Oklahoma lawmaker to file bill requiring ultrasound before abortions

[Thom Little]

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) -- Legislation that would require abortion clinics to offer ultrasound scans to women seeking an abortion is being drafted by a state lawmaker.

The head of a pro-choice organization said the proposal by Rep. Kevin Calvey, R-Del City, will "add an extra expense and one more barrier to access for women seeking abortion services."

"The intent behind many of these bills is to throw barriers in the paths of women who make decisions for their own lives that legislators may disagree with," said Anita Fream, chief executive officer at Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma.

.......

The proposed "Unborn Child Ultrasound Imaging Act" would require abortion clinics to provide women the chance to view an ultrasound 24 hours prior to an abortion, Calvey said.



http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OK_ABORTION_ULTRASOUND_OKOL-?SITE=VARIT&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2005-12-15-17-23-54

[PDJane]

1. Excuse me.

if the abortion is done during the first trimester, when it is easiest to do, are they going to tell the mother that the ultrasound has to be magnified to produce an image of the baby? Or are they going to wait until the child is viable to do that?

That's one of the dumbest pieces of legislation to come down the tubes in a while. These folks have no idea what they're doing, do they?

[Tess49]

2. First trimester ultrasounds are usually done transvaginally.

Let's add more indignity to the whole process.

[Caria]

49. THAT will further traumatize rape victims

As a middle-aged cancer survivor, I have become quite used to suffering indignities. Although many medical tests are more painful, the vaginal ultrasound is most uncomfortable from a psychological standpoint. I don't think I could handle it if I'd recently been raped.

[saigon68]

51. Rep. Kevin Calvey, R-Del City =another repuke parasite

with nothing but time on his hands.

[Tess49]

58. As someone who performs these exams, I know you are correct.

Women who were raped or molested even years earlier sometimes have problems getting through this exam. Some refuse to have them. I try to respect their privacy and never ask "Why not?"

[prog dude]

68. They Can Refuse It

Patients are not forced to endure anything. They are merely provided this healthcare OPTION that is available at OB-GYN offices everywhere.

Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything.

[HockeyMom]

3. Are they going to show FALSE images?

Look at the early EMBYRO stages (before 8 weeks). Is is a SHRIMP or a human? That could turn a lot of women OFF. "It has a TAIL and FLIPPERS?"

[LisaL]

13. Oh, I think they do. How will people without medical insurance

afford ultrasounds, unless mr. lawmaker here proposes government pays for it? Which he obviously isn't. It's just another way for them to prevent people, especially poor people, from having any choice.

[fishwax]

4. There's a truly stupid bit of legislation

and, while I love oklahoma in a lot of ways, that's the kind of bullshit that makes me relieved to be gone ...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. I'm sure a rape victim

who tried desperately to get the "morning after pill" but was denied by her rw pharmacist and now must resort to an abortion is jumping up and down at the chance to view the result of the most base and criminal intrusions anyone could make upon her body. :sarcasm:

[prog dude]

37. She Doesn't Have To Look

The bill just offers women the choice. They don't have to have the ultrasound. It just helps them make a medical decision, right? Why not offer them the choice? I just don't see the problem here.

[MissB]

44. You don't see the problem?

:bounce: Cool! You're going to be buying all the clinics the necessary ultrasound machines, right?

An ultrasound is a diagnostic tool, not a toy.

[prog dude]

60. The Government should pay for the Abortion, but not the Option?

Do you support Universal Healthcare? Who do you suppose will pay for all pre-Natal care?

So you're against choice and government-provided options for pregnant women?

[Violet_Crumble]

76. Just curious, but are you opposed to abortion as a choice?

n/t

[prog dude]

79. Similar to Hillary

Rare with women having access to as much information and healthcare as is necessary for an informed decision.

[Violet_Crumble]

85. Somehow I doubt that...

Hillary speaks a lot about PREVENTING unwanted pregnancies, not about creating barriers and inconvenience so that women who have an unwanted pregnancy make an 'informed choice', which in anti-choice language means the choice that the anti-choicer insists she should make...

I've noticed that during yr many posts saying the same thing over and over in this thread, not once have you touched on the issue of PREVENTING unwanted pregnancies, or the equally important issue of govt funding to assist women with wanted pregnancies (eg govt subsidised child-care, paid maternity leave, etc). It seems to me that yr motives for being all gung-ho for this is because you think that women are so stupid that they'll look at an ultrasound of a first trimester embryo and change their minds...

Violet...

[prog dude]

90. Women Are Just Too Stupid to be Trusted with Choice, Right?

You think they're so stupid they shouldn't be allowed to decide if they'd like an ultrasound or not.

You must believe that women are too stupid or too emotional to handle the option. They're so stupid that they should be denied access to a common procedure for their own good. That's your position?

Do you support universal healthcare and access to healthcare options or not?

[Violet_Crumble]

93. Huh? Where did I ever say that??

I wish you'd read and actually address what I was saying in my post instead of just repeating the same stuff over and over....

I'm curious. You said: 'They're so stupid that they should be denied access to a common procedure for their own good.' Apart from the fact that ultrasounds are gnerally done prior to an abortion, what is the 'good' that yr talking about? Do you think that women will get a squizz at an ultrasound and change their minds or something?

And living in a country that has universal healthcare, of course I support universal healthcare. But yr argument that we should all embrace a Bill from a Republican anti-choicer has nothing to do with universal healthcare at all...

Violet...

[MissB]

95. "A common procedure for their own good"?

Um, what exactly do you think an ultrasound is going to show at 7 weeks gestation? :rofl:

[MissB]

96. Righhhhht.

All of us here at DU are against choice. :eyes:

The bill requiring an ultrasound option isn't designed to help a woman. It isn't necessary for her to make the decision to have an abortion.

Who will bear the costs of providing the ultrasound machines? Since we don't have universal healthcare, it sure won't be the federal government.

Have you ever seen an ultrasound? I've gone through quite a few ultrasounds of all sorts during my two pregnancies. I've had an early ultrasound at 8 weeks along - during a threatened miscarriage. They couldn't find the fetus during the standard external ultrasound. They had to use a transvaginal scan to obtain any sort of a picture, and then the fetus (my now 7 year old son) was barely discernable from a kidney bean.

I had over a dozen level II ultrasounds during my second pregnancy. It wasn't until the very end that I could see something that I could point to and say, "oh, hey, there's a baby".

If it isn't going to be used as a diagnostic tool in the abortion, I cannot see a reason to force a provider to give a woman an ultrasound so she can see what the fetus looks like. That's the point here.

[alcibiades_mystery]

100. They have the choice already

Anybody is free to get an ultrasound at any time. This bill mandates an ultrasound. That's not a choice. That's an order.

[strangemedicine]

107. Don't see a problem?

First of all, look again at who has proposed this legislation. Do you honestly believe that the bill has been introduced to aid women or to aid the repub right wing anti choice agenda? Secondly, if this was meant to aid women, why not offer free ultrasounds to women who choose to continue their pregnancies, but may not be able to afford the procedure?

[liberalnurse]

6. So what....it goes to show how little he knows.

An ultrasound is ALWAYS done before an abortion....ALWAYS. That is how the fetus gestation is determined......a must know before an abortion is attempted. The woman is not shown the ultrasound. The ultrasound is either done abdominally or trans-vaginal.

[Pastiche423]

30. Don't know where you got that info

but it isn't true. At least it wasn't for me. I had neither an abdominally nor trans-vagina ultrasound prior to my abortion.

[LisaL]

33. Obviously, it isn't true. If it was, it would be pretty stupid

of this guy to try and pass the law that requires ultra sound, if all the abortion clinics already provided ultra sounds before every abortion.

[liberalnurse]

101. Like always Lizzy.....

you fail to do your homework before trashing a post....See post 99 for links to the facts. I did your homework for you.

[LisaL]

109. You don't see an idiocy of proposing the bill requiring

ultrasounds before abortions, if all the abortions were already performed only after an ultrasound was done?

[liberalnurse]

110. You don't get it....

He wants the bill to make it mandatory that the woman "LOOK" at the ultrasound. My additional information reports that ALL reputable abortion clinics already preform the ultrasound on ALL females. The ultrasound is standard criteria by NAF. It is necessary for a safe procedure. What this jerk wants is the freak out the woman by forcing them to look at the ultrasound. They can never enforce such a rule....He is posturing.

I was unaware that there were any abortion clinics preforming an abortion without the ultrasound. That is an outrage. They are practicing below the standard of care.

