Ultrasound Law: "Pro-Women and Pro-Information"
http://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2012/03/ultrasound-law-pro-women-and-pro-information/Editor's note. The following is a speech delivered yesterday on the
floor of the Rhode Island House of Representatives by state
Representative Karen L. MacBeth (D-Cumberland) in response to Nicholas
D. Kristof's recent op-ed in the New York Times.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Representative Karen L. MacBeth
I rise today on a point of personal privilege.
The New York Times reporter Nicholas D. Kristof wrote an opinion piece
on March 3, 2012 titled "When States Abuse Women." A member of this
House of Representatives on a social media site then posted this
opinion piece.
The content of the reporter's piece was about woman seeking abortions
and laws concerning required ultrasounds. In this article Krisof
states "Rhode Island is considering Texas-style legislation bordering
on state-sanctioned rape." He rhetorically asks, "What else do you
call it when states mandate invasive probes in women's bodies?"
As the prime sponsor of the Rhode Island Legislation I challenge the
reporter to show me where an invasive probe into a women's body is
stated anywhere in this legislation.
Facts on the Rhode Island bill that were conveniently left out of the
reporter's piece:
RI General Law already mandates the physician or his or her authorized
agent to inform a woman considering abortion of the probable
gestational age of the fetus both at the time of first consultation
and at the time the proposed abortion procedure will be performed.
The current proposed bill seeks to add this current requirement that
the physician who is to perform the abortion or a certified technician
working with the physician shall perform an obstetric ultrasound on
the woman… Note carefully, the physician or certified technician, NOT
THE STATE AND NOT A RAPIST.
As quoted from the American college of radiology and the radiological
society of North America. "Ultrasound imaging is a noninvasive medical
test." – not the invasive probe Mr. Kristof leads his readers to
believe.
Significantly, Mr. Kristof completely fails to mention that
ultrasounds are typically performed on a woman before a woman is able
to get an abortion:
In a 2003 study of Planned Parenthood and other independently owned
abortion facilities, 99 percent of these clinics admitted that they
either "always" or "sometimes" perform an ultrasound in association
with a surgical abortion.
Further, it was stated that vaginal ultrasounds were "always"
performed before the early surgical abortion at 83 percent of these
sites, 16 percent "under certain conditions," and only 1 percent
"never" did them.
Additionally, the study revealed that after an abortion was performed,
vaginal ultrasounds were also "always" performed at 26 percent of
these sites, "under certain conditions" at 66 percent of these sites,
and "never" at 8 percent.
"That's just the medical standard," said Adrienne Schreiber, an
official at Planned Parenthood's Washington, D.C., regional office.
"To confirm the gestational age of the pregnancy, before any procedure
is done, you do an ultrasound."
Requiring an ultrasound to take place before an abortion is performed
makes sense since it ensures that the mother is actually pregnant,
determines the age and size of the baby, and aids in determining the
location of the unborn child for either the vacuum machine or a needle
used to end its life, if in fact a surgical abortion is decided upon.
And in many abortion procedures, ultrasounds are used during the
surgical abortion to ensure that the abortionist doesn't physically
harm the mother while they dismember the unborn child.
In short, ultrasounds are already being performed as part of most
abortion procedures. And in those cases, my bill simply requires the
abortionist to display these ultrasound images so that the woman may
view them.
To those that ask why, I quote the U.S. Supreme Court: "To reduce the
risk that a woman may elect an abortion, only to discover later, with
devastating psychological consequences, that her decision was not
fully informed."
Now it may be possible that some abortions are still being performed
in Rhode Island without an ultrasound having been performed. In these
cases, if indeed there remain any, my bill would create a statutory
mandate to perform an obstetric ultrasound, which, as we have seen, is
a reasonable standard of care, and is a mandate that has been upheld
by the U.S. Supreme Court.
But contrary to the wild assertions of Mr. Kristof, my bill does not
specify what type of ultrasound should be performed, leaving this
determination to the professional discretion of the licensed
practitioner.
This legislation is a Pro-Women and Pro-Information piece of
legislation. I will not allow a reporter that did not do his homework
make it something it is not.
I have tried to contact Reporter Nicholas D Kristof at his office, on
the site he lists for comments and on one of his social media sites.
He has yet to return any of my messages requesting to speak with him.
--
Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group.
To post to this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB