I don't know about other women, but the recent emphasis on transvaginal ultrasounds strikes me as some pornographic delight among legislators. Medical Porn mandated by the State. It's more than just an end run around Row v. Wade. It's an end run around Griswald v. Connecticut. The privacy between a doctor and a woman is being legislated away.
I'd rather this conversation didn't get all caught up in the right or wrong of abortion. I'll stipulate that there are two very hotly contested sides to that question. I'm interested in what people think about the legislation that is currently making its way through several state legislature and how it relates to privacy between a woman and her doctor. I'm interested in what people think about the state mandating medical procedures that a doctor might not believe are necessary. As it stands now, abortion is legal and the legislation strikes me as more than trying to make abortion so hard to obtain that no one does get one. It strikes me as punitive. It's a punishment for daring to try to get one in some of these states.
Here are some of the bills being considered in several states, and this is a short list. There are plenty more. While all seems to be quiet at the National level, the states have been very busy indeed.
If Winder's mandatory ultrasound bill becomes law, a victim of rape or incest or a woman with a medical emergency who is seeking an abortion must obtain an ultrasound first and the state will provide a list of providers. Nearly every provider of free ultrasounds in Idaho is a "crisis pregnancy center
," which aims to dissuade women from having an abortion. The woman would also have to obtain from a doctor a second ultrasound, which would involve an invasivetransvaginal procedure if she is in her first trimester of pregnancy
. Even if she averts her eyes from the ultrasound image and refuses to listen to the fetal heartbeat, she would have to hear the doctor describe the fetus in detail.
Abdominal ultrasounds for women seeking abortions in Virginia will become mandatory under a bill signed into law Wednesday by the state's Republican governor, who had faced a national uproar when earlier versions of the measure had sought to make the exams medically invasive.
The law conservative Gov. Bob McDonnell signed requires all Virginia abortion providers to comply starting July 1 or pay a $2,500 fine for each violation. Patients living within 100 miles of the clinic where the abortion is performed must wait 24 hours after the ultrasound examination before having an abortion. Victims of rape or incest who reported the attacks to police are exempt. Women must be offered the chance to view the ultrasound images, but can't be forced to see them.
ARIZONA HOUSE BILL 2625
There is a
bill making its way
through the Arizona state legislature that would require women to prove to their boss that they need birth control in order to treat a medical condition if they wanted their prescription to be covered by their insurer. That is outrageous. Women should never be forced to share personal information with their boss in order to have access to basic health care.
As if that wasn't bad enough, it goes even further. This bill also allows a woman's boss to fire her for using birth control as a contraceptive. Fired. For taking birth control. These Republicans are trying to take away women's rights and freedoms and we won't stand for it. This bill has, incredibly enough, already been passed in the Arizona State House and is now up for debate in the State Senate.
A dispute pitting Governor Rick Perry, a Republican, against President Barack Obama, a Democrat, over a state ban on aid to abortion providers or their affiliates is expected to force out the nonprofit organization, which cares for almost half of the program's 130,000 participants.
But Fran Hagerty, the head of the Women's Health and Family Planning Association of Texas — which represents non-Planned Parenthood providers in Texas, including clinics, hospitals and medical schools — said she seriously doubts Gov. Rick Perry will be able to keep the pledge he made last week to maintain the roughly $30 million-per-year program without federal help. She said the "monstrous" family-planning funding cuts of the last legislative session, made before the Women's Health Program was jeopardized, have eroded trust and have forced clinics to shut their doors.
She vowed a legal challenge of the legislation if necessary.
"We're not going to leave the women of Mississippi high and dry," Derzis said.
Conservative Mississippi lawmakers have long sought to limit abortion rights. Abortion opponents last year pushed for an amendment to the state constitution that would have defined a fertilized egg as a human being. It was defeated in a statewide referendum last November.
While the battle over birth control, women's rights and religious freedom rages in Washington, Republicans in New Hampshire are firing a preemptive strike, aiming to reverse a 12-year-old state law requiring health plans with prescription coverage to include contraceptives.
Republican House Speaker William O'Brien is leading the charge to allow employers with religious objections to exclude contraceptive coverage from their health plans. He believes the law as it stands can be legally challenged.
The bill, which passed out of a House committee last month, was scheduled for a vote on the House floor this week.
Quote The Life Defense Act of 2012, sponsored by state Rep. Matthew Hill (R-Jonesboro), mandates that the Tennessee Department of Health make detailed demographic information about every woman who has an abortion available to the public, including her age, race, county, marital status, education level, number of children, the location of the procedure and how many times she has been pregnant. Each report would also have to include the name of the doctor who performed the procedure.
The Life Defense Act of 2012, sponsored by state Rep. Matthew Hill (R-Jonesboro), mandates that the Tennessee Department of Health make detailed demographic information about every woman who has an abortion available to the public, including her age, race, county, marital status, education level, number of children, the location of the procedure and how many times she has been pregnant. Each report would also have to include the name of the doctor who performed the procedure.
The bill "allows no terminations after 20 weeks unless the life of the mother is already in serious physical jeopardy," the group says.
According to the bill's summary on the Georgia Legislature website, HB 954 would "change certain provisions relating to when abortion is legal." The site says the bill was referred to the Senate on March 5.
The full House of Representatives adopted an amendment to the state budget Friday evening that would prohibit state money from being used on abortions and would ban state workers from performing abortions during the workday. Opponents say the amendment will jeopardize the accreditation of KU's OBGYN residency program, where residents receive training to provide abortions.[/size]
On Thursday, a House committee meanwhile passed an amendment to the
state's sweeping anti-abortion bill
meant to allow for the abortion training to continue at KU. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires OBGYN programs to provide abortion training.
Edited by Certifiably Cait, 14 April 2012 - 12:20 AM.