Abortion patients required to have ultrasound

Abortion in the US state of Oklahoma just became even more traumatic with new legislation passed that requires women “to listen to the foetus and view the ultrasound image prior to terminating their pregnancy” Doctors can also now withhold information about foetal defects, to prevent parents from opting for abortion. Wait, is is 2010? I forget.
Women who are victims of rape or incest are not exempt from this ultrasound legislation and since most women seeking abortion are in the very early stage of pregnancy, vaginal ultrasounds will mostly be used to get the best picture of the foetus.
Pro life groups who support these tough laws now want the same to be encouraged in Australia.
According to News Ltd reports:
Under the new laws, pregnant women will be required to listen to the foetus and view the ultrasound image prior to terminating their pregnancy.” Politicians in the US state of Oklahoma overnight voted to pass two abortion Bills that will force women to undergo invasive ultrasounds and allow doctors to withhold test results showing foetal defects.
Vice President of Right to Life Australia Margaret Tighe said the new laws were “terrific news” and should be adopted locally. “I can only compliment (Oklahoma’s politicians) in what they have done and can only wish that we could have such success here,” she said.
But Pro Choice NSW spokesperson Jane Caro said the new laws would strip women of basic human rights and advised women in Oklahoma to “keep their legs together”. ”The new laws are outrageous on every level and destroy the human rights of the women in that state. They no longer have equal human rights”, she said.
The US Centre for Reproductive Rights has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ultrasound law, which it said “profoundly intrudes upon a patient’s privacy”. “Politicians have no business making medical decisions,” Stephanie Toti, a staff attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights said. Local abortion foes hailed the veto overrides as a victory for the unborn. “Ultrasound gives a mother a window to her womb,” Mary Spaulding Balch, director of state legislation for the National Right to Life, said. “It helps to prevent her from making a decision she may regret for the rest of her life …’”
More background on Oklahoman laws here.
I happened to be sitting next to Jane Caro who is quoted in this article at a Business Chicks lunch last Friday. We talked about it at length and were in complete agreement that this kind of law is a shocker.
What do you think? A reminder of commenting rules which you can see below. If you are feeling particularly passionate about this subject or about a comment left by someone else, please read them before posting your own.
I understand this is an emotional issue for many people but attacks on people or ideologies will be deleted.
Keep it nice peeps.

[Thank you Madeleine]

Article filed under: in the news, motherhood, pregnancy , & published: Wednesday, May 5th, 2010.

Holly says:

June 4, 2010 at 12:44 pm

This legislation is an absolute violation of human rights. To think of the poor women in Oklahoma being traumatised (probably for the rest of their lives) as a result of it…. Makes me ashamed to be an American.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Alert Moderator

S says:

May 21, 2010 at 8:33 am

I was advised to terminate my baby at 23 weeks. What hurts me most is that the first ultrasound took 45 minutes and the sonographer did not let me see anything and the second one took 10 minutes. But I was advised that baby was incompatible with life and would only survive for less than an hour. They couldn’t see my baby well and for this reason I was diagnosed with anhydramnios (no water in amniotic sac). I will always wonder if I should have doubted as my bmi is 40 and might have caused lack of visualisation. Of course the drs were right but I sometimes am overwhelmed with fear sadness and guilt for the loss of my much wanted and loved little boy who looked so perfect after being born terminated.

Lisa says:

May 14, 2010 at 9:06 pm

I have a friend who fell pregnant unexpectedly. She was unsure about whether to go ahead with it. She had an ultrasound, and decided to go through with it. Then miscarried. She was devastated. She believes that if she hadn’t seen the ultrasound she would have coped with it much better. This is stripping women of their choices, using guilt to bring a child into the world who may not be adequately loved and cared for owing to feelings of guilt or resentment… and of course whatever reason the mother is considering the abortion in any case (medical issues, psychological reasons, rape or incest…)

I do believe in the sanctity of life, and for myself, pregnant with my first, very much wanted, child, and never having been faced with a terrible situation like so many women find themselves in, I know that I personally could not abort. However, I also believe that people have the right to make decisions about their own bodies and their own lives. Unless you walk in someone’s shoes, how dare you judge? How dare you presume to know “what’s best” for them? Government should get out of decisions that do not concern them. And people who get on their moral high horse about other peoples’ choices should thank their lucky stars that they have never been faced with such a situation themselves.

princess_t says:

May 10, 2010 at 10:46 am

I’ve just done an online search for a petition for this…doesn’t seem to be one
If anyone has heard of one, I’d luv it to be shared!
Thanks xx

Flutterby says:

May 7, 2010 at 10:30 pm

I think the law is just plain cruel. I don’t know of any woman who undertakes an abortion lightly or frivolously.

I can’t help thinking of all the tortured, abused or eventually murdered children by parents who did not want them or had them for base reasons. It’s a shocking thing, but I honestly think they would have been better off if aborted. Their little souls may have found their way to a more loving home. That’s not a Christian belief set, but it’s what I believe.

I don’t agree with anti-abortion views, but I understand people’s passion on this.

D says:

May 7, 2010 at 1:39 pm

What a fantastic law. Its about time that people are given the full scope of what they are doing when they undertake abortion. I think its ridiculous that prochoice’ers can even speak about “basic human rights” when they are breaking the most fundemental part of the whole idea. Unborn babies are people too with futures that should be protected by these “basic rights” Good on them, this law will allow folks to understand the full scope of their consequences before they take action!

Anon says:
May 7, 2010 at 7:30 pm
Here comes another one…
Such a fantastic law D.
Wake up to yourself! Have you had an abortion?
Clearly not.
If you were an educated human being you would understand that most abortions are performed before 12 weeks gestation. Which at this time, the foetus has the POTENTIAL to become a baby, it is not actually a formed, viable human being.
Yes, it is the beginning of what can be a life. But it is not a person.
Another thing I should add is that most miscarriages, also known as spontanous abortions, happen because the foetus has a severe problem which wouldn’t necessarily allow it to thrive inside or outside the womb. Most miscarriages happen because there is something drastically wrong with the potential baby the woman is carrying.
So, when a woman carries a “baby” which has a congenital birth defect or something as equally traumatic which wouldn’t allow it to thrive, and the woman does not miscarry, how does this affect her?
That woman now has to lie there, look at an ultrasound of her unborn child, which was peformed via her vagina, THEN has to listen to the heartbeat of this baby. HOw fucking traumatic would that be. And you are ignorant enough to assume that women are irresponsible and incapable of making the right decision. PFFFT TO YOU!
For some women a termination is the only option. But because ignorant people like yourself D, agree that it is absolutely necessary for a law like this to be passed, those women may not be able to go through or even HAVE an abortion.
Just another ignorant, opinionated person who has jumped on their moral high horse.
GD Star Rating
loading...
Alert Moderator
- Kate says:
  July 16, 2010 at 12:57 pm
  There needs to be more middle ground on this topic, but I don’t think this law is the solution.
  on one hand girls need to be taught that if you are not prepared to deal with the possible consequences of engaging in sexual activity then you shouldn’t. at all. end of story.
  as a grown woman of friends who have gone through this is pulls at my heart strings, I do believe that a feotus is a baby…to say potential baby is ridiculous. it is a living being. a child could be murdered and the same applies- they had the potential to be a teenager, you dont find people saying that!
  on the same page, those who have been raped or with a child as the result of incest or other such horrendous attack, or those who have been advised for medical reasons to terminate, deserve to have that option, along with serious psychological assistance.
  for me, i have made the choice that if i do fall pregnant then that is a consequence of my choosing to be sexually active, and i know that is the best choice for me.
  I do not and have never criticised anothers choices, but anon you are slightly misinformed about the result of miscarriages, only half of misscarriages are a result of a genetic problem with the actual feotus.
  I do not agree with D in saying it is fantastic, at all. I do not agree that this law benefits the woman, the psychological repurcussions would be damaging to say the least. however I think you should reflect on how your opinion affects others, you should not be so quick to judge and call D ignorant when alot of people would consider your uneducated attack offensive aswell, or in your words ‘just another ignorant, opinionated person who has jumped on their moral high horse’….
  thats the problem with opinions, they only see one side and don’t research both!
  let me make it clear, i do not agree with D, nor do I agree with you!
  GD Star Rating
  loading...
  Alert Moderator
Anon says:
May 7, 2010 at 7:36 pm
PS: Is there a thumbs down button? Because D, your post absolutely deserves one!
GD Star Rating
loading...
Alert Moderator
love, kt says:
May 8, 2010 at 12:44 pm
How dare you D – how dare you judge a woman who may have been raped, or have simply had bad luck (no contraception but abstinence is 100% effective)?
Women should have the right to live their lives the way they see fit, who are you to make that decision for them?
A despicable law, and a despicable attitude. You should be ashamed.
GD Star Rating
loading...
Alert Moderator

Amanda (Gong Girl) says:

May 7, 2010 at 12:57 pm

Whether or not there is a law about it – abortion has always been beset upon by people who are happy to prey upon the vulnerable to make their opinions known and to get women to change their minds. But as weird as this may sound, for some reason, legalising the harassment almost seems like a good thing – at least then you can prepare for it, it’s transparent, you know it’s coming…there’s something about surprise attacks that unsettles me more. So fine, your job is to harrass me and get me to change my mind, my job is to tell you to fuck off and get on with it. But then, these laws don’t target women like me, they target girls I knew who were up for days vomiting from the stress of it, or trying to kill it with alcohol only to wind up in the hospital with alcohol poisoning – bub still intact…or punching themselves in the stomach hoping that would do the trick…or getting their boyfriends to kick them – never heard about it working, though I did hear about serious internal bleeding. These are the ones they’re preying on – so I wonder what they think they’re accomplishing.

