RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Bewig reports: "Women in Virginia, like those in seven other states, will be required to undergo an ultrasound procedure as a condition for having an abortion under a new law signed by Republican Governor Bob McDonnell."

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell speaks during the 2011 Governors Summit of the US Chamber of Commerce, 06/20/11. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell speaks during the 2011 Governors Summit of the US Chamber of Commerce, 06/20/11. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)



Virginia Becomes Eighth State to Require Ultrasound Before Abortion

By Matt Bewig, AllGov

11 March 12

 

omen in Virginia, like those in seven other states, will be required to undergo an ultrasound procedure as a condition for having an abortion under a new law signed by Republican Governor Bob McDonnell. An earlier version of the bill created a national controversy because it would have required some women to have a transvaginal ultrasound, which many criticized as physically invasive and unacceptably intrusive. The law as signed, however, requires only an abdominal ultrasound. The other seven states that also require an ultrasound are Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Texas also requires the ultrasound technician to display and describe the resulting image, while similar laws in North Carolina and Oklahoma are currently unenforceable because they are being challenged in court.

The Supreme Court recognized that the Constitutional right to privacy includes a woman's right to choose whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term in the case of Roe v. Wade (1973). Later Supreme Court cases, especially City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1983), watered down protection for abortion rights by allowing states to place burdens on abortion as long as they are not "undue." That opened the floodgates for anti-choice legislators to try to fashion abortion restrictions that would pass the vague "undue burden" test.

To Learn More:

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell Signs Virginia Ultrasound Bill (by Lucy Madison, CBS News)

State Policies in Brief: Requirements for Ultrasound (Guttmacher Institute) (pdf)

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
-22 # jlohman 2012-03-11 10:12
This is difficult. I am against abortion but FOR the woman's right to choose her own destiny. It is a tough decision that SHE is going to have to live with for the rest of her life, and either way it could be catastrophic if she regrets it forever.

But as a father I'd want my daughter to have all of the information possible before she decides, so I support these requirements.
 
 
+21 # Adoregon 2012-03-11 13:08
1) As a father, when was the last time you were pregnant?

2) When was the last time Gov. Bob McDonnell was pregnant?

3) Howzabout all elected officials, members of the judiciary and law enforcement having to pee to prove they are clean citizens before being paid with public funds?

This is not difficult. Let women make their own decisions. If you don't have a womb, it's not your decision to make.
 
 
-10 # jlohman 2012-03-11 16:16
Quoting Adoregon:
1) As a father, when was the last time you were pregnant?

As a father I'd not want my daughter to go through life being sorry that she decided without having all of the critical information available. It will ultimately be her decision, but that is the most loving thing I could do.

I DO agree with having politicians tested, incidentally.
 
 
+22 # MEBrowning 2012-03-11 14:26
jlohman, EVERYBODY is against abortion. The term "pro-abortion" to describe those who support a woman's right to choose was coined by mostly male religious extremists. "Pro-choice" is a more accurate term, but you'll never hear them use it. And as for your daughter getting "all the information possible before she decides," she and her doctor are fully capable of doing that without a bunch of self-righteous men making new laws that water down her right to decide or that inflict unnecessary impediments to her decision.

To suggest that women need certain information forced on them by enacting such invasive laws as these is to suggest that women aren't capable of making their own decisions.

There IS a war on reproductive rights in this country. Since men can't get pregnant, this war only targets women. No one has passed a law abridging a man's right to a vasectomy. No man is forced to get "more information" before buying Viagra or Cialis or condoms. A woman who chooses to end her pregnancy should NEVER be subjected to coercive measures designed to get her to change her mind. Anyone who supports such laws should be ready and willing to raise the thousands of unwanted babies who are born in this country every year.
 
 
-13 # jlohman 2012-03-11 17:00
Quoting MEBrowning:
To suggest that women need certain information forced on them by enacting such invasive laws as these is to suggest that women aren't capable of making their own decisions.

To suggest that women always make the right decision and never wished for more information, is giving incorrect credit. Even if we were talking about men.
 
 
+4 # db4635 2012-03-12 14:35
Quoting jlohman:
Quoting MEBrowning:
To suggest that women need certain information forced on them by enacting such invasive laws as these is to suggest that women aren't capable of making their own decisions.

To suggest that women always make the right decision and never wished for more information, is giving incorrect credit. Even if we were talking about men.