[liberalnurse]

99. What year was that?

I did a Community Health Clinical rotation at an Ohio Abortion Center. I even got certified in trans-vaginal ultrasounds. Each patient has a gestational ultrasound pre-procedure. That information is essential for preforming the correct abortion procedure. You need to measure the skull for gestational age.

The National Abortion Federation requires this standard for certification.

http://www.prochoice.org/about_naf/index.html

snip>

see at end of page the PDF Download.....page 11.

http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/clinical_policy.html

FIRST TRIMESTER SURGICAL ABORTION

Policy Statement: Abortion is one of the safest surgical procedures in the US today. The
following guidelines enhance this safety.

PRE-OPERATIVE PROCEDURE

Standard 1: Pertinent medical history must be obtained and documented.

Standard 2: Confirmation of pregnancy must be documented.

Standard 3: Gestational age must be verified and documented.

Option 3.01: Ultrasonography, using a consistent and published table of fetal
measurements can be of clinical value in verifying intra-uterine
pregnancy and gestational age.

Standard 4: The patient must be evaluated for ectopic pregnancy if

a. transvaginal ultrasonography shows no intra-uterine pregnancy and serum
quantitative hCG exceeds 2000 mIU/ml;3 or

b. abdominal ultrasonography shows no intra-uterine pregnancy and serum
quantitative hCG exceeds 3600 mIU/ml.

[Maddy McCall]

46. No, ultrasounds are not always done before abortions.

I used to volunteer as an escort at a clinic in Mississippi. In first-trimester abortions, which is the majority of abortions, ultrasounds are rarely done in this state.

[RayOfHope]

69. It's done in Missouri. n/t

[liberalnurse]

102. Then, they are not certified....

and are equal to seedy, back room clinics. What a shame, women have such a limitation on quality health care. :cry:

[MercutioATC]

7. .

..

[jackpan1260]

8. What the hell is the argument FOR this stupid bill?

[bammertheblue]

22. I think

the idiots think that if the woman sees her "baby" (which looks more like a space alien at this point anyway), her so-called "maternal instincts" will click on or whatever the hell they're supposed to do and she won't want an abortion anymore.
It's so fucking stupid. And, as was already said, an ultrasound is already done before an abortion, so it's double stupid.

[jackpan1260]

24. Lame.

[bammertheblue]

25. Yeah

I've actually gotten into arguments with people about this. They were like "Once she sees the baby she'll change her mind". It makes me want to bang my head against the wall.

[jackpan1260]

26. Pretty soon they'll want Uncle Sam to pass out bibles,

"Hey we are just MAKING SURE that you don't want to be saved from a eternity in hell, that's all."

x(

[bammertheblue]

27. One time

this crazy guy told me I was actually serving Satan because I am a Buddhist.
That kind of blew my mind. That's the kind of religion I'm afraid of.

[prog dude]

39. The Argument is Choice

Are we against giving women access to a typical, common medical practice? She's not forced to do anything, she's just given a choice. Why the fear here?

[MissB]

40. Fear?

It isn't fear you're seeing. Let's try outrage.

Why should a clinic be forced to offer ultrasounds to women that want abortions? What medical advantage do you see?

Ultrasound machines aren't cheap. The state isn't going to be offering to pay for the machines.

[catzies]

54. It's not typical and it's not common and it's not about giving access

Why the support here?

[prog dude]

65. Not Common?

I have 4 kids. For each and every one my wife had an ultrasound as part of her routine care.

Why deny that CHOICE to women?

[prof_science]

70. BS

If this law is passed it will not be a "choice" for clinics who don't have ultrasound machines to refuse to get one. As a previous poster said, these things are not cheap. Are you going to pay for the machines to offer this "choice" to women? Are taxpayers?

It's a barrier. Flat out.

"prog dude"-- heh, welcome to DU. This is my first post in many many months. I've been on a self-imposed hiatus...

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[prof_science]

72. sorry

I amended my post to take out the troll bit. Not very nice of me.

[prog dude]

73. I Appreciate That

Thanks! That was very nice of you.

I retract my reaction too. :)

[Violet_Crumble]

75. Not common...

Yr wife had ultrasounds as part of routine care for pregnancies she was carrying to term, so don't try to claim they're the same thing as this....

And yr also wrong even about women with wanted pregnancies being able to have an ultrasound any time they choose. They can't. During my pregnancy it was the doctor who chose when I was going to have an ultrasound, and the sole reason for the ultrasound was to make sure everything was progressing normally and there were no foetal abnormalities. So, take another look at the name of this particular Bill and ask yrself what medical necessity there is to show a woman who's already decided to have an abortion the results of an ultrasound. Because what you'll find when you stop to think about it for a nanosecond is that this has got zero to do with choice and everything to do with anti-choicers trying to hijack the word choice (which of course they'll stress with the use of caps-lock) in order to gradually make access to a legal medical procedure so difficult that it won't be available to the vast majority of women as a choice....

Violet...

[prog dude]

78. So You'd Deny Her Access If She Had a Choice?

Nobody has to show her anything. She would be able to see it IF SHE SO CHOSE.

Is that how Universal Healthcare will work? Who decides what is an option and what is not? A government board?

This is a move to expand healthcare options. No coercion. No requirement.

[Violet_Crumble]

87. Could you please address what I said in my post...

I'm finding that you posting the same thing over and over without addressing what people in the thread are saying a not particularly convincing tactic...

Violet...

[prog dude]

88. Well Since Nobody Is Addressing the Access Question

***And yr also wrong even about women with wanted pregnancies being able to have an ultrasound any time they choose.***


Didn't say "antime they choose." I noted that it was routine. That is true even if the doctor is the one who decides when. Also, a woman can request her doctor do an ultrasound can she not?



*** So, take another look at the name of this particular Bill and ask yrself what medical necessity there is to show a woman who's already decided to have an abortion the results of an ultrasound.***

So you believe that less options and less access are better?



***Because what you'll find when you stop to think about it for a nanosecond is that this has got zero to do with choice and everything to do with anti-choicers trying to hijack the word choice (which of course they'll stress with the use of caps-lock) in order to gradually make access to a legal medical procedure so difficult that it won't be available to the vast majority of women as a choice....***

So you believe that less options and less access are better?

If a woman wanted an ultrasound, she should be denied?

[Violet_Crumble]

94. It's been answered many times already...you just don't like the answer...

btw, the 'question' is a loaded one, along the same lines as if someone expresses their opposition to the Paltriot Act, and gets met with: 'So you believe in not protecting Americans against terrorism???'

Didn't say "antime they choose." I noted that it was routine. That is true even if the doctor is the one who decides when. Also, a woman can request her doctor do an ultrasound can she not?

She can request, but in my experience she'll get told there's no medical reason for it. And that's the crux of it. Ultrasounds are done for a medical reason. The cutesy 'baby' snaps that get given to women wouldn't happen unless the ultrasound was being done for a medical reason, and the reason we get those snaps is because we've got wanted pregnancies and it's a way of helping us to bond...


I asked: 'So, take another look at the name of this particular Bill and ask yrself what medical necessity there is to show a woman who's already decided to have an abortion the results of an ultrasound.'

You didn't answer the question. What medical necessity do you think there is to show a woman who's decided to have an abortion the results of an ultrasound?


I said: 'Because what you'll find when you stop to think about it for a nanosecond is that this has got zero to do with choice and everything to do with anti-choicers trying to hijack the word choice (which of course they'll stress with the use of caps-lock) in order to gradually make access to a legal medical procedure so difficult that it won't be available to the vast majority of women as a choice.'

You replied: 'So you believe that less options and less access are better?'

WTF did that have to do with my comment??

If a woman wanted an ultrasound, she should be denied?

Which women are you talking about? Ones with wanted pregnancies, or ones who have already chosen to have an abortion? There's a huge difference between these two groups of women that I strongly suspect you can't see...

Violet...

[phylny]

77. Why should it happen? Why is it your business?

Or mine?

I have a great idea - why not let the woman and the doctor decide what's necessary?

[SoCalDem]

9. Why not just force the woman to stick her hand up there

so she can "feel the baby"..:puke:

[Occulus]

38. They want to show the baby TO her instead of

feeling the baby AT her.

Sorry. I couldn't resist.

This is stupid law. Problem is, stupid law doesn't always get thrown out OR repealed.

[Hobarticus]

10. Well, at least it's truthful...the nice language is out the window now

It will definitely "add an extra expense and one more barrier to access for women seeking abortion services."

Didn't know that states should work to see that women are denied access to a legal medical procedure. Did I miss something?

[Lost-in-FL]

11. Let's have him pay for them...

[Canuckistanian]

12. They can't sell this as anything but anti-abortion

There's no medical reasoning behind it and it's an obvious ploy to get the woman to ultimately refuse the abortion.

