So much for privacy
 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7025365/

Lovely.

Were his ridiculous demands met - and WHY?

Not yet, but one court upheld the demands (these are coming from the Attorney General of Kansas). The claim is that he's investigating child rape (age of consent is 16 in Kansas, apprantly) and illegal late term abortions (22 months is hte limit in Kansas). As usual, protected rights (such as doctor patient confidentiality) only apply until it's inconvenient to uphold them. :rolleyes:

And why were such detailed records kept in the first place?

Because we are a very litigious society.

Wow! That's pretty damn liberal....

It may be, but that's hardly the issue here. Abortion laws or not, patient confidentiality is under assault here.

While I am no fan of abortion, I find this to be very disturbing. I cannot immagine why the first ruling by Anderson allowed Kline access to the records. Hopefully the appeals court will find differently. But I have a question - what if they do not? Is it possible that there is a valid reason for requiring these records?

This is what judicial review is all about. I certainly do not agree with every court decision, but should the courts rule against the clinic, what choice do they have? Destroy the records? Is the clinic management willing to put themselves in jail?

GD, I think Moonliner was pointed at the "22 months" as opposed to weeks.

Which reminds me of a joke:

A question posed to three clergymen - 'When does life begin?'

The Roman Catholic priest replied: "At the moment of conception."
The Anglican clergyman said: "When the child is born."
The Rabbi answered: "Life begins when the children are married and the mortgage is paid off."

Yep, abortions up to the first birthday.