You are still missing a critical point(s). Who has established that ALL women MUST have information provided by an ultrasound in order to make an informed decision? If the woman 'wishes' for more info from an ultrasound, she can ask for one. The ultasound laws FORCE all women to have one.
 
 
-4 # jlohman 2012-03-12 15:15
If the woman wishes, she can close her eyes.
 
 
+10 # GeeRob 2012-03-11 14:38
Your daughters could go online and get every bit of information they needed. I would hope that you would raise your daughters with more respect for their intelligence.
 
 
-11 # jlohman 2012-03-11 17:09
Incorrect. They cannot get an ultrasound.
 
 
+4 # michelle 2012-03-11 21:48
Note, GeeRob says, "get every bit of information they needed." He is correct because 'they' don't need an ultrasound to make a decision.
 
 
+11 # Glen 2012-03-11 19:00
The question, jlohman, is what exactly is information? Even younger women know what an abortion is without invasive techniques that further embarrass and insult them. The REASON for the abortion is far more important than seeing an image of the embryo or fetus. This "information" is meant to intimidate and create emotion, rather than inform.

The decision to abort is hard enough without intimidation that might also include heckling protesters at the door of the clinic.
 
 
+5 # michelle 2012-03-11 21:45
This is an unnecessary medical procedure that will no doubt fail to be covered by insurance. Shame on those of you who promote it, often assuming a 'superior, I know what's best little lady' attitude. You might be believable if you also promoted real choice like funding single mothers with a reasonable standard of living so they could raise children. I don't see any provision for victims of rape. Let's traumatize them just a bit more.
Shame on doctors who will put policy over patients and go along with outrageous imposition on women. Shame on you jlohman for dressing your own misogyny up in facade of 'looking out for women's best interests'. It's not about information; women can read. This about control, pure and simple, control by men who cannot adjust to our changing demographics, opportunities and culture.
 
 
+3 # pegasus4508 2012-03-12 12:53
Your continued VICIOUS propaganda in favor of laws that abuse women is stunning. Since no DOCTORS were consulted, no DOCTORS feel this a necessary procedure, why is it that the only people in favor of this is RePublican MEN?
 
 
+22 # myungbluth 2012-03-11 11:13
Why aren't women across the country taking to the streets in greater numbers and chanting "GOP - Not In ME!" What ever happened to resistance? Hey, it's female privacy and freedom and dignity being stolen here. Stand up to these GOP misogynists!
 
 
+17 # Regina 2012-03-11 11:32
Mail may now be addressed to Richmond, Vagina.
 
 
+9 # Phlippinout 2012-03-11 12:45
Absolutely!
 
 
+16 # angelfish 2012-03-11 12:14
This bears repeating: ALL ReTHUGlican Politicians in Virginia and other States where this Barbaric Law is put in place, should be FORCED to undergo DAILY Proctoscopies in order to determine whether or not ANY brain cell activity is in evidence! This, of course, is necessary since they ALL seem to have their heads FIRMLY implanted up their Anal cavities!
 
 
+4 # LeeBlack 2012-03-11 12:32
Why wasn't there a similar uproar when these laws were passed in those other seven states?
 
 
+8 # GeeRob 2012-03-11 14:32
There were uproars, Lee, but those 6 states are red and even Florida trends red most often. The women who protested in these states were ignored as there was no political threat in doing so. Most of this legislation was provided by the Baggers, you know, the "government out of my medicare" crowd.
The word is that the only reason McDonnell nixed the transvaginal probe was that it might hurt his chances as a potential V.P.
 
 
0 # LeeBlack 2012-03-12 15:21
I considered Virginia a 'red' state, they did elect McDonnell. Maybe its because it is in the D.C. area - or as db4635 suggests - Rachel Maddow didn't focus on it. Thanks for the response.
 
 
0 # db4635 2012-03-12 14:38
Quoting LeeBlack:
Why wasn't there a similar uproar when these laws were passed in those other seven states?


Because Rachael did not publicize the other laws as much. She progably did not know about them. The citizen protests in Virginia got media attention.
 
 
+5 # Phlippinout 2012-03-11 12:32
Now its time to put leashes on their sperm!
 
 
+10 # Phlippinout 2012-03-11 12:43
If men think life is sacred, they should then become responsible for their "seeds" I believe its time to level the laws and make men as responsible as women for the fertilization of life. Its coming and I could not be happier.
 