If you were applying the orginal Hippocrates Oath – which has doctors explicity swear not to assist with abortions (a version not typically used in modern societies) they would still be drawing a fine line about witholding info on birth defects – to me it would be along the same lines as banning MRIs, X-rays and all other diagnostic tests – if we’re concerned about women aborting fetuses, what about euthanasia over a bad diagnosis? I mean really, by the same thinking, the 65 year old has no right to know about his lung cancer, the 36 year old car accident survivor will not be screened for brain damage, etc.

But while all of this gets my goat – what equally ticks me off is the cordoning off of victims of rape and incest. That is the one thing pro-lifers have got right, and at the very least absolves them of hypocrisy – why should the law be different for them? These girls/women are no more, no less, entitled to accessing this choice than any other woman. Period. Just as murderers will still get life saving surgery, paedophiles will get access to antibiotics – who gets access to care should never be dependent upon whether you are a victim or perpetrator – if you’re a human being, step right up to be served…at least that’s one thing Hippocrates got right, and the fence-sitting ‘pro-choicers’ should wake up to.

BrettsGal says:

May 6, 2010 at 7:10 pm

This law should, for lack of a better phrase, out-lawed. When I was 19 I fell pregnant to a one night stand, (judge all you want), he was a long time friend and when I told him I was pregnant from our drunken fling. He said and I quote word for word “but i didnt c.u.m” when I picked myself up from the ground, cause im not really the type of girl to sleep around. First guy after a longterm relationship. He then informed me that he would not want any part of the child, did not want to be on the birth certificate, and would not be giving me any money for the baby.
I went home and talked it over with my best friend and spent about a week thinking what to do. If I thought I could cope on my own, if my parents would ever forgive me.
I then informed him of waht I had decided to do, so he said well thank god for that, I will pay half of it. So just to stick it to him, i told him it would cost 2.5 times more then it really did.
Childish I know, but I didnt like the way he handled it.
I am now the proud mumma of 3 boys and a little girl.

The funniest thing is I saw the guy a few weeks ago and he looked over tired and had 3 screaming kids with him.

I took the time to think about the hugeness (not a real word i know) of what i was doing.

If these laws get passed in Australia, we will end up with all these back yard abortion clinics and girls dying from botched abortions. And how many more new born babies will be just dumped on the “steps of churches” or people giving birth to babies with deformatives due to their mums drinking and doing drugs to “get rid’ of the unwanted child.

L says:

May 6, 2010 at 3:17 pm

I am not surprised to see this happened in Oklahoma. My father-in-law grew up there, and i went with my partner to stay with the relatives there a couple of years back. It truly is like stepping back in time in terms of human rights there. People are open racist and sexist, they have guns displayed proudly in cupboards in the loungeroom, they want books like the Da Vinci Code banned. It really doesn’t surprise me at all.

AJ says:

May 6, 2010 at 2:46 pm

I had an abortion when I was 24 years old. I used contraception, (obviously not everything is always full proof.) I was living in a major city, having moved there from a small town in another state. The decision was made by both myself and my partner for numerous reasons (if I listed all the reasons, it would drag on for hours! Also at the end of the day, it was our decision and I don’t think I need to justify myself here.). But the reality was: If I went ahead with the pregnancy, the only viable option would have been to move back to my home town, back in with my parents and burden my family with this (not their responsibility!), possibly resenting the child.
The decision was not taken lightly – but it was made and done.

I’m now 30, married and pregnant with a very wanted baby. (Just for your info – I’m not married to the guy I had the abortion with, but I’m still great friends with him)
When I seen the ultrasounds at 4 and 6 weeks (another story – nothing to do with my previous abortion), yes, I was a little surprised at how much was happening with the baby inside me at that early stage.
I wasn’t ignorant about the facts of my abortion, but I think as a coping mechanism it’s easy to turn a blind eye to the reality of this.

