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.
Someone please tell Carol Tobias that a church is a church, but a religious school or hospital which doesn't discriminate for job applicatants on religious bases is a competitor selling services in a secular marketplace.
Right wingers are trying to confuse the two, Diane.
If an athiest cannot be discriminated against while applying for a job in a hospital or school, where does the management get off trying to discriminate with religious coverage?
Really, I would have like to see medical experts on the panel and not people with a political agenda
Really, I would have like to see medical experts on the panel and not people with a political agenda
I was most appalled with continuous statements by Diane's guests that "the fact is" without ever giving the identity of the iinvestigator and/or publisher of "the fact". Thank you, Diane, for pointing out at the end that Planned Parenthood statistics did not change. If it weren't for planned parenthood, members of my family would not know how to do a breast exam and none of us have ever had an abortion. We are also very blessed that generally we have not been in a position to have to consider that personal choice.
This is for Carol, I believe, who is anti-abortion. You stated that the vast majority of women who go to Planned Parenthood are not pressed to carry their child to full term. Under what pretense do you make this claim and how can it be accurate? Are you there in most of the consultation rooms?
I have not heard a reaction yet from someone who has had a pre-abortion ultrasound and wished they hadn't. One caller has stated that she wished she had more information and had had the ultrasound. For me, the most emotionally painful part of the abortion is when the woman has to face the reality of a possible life inside her - which is what the ultrasound accomplishes for the woman (setting aside medical necessity). Women should not be forced to see the ultrasound and suffer through a politically motivated description of the process. How many women are going to change their minds at that point anyway? Is there any evidence that this prevents abortion? I think that this accomplishes is two things: 1) a politically and religiously motivated intrusion on the woman's privacy and decision making process 2) the negative psychological affect of unnecessarily emphasizing what a majority of women are already painfully aware of going into abortions: they are not going to have the baby. Women are going to regret or not regret abortions whether or not they have the ultrasound, mandated or not. Why inflict further emotional damage through a mandated procedure if it is not necessary to do so for each woman?
I had a vaginal ultra sound -- very invasive, very uncomfortable, very awful but legal and it was necessary as determined by my doctor, thank goodness my health insurance paid for this very expensive procedure. I hope never to need to have one again. Anyone who says they are anything less than extremely invasive and uncomfortable (and embarrassing, the rape analogy is a good one) is not telling the truth. The men and women making this policy should be subjected to vaginal/anal ultrasound, forced medical procedures, then forbidden access to health care and then required to personally pay for all the extra care that the ultrasounds and unintended pregnancy's and children that will result from their policies. I will also say, that I had an abortion that I don't regret, it was also invasive, also uncomfortable, also legal, and my health insurance paid for it, thankfully because I couldn't afford to pay for it let alone pay to care for a child. The providers of care when I had the abortion 29 years ago were much more kind, caring and respectful of me than the radiologists who did the ultrasound 5 years ago. I was on birth control when I became pregnant and after the abortion did everything I could to avoid having another. But, I made the legal choice to have one -- but didn't want to have to make again. It was THE RIGHT CHOICE for me.
Of course they haven't. They have full coverage themselves or thru their husbands. But they are free to have a degree from Regent or Bob Jones, and therefore keep employed by using their marketing degrees for a lobbying organization. She will never go off message. She doesn't care about anyone or anything but her paycheck. Andshe is good at her job. So she will always be out there, being offended, 'loosing her choice' on behalf of whomever pays her to say it.
I am sure she will be attending some training session at a beautiful location in the Spring, perhaps at the Homestead, or at Regent University, anyway, it will be four star treatment, costing what it would cost to get this trans vaginal ultrasound. She is a good player of hardball. Handball. Racket ball. It is her meditation. She gets paid for being Pretty in Pink.
My experience was quite different than what the pro-life group would have you believe is "normal" for a woman undergoing abortion, especially in regards to having a doctor-patient relationship with the physician who performs the procedure.
I did use my regular gynecologist, with whom I had a dr.-patient relationship, and I continued to use him for my later full-term pregnancies after I was married. The only reason I wouldn't continue to use the same doctor, is if I were ashamed, which is what the pro-life group is trying to achieve.
Hey Jonesy, hang in there. Try church. We are getting better at helping people like you. I was raised as a feminist and you are right, it is a religion. I've found a kinder, gentler religion in JC. Where we are not good is helping young people with unwanted pregnancies. I saw a church once who promoted adopting these babies and taking the young girl in to their home too! Crazy amount of commitment but maybe that's what we should be doing instead of shouting with placards.
The concept of mandatory ultrasound prior to abortion is clearly an exercise in coersion on the part of anti-choice movement. As a woman who has made the choice for abortion in my life, I can assure anyone that I was clearly informed and aware of all aspects of the decision without a prior ultrasound. Women are just trying to maintain our privacy, dignity and take care of ourselves physically as we go through this experience. It is already enough of a challenge - walking through lines of ignorant anti-choice protesters holding placards with graphic photos just to get in the front door of a clinic, as an example - let alone undergoing the indignities of a forced ultrasound or even more appalling, being forced to listen to a heartbeat.
