Ultrasound Requirements and the Battle Over Abortion
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-02-22/ultrasound-requirements-and-battle-over-abortion
The Virginia legislature has approved a bill requiring women to undergo an ultrasound and 24-hour waiting period before having an abortion. Virginia's governor had expressed support for the bill but appeared to back off following protests. If signed into law, clinics would be required to ask women if they wanted to see the sonogram. Seven other states have some kind of ultrasound requirement. Supporters hope seeing an image of a fetus will make women change their mind about terminating their pregnancy. Critics say it's an effort to shame and harass women who have a legal right to an abortion. Ultrasounds and the abortion battle.
Guests
Carol Tobias
president, National Right to Life Committee.
Karen Tumulty
national political reporter, The Washington Post.
Nancy Keenan
president of NARAL, Pro-Choice America.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Conservatives cannot continue to be against abortion, against contraceptives, and against social programs. Never do I hear these groups come up with any meaningful ideas on how to take care of the women who may become pregnant, or feed, clothe, educate, and keep safe these women and their children. Adoption may be out there, but even it has a stigma on a woman who gives her child up.
Conservatives are the first to cut programs that these women need the most.
Abortion is not an easy decision. The ultrasound requirement is just one more kick in the gut to the woman who has to make such a decision.
I am not deeply invested in the abortion issue; both sides have merit and the issue is serious. However, one can separate the transvaginal ultrasound question from the abortion debate. I had a transvaginal ultrasound recently for reasons unrelated to abortion (I am 55). Let me be frank about this process. The "probe" is long and pokes around in deeply in one's vagina while one lays on a table with legs spread. It was grossly invasive, uncomfortable, and humiliating, and I am sorry that I consented to it, even to find out I was going to be okay. The idea that uninformed men in legislatures can make this process a GOVERNMENTAL requirement is outrageous, no matter what side of the abortion question you are on. And further, that they get to decide its timing. Good gravy people. Think this through.
It is tempting to ask if government should also mandate rectal probes of men seeking vasectomies. It really brings the question home.
There are other medical services that are legally required during pregnancy. My wife is currently pregnant and the doctor was forced to test for sexually transmitted diseases even though we know my wife didn't have any. That was a legally required test that we were forced to pay for, but didn't need.
"They've been winning this because of the way the question is framed."
What kind of framing was going to stop this in Virginia's new Tea Party legislature? The media, always ready to sand off the crazy crap of right-wingers, was totally unprepared for covering this. The false equivalency schtick failed them completely.
All those new Teabaggers elected in 2010 on "Jobs!Jobs!Jobs" and this is the first thing they've done. And with a vengeance.
And Carol Tobias saying "We want women to have all that information." She has, as Daffy Duck would say, "pronoun trouble". Her polite demeanor can't disguise her side's trying to cram this crap between doctors and women.
Abortion is a difficult two-sided issue. It's an issue about abortion, however, not choice or life. Referring to a person as "anti-choice" or "anti-life" is unfair and disrespectful.
My procedure was surgical / DNC. And the ultrasound was probe for clarification. And I was not told going into the process that this would occur - however, I felt as though I had no choice and did not question as I didn't know any better. And speaking of the medical records - I was confused further when I had my daughter 7 years ago when they asked how many pregnancies I had prior to this pregnancy. The emotional disturbances are true and difficult.
how 'bout, required vasectomy counseling before dispensing of viagra pills to men "so they can make an informed decision"? How many reasons that don't include procreation deem this pill necessary? If the point is not to procreate, logic (in pro-life terms) says it's recreational or cosmetic. So it should not be covered. Now, I don't believe this at all. I am just pointing out how hypocritical it is to screen women for their case for needing/getting birth control (many times it is a medical ENTIRE BODY or immunological reason. Not so, with viagra. btw. I have nothing against viagra. it works! : ) I'm just saying that CONDITIONAL Treatment dictated by a policy or even person, outside the privacy of patient and doctor is tyranny. "let" and "compel" is confusing for many pro-lifers. I support their choice to be pro-life.
If as stated by your guest 80% percent of abortions currently include an ultrasound as determined by the medical provider, then why is it necessary to LEGISLATE this test.
These laws are an invasion of privacy and a woman's right to decide for herself her medical care.
As a health care provider I am not aware of any other medical procedure that can be performed without the consent of the patient. This is a slippery slope of the government interfering between a patient and their medical provider
Could your guests talk about the different types of ultrasounds, transabdominal vs more obtrusive transvaginal. The photo on your web site displays only the former. My understanding is that in early pregnancy, when most abortions are performed, this law would require the more intrusive, transvaginal procedure because it displays the clear outline of the fetus at such an early stage. The transabdominal would not display such a clear picture.
One can see that anti-choice advocates don't think of women as anything other than incubators. The right-wing radicals care only about imposing their beliefs on everyone and the Constitution is just an impediment to their ultimate goal of turning the United States into Jesusland.
The policies of various abortion providers regarding ultra-sound is a "red herring." The REAL issue is the passing of a law that effects a woman's private health decisions. Conservatives keep campaigning for less government except when it is in reference to the privacy of women. No law comes between a man and his doctor. Why do legislatures think it is their business to mandate what a woman does or doesn't do in regards to her own body and her own decisions made in conjunction with her doctor?
I would be curious to know what, if any, experience the guests have with abortion?
I would be curious to know what, if any, experience the guests have with abortion?
Your guest keeps making this a issue on a womans rights. Don't you think more importantly this is a question of life or death.
Ray from Baltimore
Even if you carry a fetus to term and give it up for adoption you always think about that child out there, somewhere.
An abortion is a choice every woman needs to be allowed to make herself - there is NO reason for males to make laws ruling what choices women can make concerning a life time commitment to a child.
IF men had to be there and could not walk away it would be different. Look at how many fatherless children try to grow up, Mom struggling to bring in enough money to keep them fed, clothed, schooled and raised while the man who caused the pregnancy just walks away.
Men should never be allowed to make the choices for women and legislation making requirements IS men making the choice since the men rule the legisltors.
Precisely.
If it is not medically necessary, it should not be done. Patients rarely have ALL the information available for any condition for which they visit a doctor and it is disingenouous to suddenly have such a high standard of care for one particular procedure. It is a difficult decision to have an abortion even when you feel life does not begin at conception, and just because a woman or girl has mixed feelings or sadness does not mean it is not the right decision at the time. Making a teenaged girl or young woman feel intense shame and regret is manipulative and a horrible tool used to create confusion at the critical moment. It is like calling a screaming match a productive discussion. This issue is a red herring.
I live in Texas where it is mandatory for woman to get an ultrasound before having an abortion and as usual I am ashamed of the fact that I reside in a state that would not only entertain but pass a law so deplorable. I don't understand what you right wing religious nut jobs do not get about slippery slope. Why stop at calling a fetus a baby, why not make it illegal to menstruate or masturbate as a male because we are "murdering" unborn babies. These people are unbelievable. Have they never been to a Science class or picked up a Science book. Do they not get that this planet is already dangerously over populated? Also do they really think they know better than the woman making choices for herself? I had two abortions when I was a teenager and I am now a loving mother of a son who I decided to have when I was ready, willing and able to take care of him. I do not and never have regretted the decision I made and I am very glad that I was able to make it because it was the right decision for me and my life. Who are these egomaniacal psychopaths to think they should be able to have governance over me and my body? This is WRONG and they need to wake up and smell the hypocrisy they're shoveling.
Does the chemical drug "ru486" have anything to do with "ARE YOU FOR 86ing"
First, I'm offended by the words "child" and "baby" used by your guest Carol to describe an unborn fetus.
Second, I'm 58 and exhausted by predominantly male politicians and religious leaders (so called) trying to control my uterus. Mind your own body business and reproductive choices!!!!
I'm also sick of seeing Erectile Dysfunction commercials 100 times day...penis problems penis problems all day long on network television! Give it a rest.
Finally, I had an abortion in my 20's and it was the perfect decision for me...no regrets.
Using Carol Tobias' own figures about the number of abortions performed in spite of all the restrictions, abortions will be sought and performed, legal or not! They must be safe, legal and rare. Planned parenthood must continue to be supported to prevent them. It's frightening to hear the rhetoric by the republican candidates condemning birth control and prenatal care.