If I had have been forced to see an ultrasound prior to my abortion:
Would it have changed my mind? No.
Would it have made an already difficult situation harder? Yes
Do I regret my abortion (even after seeing my new bub-to-be’s ultrasound)? No

Sorry, I just don’t think this procedure is going to have the desired outcome it’s aiming to achieve.

birth2earth says:

May 6, 2010 at 1:26 pm

In Australia, each state has a different law on abortion, which seems intuitively ridiculous. It’s about time that we insisted on a cohesive law for all Australians to secure a safe abortion when required. In NSW, abortions are legal – if they’re performed by a qualified doctor and with the consent of the patient … but the doctor must believe that the termination is necessary to protect the mental and/or physical health of the pregnant woman. It is not, at law, strictly up to the woman. Whilst anyone who seriously utilises abortion simply as a method of birth control is dangerously reckless at best and immoral at worst, safe abortions should be available to those who need or want them. Women are not just incubators for future generations, and each pregnant girl/woman should be able to decide her own future with respect to carrying a child.
Carrying a healthy child to term and delivering a baby is surely one of life’s purest joys – but life does not always deliver up what we expect. As intelligent members of society, women should be able to choose for themselves, regardless of what state (or country) they live in.

asti says:

May 6, 2010 at 12:23 pm

why we, the women, are always the victims??

Anita says:

May 6, 2010 at 11:32 am

Some pro-lifers seem to think women use abortion as an extreme form of contraception, sometimes this is the case, most often it’s far from it.
In these instances, the mandatory ultrasound would be far more effective if this was used as an informative tool during sex education, promoting the prevention of abortion through proper, regular use of contraception.
Using the mandatory ultrasound as a shock treatment after the deed has been done, (I think) is mean, unhelpful and defeating the purpose in a lot of cases.
If a women has chosen an abortion for whatever reason, than I believe this is the best decision for everyone. What’s the point in bringing a child into an unwanted, or unsupported situation? Not good the child if you ask me…
If a women, for whatever reason, has had this decision forced on her (for medical reasons etc), how is a mandatory ultrasound going to help her or the unborn child in any way?!
Withholding medical info, in my opinion, is just plain wrong for so many reasons that I’d ramble on forever if I went into it…
My overall opinion – Not cool!

Grace says:

May 6, 2010 at 11:24 am

I do not like abortions, and would not have one myself.

However, I find these laws INCREDIBLY offensive.

To be honest, I would be surprised if they survived a constitutional challenge. I don’t know much about US law, but these laws are such a gross invasion of the privacy and autonomy of an individual…surely they cannot stand.

I hate the idea of a woman being forced to have a vaginal ultrasound. It it just so invasive! Same with the test results. Urg.

ANONFORSURE says:
May 6, 2010 at 7:09 pm
I don’t think anyone likes abortions Grace.
I do completely agree with you when you talk about how invasive this would be. Absolutely disgusting in my books.
I hope the law doesn’t get passed. It is up in the air at the moment. Makes me so mad!
GD Star Rating
loading...
Alert Moderator
- Anonymous says:
  May 6, 2010 at 9:27 pm
  They are SHOCKING laws, but I would definitely not be surprised if they were passed. We’re having a similar debate in Australia at the moment, and there are much more conservative opinions about the abortion issue in America.
  GD Star Rating
  loading...
  Alert Moderator
  - camille says:
    May 7, 2010 at 11:04 am
    I work as a sexual assault counsellor and would consider the insertion of a vaginal probe by a doctor against a woman’s wishes to be sexual assault by the medical profession and the state. Even if they think they breezily tell a woman it is just a routine part of the decision-making process, this is still considered coersion, much like the boyfriend that uses emotional coersion by saying “if you loved me you’d do it”.
    When I see how careful and considerate doctors and nurses are with medical and forensic examinations of sexaul assault victims, I doubt they will find doctors or nurses willing to perform these unwanted vaginal ultra-sounds.
    Also, I wonder what they will do to a woman who agrees to have it, but sticks her ipod on full blast and closes her eyes.
    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    Alert Moderator
- Grace says:
  May 10, 2010 at 9:47 pm
  Lol thats a good point – noone likes abortions. I meant to say that I am opposed to them being generally available, but did not articulate myself well at all!
  GD Star Rating
  loading...
  Alert Moderator

Peanut says:

May 6, 2010 at 9:06 am

This is just horrific to imagine. Those poor, poor women. Before reading this, I would have had trouble imagining how this procedure (and the decision leading up to it) could be more traumatising than it already is. Now I see it can.
I simply don’t understand how witholding test results is ethical? It’s just so sad.

Subscribe to our daily updates

Recent Comments

The new battleground in abortion law: ultrasounds.

339 Responses to “The new battleground in abortion law: ultrasounds.”

Topics

Top 10 Subjects

Stay Connected

Subscribe to our daily updates

Recent Comments

The new battleground in abortion law: ultrasounds.

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like:

You might also like: