There has been a lot of state-level legislation recently (always in Pub-controlled states) which is rather transparently designed to make it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion. See this Pit thread which covers several such measures.
Now there’s some fight-back in the U.S. Senate, with the introduction by Senators Tammy Baldwin and Richard Blumenthal of the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would require states to regulate abortion providers in exactly the same way they regulate other clinics and doctors who provide comparable services. From Slate:
As the article notes, this bill has no chance in the Pub-controlled House; However:
So:
Does anyone have any arguments for or against this bill?
I think most people, rightly or wrongly, compartmentalize abortion as being in a different category than a root canal or a colonoscopy. Trying to force the former to be more like those latter procedures does not seem like a good political move to me.
n.b.: To me, an abortion, certainly in the first trimester, is “just another medical procedure”. But I’m not in the least bit religious, so my views on abortion are not typical.
Actually, Mace, your views on abortion are typical. The vast majority of the country is in that soft space. Just because the people who agree with you aren’t noisy doesn’t mean they’re not out there.
I can go to my GP’s office with less than 48 minutes’ notice. A first-trimester abortion is chemically induced and no more intrusive than, say, taking a few pills.
My views are not typical. I don’t want a waiting period, but 69% of Americans do. But more to the point, I don’t care how many abortions there are. I don’t see the need to make them safe, legal and rare. It’s a personal choice (up to a point during pregnancy) and if a woman wants to use abortion as a form of birth control, then let her.
On that note, see the shocking new film The Obvious Child – highly controversial, apparently because, most unusually for Hollywood films, it features a woman who gets an abortion, only needs to endure the procedure for three minutes, and then gets on with her life without in any way suffering or being punished for her choice.
The bill is now in Senate hearings. Diane Black (R-Tenn) says abortion causes breast cancer and is not actually health care. Ted Cruz is even more dishonest.
I’m unsure what I think about this bill. I’m in favor of removing many of the restrictions that have been placed on abortion, I know some of them in my state are just beyond reason. That said, I can’t completely agree that abortions should necessarily be treated identically to any other medical procedure, but from a legislative perspective, I think I’d just rather the government, at all levels, stay out of it as much as possible.
I can’t agree that an abortion, even a first trimester abortion is necessarily “just another medical procedure”. The reason I say that is that, in most cases, an abortion is an elective procedure. At least in the sense that that if life isn’t in danger or health at risk, it’s not the same as, say, a non-cosmetic dental procedure or preventative test like a colonscopy. I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing to have a waiting period on an elective procedure–imo, if it’s not medically necessary, the risks are more difficult to weigh–but I would agree that if an elective procedure should have a waiting period, it should be the same for all of them.
However, particularly when it comes to something like abortion, I think it’s probably difficult to realistically legislate a line between an elective and medically warranted or necessary procedure. For instance, with something like cosmetic surgery, we might be able to realistically say that, unless it’s related to other medically necessary procedures, like skin grafts from burns or reconstruction from an accident. Do we really want legislators drawing these sorts of lines? I don’t think we do. And if we leave it up to the discretion of the doctor, is it even necessary to legislate it at that point?
I guess I’m kind of talking in a circle here, but I guess my point is that I don’t think it’s necessarily fair to say that it’s “just another medical procedure”, but I do think the onus ought to fall on those who want to legislate it to make a solid argument about why it should be legislated differently and how the gray areas will be handled. If we get on the wrong side by requiring a waiting period for medically necessary procedures, it could cause serious injuries or deaths, but if we get on the wrong side of not requiring it for elective ones, we still ought to be covered by medical ethics and informed consent.
I still think that even if they should be legal and safe, rare shouldn’t be understated. After all, if a woman does choose to use abortion as birth control, she’s probably putting herself at greater health risk, and certainly costing herself and her insurance more money compared to other forms of birth control.
Further, I think if abortions become too common, even if they’re not a bad thing in and of themselves, they may be symptomatic of a larger social issue. For example, I’m also in favor of legalization of several currently controlled substances, but just like with alcohol, which isn’t inherently wrong either, some people can use it safely and some can be a danger to themselves and others if they overuse it. That said, I’m not sure exactly what the line for rare should be, and what it means if we cross it–maybe it’s a sign that access to other forms of birth control or education aren’t as available as it should be. Still, I would say we should probably take notice if suddenly the rate were to, say, double, and it would probably be worth investigating the reasons why.
Wouldn’t this bill work both ways? If abortion clinics have to be regulated exactly the same way as other outpatient clinics, wouldn’t that in many cases create a stricter regulatory climate in some states?
Cruz wins the prize for cherry picking facts to best support his argument. When citing our European counterparts, he conveniently ignored that such abortion restrictions are entrenched in progressive public health systems that enable all individuals to access quality, affordable (often free) health care, including comprehensive reproductive healthcare
This argument is always a funny insight into the liberal mind. Okay, so because there’s universal health care, it’s okay for a woman to have to ask the government’s permission for an abortion past 12 weeks or so.