Your belief that women are suffering from having an abortion and your personal angst about it brought on by your individual beliefs does not trump the right of a woman to choose. It simply isn't your business. There was once forced sterilization of people in parts of this country. Mandating any medical procedure on anyone is wrong. We have a right to choose. I chose, it was my decision, any regret that I may have is my business, not your's.
The panelists are doing a great job being civil and articulate. I wish the pro-women/pro-choice lady was able to respond to the other woman's examples of how abortions hurt women. I don't doubt that some women remain ambivalent or grieve. However, that response is not universal of all women who seek abortions, nor does that response mean that for those women that they would choose *not* to have an abortion if they had to choose again. And by the way, women who give birth and put their child up for adoption can experience that same "What-if" or sense of loss.
Why does Ms. Tobias keep referring to a fetus as a baby or child? This just shows what forms her opinions and I find her very disingenuous. I support a womans right to make her own decisions but would love to reduce the number of abortions. However, I do believe that we can do so by improving the support of women and children, by reducing the number of poor by bettering our education system and undoing the redistribution of wealth that has occurred over the last 35 years. The current wave of invasive legislation and rising vitriol from social conservatives is repulsive.
I agree we should not be forced to pay for wars based on lies by chickenhawk administrations
I am a 62 year old mother of 3 and grandmother of a newborn. My 3 were planned pregnancies and my grandson is the much longed for firstborn of my 34 year old daughter who has had type 1 diabetes since she was 10 years old! I was a volunteer midwife in rural Western North Carolina for years. I vote in every election. I am and will always be PRO-CHOICE for all women! In my day (fertility-wise) we had a saying "If MEN could get pregnant ABORTION would be a sacrament" I believe this is more true today than ever! No woman gets pregnant for the "relief" of having an abortion. Some questions: How much does the "required" ultrasound cost and who pays? and Where does the assumption arise that a woman who needs to terminate a pregnancy has 2 days to spare for the process? My guess is that most women seeking termination have transportation issues, financial issues, relationship issues, and safety concerns... brave the ANTI-CHOICE protestors 2 days in a row for a personal, often lonely and sad medical procedure? May God open the hearts and minds of those who presume to make the rules and judgements of a private, medical matter! Blessings and PEACE to everyone who cares about the safety and health of the women and children who have already been born into this beautiful and dangerous world!
I am a 62 year old mother of 3 and grandmother of a newborn. My 3 were planned pregnancies and my grandson is the much longed for firstborn of my 34 year old daughter who has had type 1 diabetes since she was 10 years old! I was a volunteer midwife in rural Western North Carolina for years. I vote in every election. I am and will always be PRO-CHOICE for all women! In my day (fertility-wise) we had a saying "If MEN could get pregnant ABORTION would be a sacrament" I believe this is more true today than ever! No woman gets pregnant for the "relief" of having an abortion. Some questions: How much does the "required" ultrasound cost and who pays? and Where does the assumption arise that a woman who needs to terminate a pregnancy has 2 days to spare for the process? My guess is that most women seeking termination have transportation issues, financial issues, relationship issues, and safety concerns... brave the ANTI-CHOICE protestors 2 days in a row for a personal, often lonely and sad medical procedure? May God open the hearts and minds of those who presume to make the rules and judgements of a private, medical matter! Blessings and PEACE to everyone who cares about the safety and health of the women and children who have already been born into this beautiful and dangerous world!
American women have a right to access abortion services during the early stage (1st trimester) of pregnancy. That is a RIGHT. The VA proposed law is another effort to make the process so costly of a woman's time and funds, and so demeaning that frankly limits access. Ms. Tobias is less than candid when she asserts that the proposed VA ultrasound procedure is one that is routinely performed outside of states which mandate it. The use of an intra-vaginal probe comes about only when the pregnancy is too early (ie, 1st trimester) to identify the fetus using external ultrasound. It is not medically necessary for any purpose if a woman seeks to terminate the early pregnancy as it is her right to do.
Republican state legislatures are overreaching with this kind of legislation, and seek to impose their activist religious views on our government. They will lose the moderate, mainstream Republicans, Independents and anyone who values a woman's dignity and reproductive rights.
This is already the law in 28 states. It's only a problem if you have nothing with which to oppose the Democrats.