And what if the woman was raped? Raped by her father or by someone she trusted? Now she has to be confronted full in the face with the ugliness of the unwanted thing growing inside her.

This is sick.

[superconnected]

14. This man is sick.

This is Scare tactics. He wants to mentally F* up women with the memory of the fetus.

This is the sickest tactic I've heard yet. It is malicious.

[LisaL]

15. I think it could be more simple. He just wants people not be able to

afford the procedure, and thus, be unable to have it. Typical republicans-they have no wish to support those babies once they are born. But don't want women to have abortions.

[superconnected]

20. ah. Makes total sense, they can't afford an ultrasound so

how does he expect them to afford a baby. Still, in the ultrasounds I went to with my sister, they had her looking at the screen and they were describing what she was seeing to her - ie there's the head, etc. They start doing that very early.

Requiring women to get them if they are going to abort is morbid to me.

They can also tell boy or girl very early.

[MaineDem]

16. When I read the title I thought "I bet this lawmaker is a man"

Sure enough.

I apologize in advance to any thinking caring men who read this but I'm getting pretty sick of men deciding what is going to happen to me when I get pregnant. I wish people would worry more about the children who go to bed hungry.

That said, I'm actually beyond my childbearing days but I'm still sick to death of this.

[Lars39]

17. This goes hand in hand with the fundies buying up ultra-sound

equipment to put in their clinics.

[superconnected]

21. good point.

[dogfacedboy]

18. Don't ya love how it's always MEN making women's health decisions? n/t

[bammertheblue]

23. No shit

Like that photo of Bush signing the law to ban a certain type of abortion- six old white men in suit sitting around grinning, choosing what women can do with their bodies. It's repulsive.

[sinkingfeeling]

19. Why not let's provide all females in the country with an atomic

microscope (above age 10) and they can examine their underwear every night to see if a fertilied egg happened to slip out of their bodies? Since over 66% of all human fetilized eggs never implant anyway and the crazy RW believes each and every one is a person, let's really clap down on this genocide!

[The Wielding Truth]

103. Great post! What a bunch of pushy busybodies! Get out of our bodies!

[aquart]

28. The Woman Intimidation Act.

Are the women allowed to refuse this garbage?

[prog dude]

62. It's a CHOICE

Sure they can refuse it. It's called "choice."

It's part of just about any OB-GYN office and pre-natal care. Why is giving women the CHOICE of this terribly common procedure so scary to people who support Universal access to healthcare and women's access to information?

[Horse with no Name]

86. The big difference is

You don't go to an OB-GYN clinic to get an abortion.
You go to an abortion clinic.
This isn't prenatal care so your argument doesn't stick. This is an A-B-O-R-T-I-O-N. The woman does NOT want to bond with the fetus. She does NOT want to hear a heartbeat. She has not picked out names or purchased cute little clothes. She does NOT want to be haunted by morbid pictures of a fetus that will not be born.
She has made her choice to not have a baby.
This is an obscene attempt to intimidate women into giving birth.
But here is a newsflash for you.
If a woman wanted this "terribly common procedure", she could make the choice to visit her OB-GYN and request one.
It has no place in a abortion clinic.

[Azathoth]

29. The article isn't clear

If the bill makes ultrasounds mandatory and requires the mother to view them before an abortion, then it's ridiculous and most likely unconsitutional. If, however, the bill only requires abortion clinics to make ultrasounds available to mothers who wish to view them, then I don't really see what the fuss is about. A patient should have the right to view the results of any medical test performed on them.

[DaveColorado]

31. "it's ridiculous and most likely unconsitutional."

Says who?

Alito?

Scalia?

Roberts?

Thomas?

[iamjoy]

32. That's What I Thought - Perform Or Offer

I see little wrong with requiring providers to *offer* an ultrasound to women seeking an abortion, a lot wrong if it is mandatory for the patient to view the ultrasound.

OTOH, I see little point to requiring abortion clinics to offer ultrasounds, just as I see little point to a waiting period for an abortion.

[Bill McBlueState]

56. well, it's clearly not about the patient's rights

Do you really think this Oklahoma lawmaker is concerned about the right of women to "view the results of any medical test performed on them"?

[LiberalFighter]

34. Only abortion clinics?

Are those the only places that provide abortions? I don't think so!!
Shouldn't they require ultrasounds be performed by any doctor that performs an abortion?