It is insulting, not to mention paternalistic, for Carol Tobias to portray women who choose abortion as so ignorant and uninformed that they must be shown a picture of their fetus in order to make the “right” decision. Most of the women I know who've had abortions have weighed the pros and cons very seriously. I know I did, and it was the right decision for me and my future family. This proposed VA law seems downright sadistic.
So when a doctor gives you a pelvic exam that is like rape?
Some years ago I accompanied a young woman who had decided to have an abortion--a sixteen-year-old whose boyfriend persuaded her he loved her, but abandoned her when he learned she was pregnant. I wasn't aware of the pro-lifers' tactic of subjecting the woman to watching the ultrasound. It seemed to me that the technician was making the procedure last as long as possible and being sure the girl was watching. Finally I intervened and said, "Is this necessary?" and the technician turned the screen away and finished up.
I think the abortion debate would go away in a hurry if Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney would advocate for putting the male partner in jail--not the doctor, not the woman. And then acknowledge that we're going to need a lot more jails.
I listened with dismay to the guest who claimed that women suffer after having abortions. There is absolutely NO good scientific evidence that women who have had abortions suffer more than those who carry an unwanted pregnancy to term. The American Psychological Association (http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/index.aspx) says:
"The best scientific evidence published indicates that among adult women who have an unplanned pregnancy the relative risk of mental health problems is no greater if they have a single elective first-trimester abortion than if they deliver that pregnancy."
In fact sometimes there is LESS suffering after an abortion if fetal abnormalities are involved:
"The few published studies that examined women’s responses following an induced abortion due to fetal abnormality suggest that terminating a wanted pregnancy late in pregnancy due to fetal abnormality appears to be associated with negative psychological reactions equivalent to those experienced by women who miscarry a wanted pregnancy or who experience a stillbirth or death of a newborn, but less than those who deliver a child with life-threatening abnormalities."
Indeed, some women suffer precisely because of the harassment and stigma that the anti choice movement attaches to abortion:
"This review identified several factors that are predictive of more negative psychological responses following first-trimester abortion among women in the United States. Those factors included: Perceptions of stigma, need for secrecy, and low or anticipated social support for the abortion decision; A prior history of mental health problems; Personality factors such as low self-esteem and use of avoidance and denial coping strategies; and Characteristics of the particular pregnancy, including the extent to which the woman wanted and felt committed to it."
It is important that people hear the scientific evidence rather than the lies. Thank you.
Dr. Susan E. Brennan
I agree with the person who commented on Carol's inappropriate use of the words "child" and "baby" for what is actually an embryo or fetus, depending on gestational age. Perhaps we should spend more time and money worrying about the already existing children and babies who live in poverty. Of course this is not something that will win votes from "issue voters" in an election year.
Why do you assume the OBGYN is a man? There are plenty of female lady doctors. In addition, allowing doctors to make decisions on health care is hardly a gender issue. I can guarantee you, women ask far more questions about health care than men. In fact, it is OFTEN the wife who insists her husband see a doctor and makes sure the problem is correctly stated, asks the questions and makes sure the orders are followed.
Prochoice people say its a womans right to choose because its her body. This is true, a woman's body is inviolable. She has the right to give her body to whomever she chooses. BUT, everytime a woman has intercourse with a man there is the possibility that she might get pregnant. Both know the risks of sexual intercourse and both have an obligation to take responsibility for their actions. That child has the right to be born, not just because it is a new human being, but because in this day and age it is too easy to avoid pregnancy. Use BC, use a condom, be abstanant, do have sex during ovulation. "It's my body and I have the right to do whatever I want with it" is a totally BS argument. I am a man, yes. But saying that I have no right to speak on this subject is also a bunk argument and a cheap way to fight that battle.
Ultrasound is not like an xray. It takes time to acquire images. It may take 10-15 minutes to acquire these images, and possibly longer if there is pathology.
Carol Tobais
mentioned that she thinks there are tons of women who regret their abortions (the airways will be flooded with emails she said). Without data - as she probably has none either, I strongly believe that she is broadly INCORRECT - and that the majority of women who have had abortions (not all of course) do NOT regret their abortions, myself included - and went on to have a family, with children they love and are able to care for appropriately - as decided by the women themselves - along with their partners. I do not know one single woman who has had an abortion that regrets their decision - and ALL that I know, went on to have wonderful family's - ALL are wonderful Women and Mothers. DO not force your beliefs on others or state mis - information - I am tired of hearing politicians wrongly make wild accusations that the gullible will believe.
FrankG I totally agree about putting the men in jail but I have a better idea. Give the boyfriend a mandatory invasive ultra sound of their private part to see what they were thinking!
