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.
Well put.
Yes, and the skill it takes, the experience, is not something that can be achieved at a 'christian education' where everything that is basic and honest in life falls into their 'don't ask and don't tell.' church oversight. So we can not be honest about life with children at the appropriate age, as that will override 'their choice to be the framers of their childrens world view.' So let them opt out of awareness, and observation skills. Do not let them be Special Forces or Seals, where one is forced to observe 'the facts on the ground,' The weather, etc., and to pass on the facts to their brother and sisters soldiers, marines, etc. " Now, they can swab the decks, and clean the ditches, but don't let them become 'dependable' without some level of retraining. No, they will always be like poor hungry dogs, gripping at your fatigues, because they are so desperate, and hungry, to obey their bishops. They can't help it. They are Newts and Santorums people to manipulate. They are not World Class People. Do not let them mix with the natives. Keep them off the flight deck. It is what it is. Carry-on.
Excellent reasons not to vote for the self-righteous.
i see no love for the unborn
only disdain
disrespect
for innocent unborns.
it's not about religion
so why can't we love BOTH?
The Affordable Care Act does not dictate what insurance companies or what coverage one should have. It simply requires individuals to be covered.
I am truly sorry that you are unable to have children since your abortion. I wonder what the data shows on the frequency of this occurrence. I think the value of keeping abortion legal is that this would be very rare in the care of a capable doctor. Pro-life extremists are doing their best to ride the slippery slope to the bottom by pressuring politicians to overturn Roe v Wade as soon as they are elected, but meanwhile to champion laws like this one on ultrasound that will make it too expensive for poor women to exercise their right to choose. Affluent women won't have an issue--they'll just pay for the ultrasound and may even have insurance for it.
Women and men need to stand up and make it popular for politicians to uphold Roe when campaigning.
If a medical practice can make a profit over saying they had provided an ultrasosund, they could have an old machine and squeeze some jelly and put on a dog and pony show with an untrained individual. Check the degree of your medical provider and their staff. If they can get money for being seen to do something, yet not really provide a state of the art service, 'they will get coverage and dollars for someone untrained, someone of their family." If you are in Virginia, you need to get a second opinion if you need to know what is on that ultrasound, unless you are in the hands of a competant physician and he is 'working for you,' and not for The Church andtheir Minions. If your doctor is not working for you, and on your behalf, check out that degree on the wall. Check it out before you spend you time and money, whether you have insurance or not.
Sadly, I think you don't understand the basic argument of being Pro-Choice. No one is worried that women will change their minds - women know exactly what is inside, and they don't want to be forced to have a expensive vaginal picture when it is not medically necessary. It is ridiculous to assume that women do not understand their bodies. Just look in a book or google it for goodness sake.
I side with the 60 year old caller - women who give their children up for adoption suffer more - I know I could never do that. I, as many others - don't think of it as a person's life being terminated at all (ie fetus). Nobody thinks "she will feel bad if he/she lives" - PLEASE ! there is no HE or SHE yet - there is no determination of either sex at the point of knowing you are pregnant and seeking an abortion! Yes - women should get on with their own lives - and it is exactly what they are trying to do by getting an abortion!!
You are entitled to your decision - but don't force others to follow your beliefs - this is America in 2012 - and America used to have freedom of religon and freedom of choice.
Most young women of child bearing age go on to have healthy children at a later time - who I might point out would not have been born if the woman was forced to take care of an unwanted child!! Let's think more about the quality of the actual child instead of focusing on an unwanted "pregnancy" (note: not a child yet).
Understood, it would be an assault if one did not consent to a pelvic exam. However, there are MEDICAL reasons to perform an ultrasound (dating, r/o ectopic) prior to an abortion. (And, yes, no health care provider should ever perform any procedure without patient consent). If a women does not consent to an ultrasound, then the provider does not need to give the woman an abortion. One should always have needed information prior to any medical procedure. Maybe the woman is not fully dealing with the situation if they can not deal with an ultrasound.
I think it's sad that the age of an unborn human being somehow makes it Not a human being and therefore disposable. It appears we've decided as a society that this 'age-discrimination' of certain humans on Earth - specifically the unborn - is just fine and is a woman's "right". Give me a break. It's murder and is getting rid of something that's inconvenient. But guess what - it's still a human being. It's not a fish, a bird, or a dog. A human being just like you. But with no rights apparently.
How about women get to choose if a baby is the right or wrong choice for them?
Beyond a right to be terminated at another's discretion, does an unborn child have any existential human rights?
The side discussion about prescription coverage for birth control pills included the idea that insurance companies should cover them as they would any prescription or even give special coverage so that they aren't subject to the deductible so they end up being free to the consumer. It's only since 1993 that my insurance company covered birth control pills. Before that, I got a prescription from my doctor then paid for the pills myself. The pills were still easily available.
I always questioned why my insurance company wasn't willing to pay out $20/month while being willing to pay for prenatal care, delivery, etc. Maybe they figured the revenue from covering a dependent made up the difference.
Of course I didn't like paying for the pills myself, but I did not think I was entitled to that benefit or that insurance companies should be required to offer that coverage. Maybe some insurance companies did.
Choosing is fine, I just happen to think that once it's to the point of choosing whether of not to kill, it's too little too late. Choose Before it gets to that point. Or is that just not practical for most women? Again, a sad comment on our society and women in general. Pathetic.