Better yet shouldn't they require ultrasounds for any pregnant woman? How about requiring ultrasounds by the 8th week?

Will they require all women be pregnant no later than the 2nd year of their marriage? Have their second child not later than 18 months after the first child is born?

China dictates how many children can be born in families. Now some in the US are trying to dictate how children will be born? What will be next? What did they do in Germany under Hitler?

[WildClarySage]

35. Funny... but ultrasounds, while generally thought to be safe

in actuality are not necessarily entirely benign, and it's not known what risks they entail for the fetus. Drs usually perform them routinely but are aware that there are adverse effects and you can't just get one anytime you want to peek at little junior you. If this guy really wants to show his love for fetuses he should be working to ban unnecessary ultrasounds, not force them on women.

So what happens if a correlation between ultrasounds and specific defects is observed after this legislation passes, can OK women who changed their minds sue for damages?

This is precisely why doctors should practice medicine and lawmakers should practice restraint.

[prog dude]

36. Choice

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but doesn't the law just give the woman another choice? I mean, she's not required to get the ultrasound, it's just an option. That sounds like a good thing, doesn't it?

[MissB]

41. But why should the clinic be required to provide an ultrasound?

[wickerwoman]

42. Why do we need a law to give women a choice they already have?

If she wants to see an ultrasound, she can ask her OB/GYN for one. This is just a transparent attempt to make these clinics shell out for extra equiptment and to force often already traumatized women to assert (yet again) that they do in fact, for all and for keeps, no take-backs with cherries on top want to have an abortion. It's fucking condescending.

Why not a law requiring doctors to show X-rays to their patients before setting a broken bone? And then they can have a serious conversation about the long-term physical and psychological impact of having a cast. And then they'll have to wait for 48 hours to make sure they really wouldn't prefer to keep the broken arm.

Women who make it into an abortion clinic have made up their minds already. Is it so much to ask to give them a little credit for making their own decision and not double guess it over and over again?

[Robeson]

64. Bingo. It's another attempt at intimidation....

...as you said, "Women who make it into an abortion clinic have made up their minds already. Is it so much to ask to give them a little credit for making their own decision and not double guess it over and over again?"

[area51]

52. "If this guy really wants to show his love for fetuses..."

Or, if he really wanted to show love for fetuses -- and children -- he'd fight for universal healthcare for all children to include pre-natal care and from birth to age 18. Fscking nazi hypocrites!

[NVMojo]

43. these assholes need to find something important to do then stick their

equipment up women's crotches. Fatratbastards!

[anitar1]

45. They obviously think they are the crotch owners. n/t

[sandnsea]

47. How about housing, power and food!!!

Let's require every woman be guaranteed all of that, throughout her pregnancy and the infant's first year, before an abortion!

[HuffleClaw]

48. next they'll demand

the woman attend a 'prayer circle' or some such crap. this intrusive slippery slope crap has got to stop. just once i'd love to see some congress critter propose a bill requiring some 'test' before you can be prescribed viagra. really it would clearly demonstrate the absurdity of this sort of crap.

[bleedingheart]

50. My son looked like a centipede around 7 weeks of gestation

In fact....it might quickly disprove the images of the abortions the fundies like to show....

many abortions happen in the first few weeks....

and for women who want to abort close to the edge of the legal limit....they use ultrasound anyways...

[proud2BlibKansan]

53. So what's next?

Will they put these images on the side of a panel truck and drive it around town in an effort to discourage abortions?

Oh, never mind, they already do that.

[KansDem]

55. Who pays for this?

The patient? The clinic? Insurance? Who???

[dsc]

57. I am pro life and I think this bill is stupid

I doubt it would significantly decrease abortion nor do anything to make women healthier. This is simple grandstanding.

[prog dude]

59. So You're Against Choice

I can't believe how many folks are against providing women a choice in this matter.

Unbelievable.

If Universal Healthcare comes to pass, would we demand that ultrasounds be excluded? Now that is both anti-choice and anti-woman.

[dsc]

61. I am

I feel that no one gets to murder incovienient people.

[prog dude]

66. I Meant the CHOICE of an Ultrasound

I am surprised how many are opposed to OPTIONS in women's healthcare here.

[dsc]

92. My take is that the woman would have to get one

not be offered one. If a woman for some reason wants an ultrasound before having an abortion, then why not? But to force the issue is just stupid as far as I can see.

[LisaL]

108. I imagine they are playing around with words.

Here is a link to an abortion law in Michigan about ultrasounds. It started out with required, than was changed to "allowed".
I imagine the very same thing is going on here.
http://www.wlns.com/Global/story.asp?S=4215124&nav=0RbQ

[phylny]

80. I feel that no one gets to interfere in a private

healthcare decision.

[Wordie]

104. I am just curious about your comment...

I've often wondered about people who talk about abortion as "murder," but have never really had the opportuntity to discuss my question. It is this: are you aware that most on the "Choice" side don't see a fetus as a person? Do you think that such a person is advocating murder, if they have a different definition of when human life begins?

And, how does one define when exactly when it is that a fetus makes the transition from fetus to human life?

I ask these things not wanting to start a flame war - I hope others will respect that - but as a genuine attempt at understanding how the other side thinks.

(I must add that your statement that abortion is "murder" of "inconvenient people" is very troubling. It presumes an awful lot. I respect your belief about the topic in general, it's just that I don't want that belief to dictate the last legal word on the subject for all of the rest of us. But let's not get the thread off on that, because that would not be fair to the OP.)

Thanks.

[OKthatsIT]

63. This is disgusting

period.

[prog dude]

67. What, Providing Women an Option?

What is so disgusting about offering women a CHOICE in healthcare; an option for a procedure that is commonplace in OB-GYN offices everywhere?

[phylny]

82. What's disgusting is you or me or anyone else having a say about

someone else's medical procedure. That's between a patient and a doctor.

If you're a man and want a vasectomy, or another medical procedure, do you want your doc calling me up and asking my opinion?

[MissB]

98. It is a diagnostic tool, not a "choice".

It isn't a toy. It is a medical tool used to help diagnose potential problems during a pregnancy.

Answer these two questions, if you're still around: What purpose do you think this bill's requirement will serve? What benefit to the woman do you think the requirement of an ultrasound will provide?

[Judi Lynn]

74. If Republicans had all that reverence for life they would live differently

and you wouldn't hear them gibbering "Let's turn Iraq into a sheet of glass," "Let's bomb Afghanistan back to the Stone Age," "Kill them all and let God sort them out," etc., etc., etc.

No one is getting fooled here. Hearing Republicans coming forward again and again to try to wheedle people into doing it their way doesn't move anyone to reject his/her deep-seated beliefs.

It just kills them that they don't have the military power, YET, to force everyone to do their bidding, and execute women if they find they have gotten an abortion, somehow.

If they're pregnant, by God, they're supposed to STAY pregnant, allow idiots to control their destiny, and they'd better not hope for financial assistance if they can't support the little ones they're trying to raise, either.

[Sivafae]

81. This has to be a stepping stone law

In my own experience, a vaginal (whatever you call it) ultrasound was done before. But if there is a verifiable size of the fetus then a law could be passed that futher limits the 1st trimester period for most abortions.
Public enemy said it best when they said "can't truss it!"

[Horse with no Name]

83. Even worse

is the wording that it is 24 hours before the abortion.
Which simply means that the woman has to go to the clinic and then go home again and dread going back the next day.
I guess that they will step up their intimidation at the clinics coincidentally to make women afraid to go back the next day.
This is just plain disgusting.

[peacebird]

105. 24 hours means the women will have to take time off work two days also

Add a little more financial hardship into the mix. Very "compassionate".

[depakid]

84. These people never quit

No matter what the courts or the doctors say.

[yorkiemommie1]

89. does he have stock in an ultrasound machine company?

cynical, but i don't trust these folks.

send him a copy of The Handmaid's Tale. no, don't. might give him ideas.

[prog dude]

91. Yeah, Only the Rich Should Have Access to Healthcare Options

?

[LisaL]

97. It's because the poor can't afford it.

Who is going to pay for all these ultrasounds and ultrasound machines?
The guy who proposes the law? Yea, right.

[Wordie]

106. Has Calvey proposed legislation for those planning other med. procedures?

It would seem to me if this is not an attempt to put up a barrier to a woman seeking a legal medical procedure, then surely he must have proposed similar legislation, say, for women diagnosed with osteoporosis to have "the choice" of regular bone scans, or for women to have "the choice" of always obtaining a complete medical workup for heart disease if they have some of the risk factors for it?

No? He hasn't?

There's your answer.