Good Morning,
Regarding abortions, I personally know at least 5 people who've had them, everyone of whom has regrets. This included both of my sisters and an aunt. A close friend was never able to get pregnant after her abortion. I just don't know what the pro-choice people are so afraid of - why not offer the information as a standard practice? why not be allowed to know what's going on with your body, and specifically what will happen? and why not SEE what your baby looks like? I would assume that having made a decision as serious as abortion one would have already "distanced" one's self emotionally - it's just a fetus, right? So what specifically is the harm, and just HOW is it being insensitive simply by giving information? I think it's because the pro-choice people are worried it will "force" women to change their minds. And just one more thing - your caller (woman in her 60's) stated that everyone she knew that had an abortion was fine, and had suffered no emotional after-effects. However, women who chose adoption instead suffered, had regrets etc. Soo if I'm understanding correctly, a person's life is terminated [ie the fetus] because the woman will feel bad if he/she lives?? Very strange, in my opinion. Let the person live, and get on with your OWN life. Seriously? you have to "get rid of the evidence" to feel good about yourself? Sad comment on society. -M. Wilson
During tough economic times with impossibly high healthcare costs, its hard to believe that any state would require this expensive test of its citizens. It is legal to choose an abortion, and it would be no more the state's business than it would be if a woman miscarried.
This is just the state bowing to the intimidation tactics of religious institutions.
Of course, they haven't thought it thru. That is what a marketing degree does for you. Your mathematics and physics and biology are all 'matters of belief.' That is why you don't want these people in engineering schools, medical schools, etc., anything where their eyes will gloss over and their ears will close as their brains have the filter of 'what to believe, and who to believe' and 'who is of the devil" Check the undergraduate degree of any doctor or nurse you see at any facility, private or public, because they have a filter, and want to filter out everything for everyone else. There are no rosy glasses in their fairy tales. It is all 'be scared and go to hell" or follow me. It is a special 'blessed waterboarding,' with the special Virginia Smile. Hey, It's 'Virginia is for Lovers,', not 'Virginia is an Honest Place." So, all you people from the Heartland, do not let your Friends and Family stay behind in The Old Dominion. There is nothing for them here but people willing to take advantage of them in Their special Virginia Gentleman Way. When your sailor deploys, get the family back to the heartland away f rom these "Virginia Gentlemen." They are not your Friends, no matter how much they scrape and bow.
An ebyro or fetus is no different than an adult (geneticaly). They are cells that are in the process of developing into an adult. Just as children are in the process of developing into adults. The issue is the potential of human life being snuffed out.
Oops, I was responding to lezlunz (February 22, 2012 - 10:36 am )
It could be if you didn't request a pelvic exam.
Abortion is much like watching paint dry, it is not at all obvious of the longer term effects and consequences.
When we were in our 20's and first married we had a baby boy. A few years later my wife, still in her 20's discovered she had uterine cancer and had a hysterectomy.
She wanted to adopt, I wasn't so sure, it was pretty expensive and would cost several months pay to adopt. To make a long story short, we did adopt a baby girl with my parents help.
Our son was hyperactive, never finished high school, had a drug problem and died at 29 in an automobile accident just when he was starting to turn his life around.
Our daughter was a good student and graduated from college.
We are now retired, healthy and independent, but can see that the day may come when we may will become more and more dependent on our adopted daughter as our parents became dependent on us.
We keep hearing about the evil job killing entitlements, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, but entitlements are the tools that allowed our children to leave home, town, state and chase their dreams without having to worry about their parents. Now entitlements are at risk because there are not enough young people to support their parents, aunts and uncles.
Here in America the WASPS are soon to become a minority; it is not their children that will inherit our land. We are not alone, consider Northern Europe, Russia and perhaps China with its one child policy. Assuming a Chinease man can find a woman to marry what will happen to their parents? We could ask the same question of our children and step-children who have parents, step-parents, un-married parents, separated and divorced parents, relatives and friends who never had children or their children died before they did.
As a social scientist and researcher I question Nancy Keenan's use of a 10 year old study to support her position that ultra sounds are routinely provided by abortion providers. A study conducted a decade ago on any social issue is dated! She cited the study twice and than erroneously concluded that if the study would to be updated the findings would be even more supportive of her position. This is speculation unsupported by empirical proof.
Ms. Keenan's comments throughout the discussion were generalizations without current empirical support. Statements such as "many women"...; 'response to the emotional toll of abortion would be "overwhelming" from potential callers'. should be questioned whenever they are disguised as incontravertible "fact".
I find it hard to support the Right to life movement, when it's focus seems to be entirely on removing the rights of a woman over her own body. I hear nothing from them, or the supporting politicians as to what they are planning to do to support these women who do choose to carry the baby to term, or how to improve the circumstances of the child. They oppose affordable healthcare or socialized medicine, at a time when a normal pregnancy and delivery cost is in excess of the average annual salary in this country. They talk of welfare recipients as being freeloaders and a drain on the economy, and yet wish to bring more children into this category. Education funding is being cut everywhere, and the Department of social services and child welfare is always overstretched nationwide. If you really want to reduce abortions, it is far more important to address the root causes that make this a necessary decision for women and families. Planned Parenthood does far more in this regard than any Right to Lifer or Politician that I am aware of. -- For starters, how many have actually adopted multiple children, after all, none of them are living on the poverty line.
One more thing - how come they promote Viagra etc, for men, tell women to stick and Aspirin between their knees, and also despise homosexuality. The hypocrisy is overwhelming!