How is a transvaginal, diagnostic ultrasound forcible rape, but the introduction of cervical dilators, uterine suction curettes, uterine curettes, etc., not forcible rape?
I thought Jon Stewart put this to rest last night. If the proponents want to teach would be non-mothers to make better decisions, make the ultrasound an option and advertise the availability.
It was disappointing to have a guest determined to provide disinformation about both abortion and Planned Parenthood. She talks as if every trip to the clinic results in abortion and not an exam, discussion of birth control options like barrier methods, pills and IUDs, or check for cervical cancer.
Cervical cancer would be a good topic for a show since it is now possible to immunize against a common virus that causes it. This could prevent the usual virgin from starting down the path to cancer on her wedding night.
Full disclosure is good. In that spirit, women should have to watch a film on overpopulation and the financial effects of raising a child.
Choice.
The obvious question no one has asked yet is: If 99% of the abortion providers use ultrasound before the procedure, then why do you need a law at all? It's just a waste of the legislature's time and taxpayers money to make a political statement.
Rights to abortion for rape victims and where the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother are understandable, but most, by a landslide, are performed simply because the woman had unprotected intercourse and simply doesn't want the resultant child. I support some form of this law, because it gives the fetus' life some sort of recognition, as a living thing capable of maturing to live a wonderful human life, to it's own mother who wants to terminate it. You're not just using sanitizer to kill some bacteria on your hands, that fetus is inarguably at least "potential" human life. Tue fetus deserves some minimal representation as human.
I am a 48 year old mother of 3 of my own and another teen who stays with us. I had an abortion at 17 am thankful I had that choice and am thankful my daughter still has that choice. Whether I was required to have an ultrasound or not or any pf this other bull..... they are now requiring would not have stopped me or my mother who went with me nor would it stop me from securing care for my daughter. We know the risks of this craziness because we live in Wichita and we have seen Dr. Tiller murdered and lived through the summer of mercy. Who is protecting women certainly not your guest, how many foster kids does she have, how many has she adopted out of social services. Abortion has always existed....ergot etceteras
I'm listening right now to the argument that sometimes it comes back to haunt women. Well, so what? The right constantly talks about the right of people to make their own decision and the responsibility to deal with consequences. Well, that would be except for women -- who aren't really people to the right.
I resent your pro-life guest today who constantly refers to the embryo/fetus
as the "BABY", the "CHILD", as if it is. It's part of their propaganda to induce
guilt where none is due. I will be outside the Republican "debate" today with my sign "TAKE YOUR PROBE AND SHOVE IT"...
Thank you, Diane. My late wonderful companion adored you.
As a long-time listener of the Diane Rehm program and supporter of her intelligent and non-biased moderation of the discussions she hosts--I am deeply disappointed that she is allowing her guest, Carol Tobias president of the National Right to Life Committee to continue with her disingenuous argument for forcing women to have ultrasounds before an abortion.
One does not force people to take information.
Abortion is settled law. Stop bullying women.
Akaka,
All of that is why a DOCTOR, and not a LEGISLATOR, should use his or her judgment as to ordering, or not ordering, any ultrasound. Whether it's painful or not is beside the point: if an MD says one is necessary for medical reasons, women typically have one. No one should have the right to force one on a woman.
"Evergreen wrote:
...
Both men and women regret decisions they make and wonder how their lives would be different if they had taken another path."...
Like giving up a Child for Adoption.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
A perspective from Texas: I just wanted to point out that in my state, health insurance providers aren't even required to cover prenatal care or childbirth (mine doesn't). So the idea that the Legislature wants to invade the doctor's office during an abortion consultation is even more offensive.
I believe that Obamacare will require Texas, and all states, to cover prenatal care and childbirth by 2014. Thank goodness.
Women have the right to an abortion. Period. Why does the religious right insist on attacking that right incrementally through laws like this or trying to defund planned parenthood? Maybe it is because they have not really tried to consider why the supreme court made the decision or they don't care. SCOUTUS decided that an abortion was a private matter between a women and her doctor. How is this law in accord with that decision?
I also wan't to point out that pro choice advocates want abortion to be legal, safe, and RARE! We don't celebrate abortion, it is something we want to reduce by reducing unwanted pregnancies. That is why we support extending contraceptive coverage to be as universal as possible. When the religious right complains about their "religious freedom" to not provide a health service to an employee, and then turns around and tries to force women to undergo a procedure that is not necessary, is already available if wanted, and probably NOT wanted by many women, I have to wonder...
Does religious conviction cloud the brain's ability to understand what ideas like freedom and rights actually mean in the context of a secular society made up of many different people with different opinions?
If, as Tobias says, ultrasounds are already being done before abortions, why must there be a law requiring it? Tobias is being disingenuous about why this law was passed.
I get so angry when I hear the sophistic arguments of the pro-life people. Why haven't the bishops and right-wing politicians offered to take in and support all these babies that would otherwise be born if they had their way? These hypocrites vehemently argue against government in your personal life but are more than willing to subjugate women to their demands. I can't help but compare their intrusiveness to that of certain muslin extremists' domination of females, i.e. Saudi Arabia is a good example. Let's get these people out of our lives once and for all!