Buffer zones needed II
Regarding the news story “Voiding of buffer zone at abortion clinics could force Western Pa. change” : As an obstetrician/gynecologist who practices in Pittsburgh, I've seen firsthand the impact that so-called “sidewalk counselors” have on my patients, which is why I find the Supreme Court's decision in McCullen v. Coakley so troubling.
Buffer zones around clinics that offer abortion services are necessary to protect women seeking comprehensive reproductive health care. Should Pittsburgh's buffer zone be eliminated, I fear for the safety and well-being not just of my patients, but of anyone who works at these clinics.
As a physician, I trust women to make the decisions that are right for them and their families. It is clear that the anti-choice protesters do not.
Colleen M. Krajewski
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Ride-sharing’s advantages
- Won’t stop drilling
- Opposed to efficiency?
- Taiwan & Hong Kong
- Vandergrift killing Olmsted’s vision
- Sheetz-CVS hearing
- Export more oil
- GCC 19, sportsmanship 0
- Lying time of year