Hand over the ultrasound
More war on women sadism, this time from North Carolina.
A state law requiring that doctors who perform an abortion after the 16th week of pregnancy supply an ultrasound to state officials has sparked a new and bitter front in the war over abortion here, with stakes that are both personal and political.
Supporters say the purpose of the law is to verify that doctors and clinics are complying with state law, which outlaws abortions after 20 weeks but with an exception made for medical emergencies. Critics say the purpose is to intimidate and provide hurdles to women and doctors.
Oh come now, why wouldn’t women seeking abortions want state officials looking at their ultrasounds? They’re not as fragile as all that, are they? This is just victim feminism!!1
Melissa L. Reed, the vice president of public policy at Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, which operates clinics in four states, said state inspectors already had the ability to go to abortion clinics to review medical charts. She said she believed that the purpose of the new law was to intimidate doctors, particularly, she said, because the determination of fetal age is “not an exact science.” Ms. Reed also accused lawmakers of trying to intimidate women by requiring that “the most intimate piece of a woman’s medical record” be shared with a government agency.
Pff. It’s everybody’s business what’s going on inside a pregnant woman’s body. She’s public property after all.
The law, which was approved in June, also extends the mandated waiting period for women seeking an abortion to 72 hours from 24. That is the longest waiting period in the nation, and one that exists in four other states, according to the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute.
So women who have to travel to get an abortion have to spend three nights away from home. That’s a lot of money, a lot of time off work, a lot of time to have a car tied up, a lot of time away from the kids. It’s what I would call a significant burden.
In a statement on Thursday, Graham H. Wilson, a spokesman for Mr. McCrory, said the law “includes common-sense measures aimed at protecting women’s health by ensuring medical professionals use proper safety precautions, and this commitment is consistent with the governor’s pledge.”
Gerrick Brenner, the executive director of Progress NC Action, a liberal group, recently sent an email to supporters that accused Mr. McCrory of “breaking his promise to women.” The new law, Mr. Brenner wrote, was a “creepy scheme” that could be mistaken for “something out of George Orwell’s ‘1984.’ ”
What, because women have a right to privacy just as men do? Don’t be silly.
How thoughtful of him!
Because somehow, in all those years of training, the doctors never got any experience in protecting health by using proper safety precautions. Is anyone asking the medical schools to turn over their records? No? Because we know the doctors are getting this type of knowledge through both classwork and experience, and we are making excuses for why this law needs to be in place.
What about all the other thousands of procedures being done around the country? Who is safeguarding open heart surgery patients by making sure the medical professionals use proper safety precautions? The cancer patients? Those who have joints replaced? Root canals?
What happened to the right to bodily privacy invoked to allow Roe vs Wade to pass? I can’t imagine having to share personal medical records doesn’t fall under that precedent…
I’m, reading a biography of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. She was, apparently unhappy with Roe vs Wade, causing her to be denounced by some feminists. However her unhappiness, as explained by the book (and IANAL and English to boot) was that Roe vs Wade caused a sweeping legal change without a supporting legal framework of lesser caselaw. She felt the decision was not safe and without that supporting framework could be nibbled away or overturned if the political climate changed.
Looks like she was right.
There is no ‘war over abortion’ at present. There is a focused campaign AGAINST abortion, and against women’s rights in the broadest and most general terms. And it appears that the piecemeal erosion of reproductive rights and medical access is almost unopposed.
The loony Right seems to have lost on LGBT rights, and the general public seems to have shifted its view. What novelist could have predicted this simultaneous assault on women not registering in the minds of the public?