 
+17 # ABen 2012-03-11 13:22
So how is this not 'government overreach' of the worst sort? So personal rights and the doctor-patient relationship are sacrosanct unless you are a woman. Women's reproductive health is at the core of any family situation and should be part of our American core values. Get the GOP out of people's bedrooms and out of our doctors offices!
 
 
+8 # Regina 2012-03-11 15:18
There's one other possible strategy in this insanity: the righties know damned well that their misogynist bills will generate a lot of noise in response. That could distract the public from the big NO conspiracy, to obstruct the economic legislation we really need so that they will succeed at their stated goal, to make Obama fail. We must make them fail on both sets of issues.
 
 
+6 # psadave 2012-03-11 17:29
The GOP men who support such laws are mainly concerned with getting votes. We now know that whenever they make their demands to protect 'FREEDOM', it is another attempt to garner votes. Some of their key words they learn from wordsmith Frank Lunz. VP hopeful McDonnell -- it now stands for Vaginal Probe.
 
 
+12 # Michaeljohn 2012-03-11 18:59
The hypocrisy in these laws and the fetal 'personhood' movement is unbelievable. If the goal wasn't control of a woman's body, then we would expect the same lawmakers to pass strict laws with punitive consequences for entities that regularly pollute our environment, making it unsafe for that protected fetus to develop normally and, once born, to thrive and also to provide for affordable health care throughout the pregnancy and during the developmental years. But no, these hypocrites could care less about the children, unborn or not.
 
 
+2 # PABLO DIABLO 2012-03-11 21:59
Any restriction is an "undue burden".
 
 
+5 # Patriot 2012-03-12 11:17
Part One

It still takes two to tango. Where are the laws that require doctors to take DNA samples and match the DNA of a fetus t the DNA of the male who helped to crete it? Does anyone know what a rigamarole it is for an unmarried woman who does want to keep a child to win, in court, support for that child from his father?

While I cannot speak from personal knowledge of any other clinic, I do know what happens in a Planned Parenthood clinic when a woman requests an abortion. I accompanied a friend who had made such a choice -- which she made because she felt she did not want to bring an illegitimate child into the world, because she could not figure out how she could support a child on her income alone, and because the man responsible with her for that child would not even acknowledge his responsibility.
I sat with my friend through the interview process, during which she was counselled about her choices: bear the child and raise it herself; bear the child and let someone else adopt it; or terminate the pregnancy.

Alas, no one even comes forward to help with the expenses and emotional cost of bearing a child, which must be met before that child can be adopted by someone else, let alone financial and emotional help to raise a child alone.
 
 
+5 # Patriot 2012-03-12 11:35
Part Two
My friend received all the "think carefully what you're contemplating" counselling anyone could imagine. I concluded that Planned Parenthood would be delighted if every woman who arrived seeking an abortion left still pregnant.
The ultrasound laws are intended to horrify and shame a woman, particularly the Texas law. They not only fail to exempt victims of rape or incest, they also fail to take into consideration a woman such as my friend and I met that day.
She and her husband, proud and devoted parents of four healthy children, had decided to abort this, their fifth pregnancy. They had welcomed each of their children; although they had found providing an ever-larger home and making their income cover ever-increasing expenses difficult at times, they had joyfully economized and eliminated all unnecessary items in order to provide the basics.
But with this fifth child...they could not see how they would be able to provide for it, and still provide THE BASICS for their other children. The woman had tears rolling down her cheeks as she talked. Her husband was not with her because he was at another clinic, having a vascectomy, too late, as they both bitterly felt.
We talked with many women that day, but I have never forgotten the faithful wife and husband, devoted parents, who had to make such a terrible choice.
Just imagine subjecting her to an ultrasound, not to mention a Texas-style ultrasound! How barbaric!
 
 
+4 # Glen 2012-03-12 15:08
Very nice, Patriot. Thank you. A number of us have accompanied, or spoken at length with women who have had an abortion. Two I know had abortions for two very different reasons: one was 40 years old and had a very unhealthy uterus that would no doubt not maintain a viable baby to term. The other was unmarried and had learned her boyfriend had inherited some extremely damaged genes that lead to bi-polar disorder and all manner of related issues that were just then becoming obvious. It's tough, but as you say, most women do get counseling of a sort from one or another source. A decision is sometimes easy, if one does think of the potential baby, rather than the adults involved. Those babies often suffer with disorders they suffer with lifelong, and were born only because the adults thought only of themselves and their situation, or the pressure of society at large.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN