biscuit Paradise of Aumeltopia. . 110 reads.

Opinions | General Assembly: Ban on Sterilisation of Minors Etc

·
—INTRODUCTION— | —FOR— | —AGAINST—
·

Introduction

The South Pacific's Delegate, Aumeltopia, has voted for this resolution at the present time, due to a strong preference that way among TSP's World Assembly membership (>80% for).

Links

For
·

From TSP Citizens

[none so far]

From the World

Lord Dominator

Lord Dominator is the author of multiple WA resolutions and a regular contributor to the General Assembly community. He posted this on the draft's forum thread:

Lord Dominator wrote:"I find the assertion that this draft contradicts the 'Patient's Rights Act' to be rather...idiotic," Dee muses, leaning back in her chair.

A brief look at clauses I and II are rather clear on restrictions to medical procedures it gives."

With this, she pulls out a small stack of leathery copies of the resolution, with the clauses highlighted:
GA#29 wrote:
(I) Patients have the right to emergency medical treatment under circumstances requiring lifesaving procedures. A physician or qualified caregiver may provide treatment without the patient’s consent if, because of emergency circumstances, including the patient’s physical or mental state, it is not possible to obtain their consent.

(II) All persons who are lawfully present within any WA member nation have the right to undergo any non-emergency medical procedure deemed necessary and beneficial to the patient by their physician or other medical professional, which is legal for that person in the nation where the procedure is performed, and for which confirmed funding is available.

"I've also taken the liberty of bolding the most important part of this for out purposes. As you can no doubt see, the second clause clearly provides a requirement that the procedure be legal. If anyone of course would like to argue that the World Assembly here doesn't have the power to illegalize a given procedure in member nations, well, I haven't had my fill of crushing debate opponents yet today.

There of course remains the possibility that the procedure be 'life-saving.' Luckily, the delightful ambassador of the Imperium here has already provided for the potential of such.

I do believe that's all any claim of contradiction could even potentially stand on done away with, don't you?"

Kranostav

Kranostav is the North Pacific's Minister of World Assembly Affairs. They posted this on the North Pacific's forum thread for the proposal:

Kranostav wrote:For. It does exactly what it is supposed to do and aids in the issue of allowing parents to make decisions on their children without question.

Sanjurika

Sanjurika is the North Pacific's ambassador to TSP. They posted this on the North Pacific's forum thread for the proposal:

Sanjurika wrote:... I support this. It covers all its bases and gets what it needs to do done.


Against
·

From TSP Citizens

West Carlisten

West carlisten is a Legislator in TSP. He posted this message on the regional discord:

West carlisten wrote:can I ask everyone to vote against the current GA proposal?
1. "independent Institutional Review Board" is meaningless because it is is not specified how and what it should be independent from - if all doctors are required to support eugenics before becoming a doctor, then the Board could technically be composed of independent doctors while still not allowing for actual independent review
2. there are many different views regarding "long-term health" - you can't develop prostate cancer if it has been removed; therefore it could be argued that such actions are "necessary for long-term health"
3. the legislation does not mention consent from the minor or parents/guardians which means someone could be sterilised against their own and their family's will because the so-called "independent Institutional Review Board" decided so
4. this law would block future attempts to introduce proper, effective legislation until repealed
5. it's awfully written

Concrete Slab

Concrete Slab is a Legislator and former Local Councillor, and has written two World Assembly resolutions. He sent the first message in a telegram to the Delegate, and the second in a RMB post:

Concrete Slab wrote:Mr. Delegate! I must urge an against vote for the current GA proposal!

The title is misleading, and all it does is create more bureaucratic jobs with a board that will do nothing!

For more in depth arguments, search here! viewtopic.php?f=9&t=472077&sid=04dd7f68c3edffb506e7f6ca2157240c

Concrete Slab wrote:As you know, I am against. The title is misleading and all it does is throw the responsibility to capitalist pig committees, not enacting any guidelines or punishment.

Omega

United Federated States of Omega is a Legislator in TSP and the author of a General Assembly resolution. He posted this message on the regional discord:

United Federated States of Omega wrote:Hey I'd like to advocate a vote against the current GA resolution simply due to the extradition ban. We could extradite someone for crime that the punishment wouldn't be forced sterilization but this prevents that.
Also it doesn't define what is illegal sterilization which opens up a bunch of issues.
I'm all for the premise just not this resolution. So vote against.

Bear Connors Paradiso

Bear Connors Paradiso is a TSP citizen. They posted these messages on the RMB:

Bear Connors Paradiso wrote:I urge TSP to vote AGAINST the current WA proposal that currently proposes an "independent review board" which has zero protections from corruption or abuse over the proposed control of sterilization.

Bear Connors Paradiso wrote:Wouldn't you rather vote against it simply because it would ban sterilization anyway then and/or give you more work to get it done? I don't like the vagueness of how this panel of judges idea is. Like is it something that the nation itself picks, or the WA, or the author of the proposal? Just that it exists and gets verified by "somebody". Usually proposals that nominate a panel are not accepted anyway. It should be shot down and allowed to be resubmitted with better wording.

Nowa Europa

Nowa Europa is a TSP citizen. They posted this message on the RMB:

Nowa Europa wrote:This current World Assembly proposal at vote to ban sterilization of children leaves way too much room for widespread abuse by corrupt governments, why was a vote approved that isn't ready to be presented? It also casts doubt on the idea of transgender children being safe, I am no expert on transgenderism but I'm pretty sure this bill is a blanket invitation to put their lives in danger and get away with it.

From the World

Candlewhisper Archive

Candlewhisper Archive is a Senior Issues Editor. They posted this message on the draft's forum thread:

Candlewhisper Archive wrote:This nation's leadership deplores the use of "etc" in a title, as it creates an inappropriate lack of specificity for what ought to be an international legal document.

We also agree that the prohibition against child abuse already prevents forced sterilisation of a child, and that this therefore represents an additional layer of legislation to an already bloated bureaucracy. The General Assembly has a responsibility to use its funds in an efficient way, and the creation of an Institutional Review Board sounds to me like creating bureaucratic jobs for their own sake.

For that reason, we stand opposed to this resolution, though we express doubt that many of the world's delegates will give it much thought beyond reading the gist of the title, and thus expect it to pass anyway. Such is politics.

Marxist Germany

Marxist Germany is a regular contributor to the General Assembly community. They posted this message on the draft's forum thread:

Marxist Germany wrote:He entered the voting chamber to cast his vote, in an indigo suit, wearing a navy blue tie. Klaus took a ballot paper from the table and entered the voting booth to cast his vote. He leaves the booth with a sign of disappointment on his face as he sees the live results. He walks into the debate chamber followed by two assistants, surely other ambassadors aren't dumb enough to vote based on the title, he thought to himself. He walks up to the podium to declare his opinion, and begins, "fellow ambassadors, we must not vote based on the title since this is noncompliance with existing international resolution, those of you who have read the actual proposal may have come to the conclusion that it is ridiculous, handing over the responsibility of creating regulations to the WACC will diminish the purpose of this assembly, which is to create the regulations themselves. The other problem is the delegation of determining the necessity of the sterilisation to an Institutional review Board, which is ludicrous and unnecessary as doctors can do that themselves, and nothing stops IRBs from being corrupted by governments. I also dislike the use of "etc" in the title as it is inappropriate in titles. I would advise everyone here to vote AGAINST." He steps down from the podium.



·

·
—Link—Link
·
·

RawReport