Abortion debate suppresses pregnant inmate bill in Iowa Senate
Source: Des Moines Register
Abortion debate suppresses pregnant inmate bill in Iowa Senate
The proposal to limit the shackling of expectant mothers is 'basically dead.'
Mar. 22, 2013 11:48 PM,
A legislative proposal to limit the shackling of pregnant inmates is basically dead in the Iowa Senate, says Sen. Janet Petersen, the bills floor manager.
Petersen, a Des Moines Democrat, says she wont proceed with Senate File 399 because of an amendment proposed by Sen. Kent Sorenson, a Milo Republican. Sorenson wants to prohibit the use of state money to perform or facilitate inmate abortions.
I would like to make advances on maternal health care for women who are incarcerated, Petersen said. But his amendment causes problems getting this legislation passed.
She acknowledged she doesnt want to spark a contentious floor debate on the abortion issue. It also appeared Sorenson could have the votes to secure passage of his amendment. Democrats maintain a razor-thin 26-24 margin in the Senate.
Read more: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20130323/NEWS09/303230044/1002/NEWS01/Abortion-debate-suppresses-pregnant-inmate-bill-Iowa-Senate?nclick_check=1
KG
(28,752 posts)uselessobot
(43 posts)Unfit places for decent and sane people to live.
atreides1
(16,087 posts)Decent and sane people still live in those backward, theocratic, misogynist states...with no hope of changing the make up of those legislatures!
And because of the rigging that those same legislatures did with the last census...those very same backward, misogynists maintain a hold on the US Congress and that will only make things worse for all of us!!!
uselessobot
(43 posts)into their own hands now if they really desire change.
duhneece
(4,116 posts)Poor Rep Petersen, who cares for women inmates, but can't push for them not to be shackled when giving birth.
Faygo Kid
(21,478 posts). . . this takes the underlying motivation for taking away women's choices - to control them - to an even higher level. Shackling pregnant women. The ultimate GOP fantasy. Or is it a fantasy? Apparently not.
bossy22
(3,547 posts)your right to choose is severely limited and some choices will be made without your input. For example, in prison, you have no right o refuse treatment for a condition- but in the outside world you most certainly do.
There are plenty of reasons to argue against limiting inmate abortions but using a "woman's right to choose" is not a good argument.
Faygo Kid
(21,478 posts)I doubt it.
marshall
(6,665 posts)Several years ago when I was looking to adopt a child, an attorney halfway across the country emailed me. He said if I could cover his client's legal fees she would hand the child over to me. He said he could guarantee she was drug free for seven months of the pregnancy because she was in jail since the first trimester.
I didn't adopt the child, but often wonder what has hapened to mother and child.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)And there's a lot of them out there. You can drive around the Plains states and farmers have dead fetus billboards in their fields. And they keep trying to pass ever more restrictive abortion laws.
The Flaming Red Head
(1,805 posts)due to lack of health care. Why don't they give a fuck about the reality of being pregnant in the jails now and girls begging for help and getting none. What I know is anecdotal, but oh Gawd the horror stories. Man just fuck, fuck, fuck. the fucking right wing christian fuckers
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Iowa conservatives are nasty.
2ndAmForComputers
(3,527 posts)That's like saying "In Croatia, water is wet."