# Women's Health Protection Act (a pro-choice Senate bill) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 16, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282 "2014-07-16T16:34:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/1 "2014-07-16T16:34:09Z")
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](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=695705&highlight=abortion) 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,](https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1696) 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:](http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/07/15/women_s_health_protection_act_a_brilliant_bill_to_protect_women_s_abortion.html) > [@](#): > > The bill goes into detail about the specific abortion-only regulations that would not be allowed, but the general principle is that if you don’t require it for other outpatient procedures, you can’t require it for abortion. Want to force women seeking abortion to listen to a script full of lies and then make them wait 24 or 48 hours to think it over? Better be prepared to do the same for people who need colonoscopies. Want to require a bunch of unnecessary visits before a woman is allowed to have a procedure? Now you need to do that for a biopsy, too. Want to force abortion clinics to meet ambulatory surgical center standards and abortion providers to have hospital admitting privileges? Well, dentists will have to meet the same standards before they can drill a tooth. If this bill passes (more on that below), states would be forced to let abortion providers operate in peace or make everyone else—including, gasp, _men_—endure the same kind of hassles and mistreatment women seeking abortion now have to endure in much of the country. As the article notes, this bill has no chance in the Pub-controlled House; However: > [@](#): > > But it’s still an important move on the part of the Democrats to introduce it. The ostensible excuse for all these excessive regulations on abortion clinics is that they’re necessary to “protect” women’s health. By introducing this bill, Blumenthal and Baldwin are pushing Republicans to admit the truth about the targeted laws or to explain why they believe women, as a class, cannot be trusted to exercise the same personal responsibility for their health care decisions that men enjoy. Considering that the Supreme Court will almost surely be ruling on the legality of these kinds of regulations within a few years, exposing and emphasizing the motivations behind these regulations can only help the pro-choice cause. So: 1. Does anyone have any arguments for or against this bill? 2. Will it have the effects the author hopes? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/2 "2014-07-16T17:05:43Z")
Will it even pass in the Senate? The idea of a law requiring [a 24 hour waiting period for abortion has strong support in the US.](http://www.gallup.com/poll/148631/Common-State-Abortion-Restrictions-Spark-Mixed-Reviews.aspx) 69% favor, 28% oppose. I’m having trouble seeing how this is going to help the Democrats. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/3 "2014-07-16T17:08:53Z")
It’ll stir up the base for November. What more do you want? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/4 "2014-07-16T17:37:13Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/5 "2014-07-16T17:41:21Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/6 "2014-07-16T17:53:20Z")
Is anyone getting medical treatment of any kind with less than 48 hours notice? If I were having a tooth drilled I’d certainly have to schedule it at least that far in advance. Same thing for a colonoscopy, or any other procedure. Not sure what this is going to do other than add red tape to our already bureaucratic mess that is healthcare. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/7 "2014-07-16T17:55:17Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/8 "2014-07-16T18:00:48Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > 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. 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. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/9 "2014-07-16T18:53:47Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > It’ll stir up the base for November. What more do you want? > > Regards, > Shodan Something that simultaneously apathizes the anti-choice base. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/10 "2014-07-16T19:02:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > 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. On that note, see the shocking new film [_The Obvious Child_](http://www.salon.com/2014/06/06/shocking_movie_portrayal_why_obvious_child_is_a_revolutionary_fairy_tale/) – 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. ---
**Author:** ![joyfool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@joyfool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joyfool)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/11 "2014-07-16T19:40:22Z")
**BrainGlutton** , thanks for the link on that film. I’m definitely putting it on my “must see” list. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/12 "2014-07-16T19:44:50Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Is anyone getting medical treatment of any kind with less than 48 hours notice? Sure, haven’t you ever been to a walk-in clinic? Abortion is a thing that easily can be done on a walk-in basis. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2014, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/13 "2014-07-16T21:10:29Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Is anyone getting medical treatment of any kind with less than 48 hours notice? > > If I were having a tooth drilled I’d certainly have to schedule it at least that far in advance. Same thing for a colonoscopy, or any other procedure. > > Not sure what this is going to do other than add red tape to our already bureaucratic mess that is healthcare. I’m pretty sure if I broke a tooth my dentist would fix it that day. ---
**Author:** ![74westy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/74westy/32/3950_2.png) [@74westy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/74westy)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2014, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/14 "2014-07-17T20:23:58Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Is anyone getting medical treatment of any kind with less than 48 hours notice? > > If I were having a tooth drilled I’d certainly have to schedule it at least that far in advance. Same thing for a colonoscopy, or any other procedure. > > Not sure what this is going to do other than add red tape to our already bureaucratic mess that is healthcare. Is your inability to see your doctor in 48 hours the result of a legislated wait period? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/15 "2014-07-21T13:54:05Z")
[The bill is now in Senate hearings.](http://www.salon.com/2014/07/20/the_senate_flunks_basic_biology_inside_a_disgraceful_hearing_partner/) Diane Black (R-Tenn) says abortion causes breast cancer and is not actually health care. Ted Cruz is even more dishonest. > [@](#): > > Perhaps the most ironic testimony against the WHPA – and in favor of abortion restrictions – came from Senator Ted Cruz, who hails from Texas, a state with so many abortion restrictions that women are now risking their health and lives by self-inducing abortions or crossing the border to get care in Mexico. Senator Cruz attempted to validate U.S. abortion restrictions by referencing a handful of European countries with gestational restrictions on abortions. This was a popular argument during the hearing for Texas’ HB2 – the bill responsible for shuttering the majority of clinics in that state. > > 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. Senator Cruz and his colleagues have adamantly opposed similar policies in the U.S., particularly the Affordable Care Act’s provisions for contraceptive coverage and Medicaid expansion. On the one hand conservatives lean on European policies to argue for stricter abortion restrictions at home, and on the other they claim those policies are antithetical to the moral fabric of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/16 "2014-07-21T15:11:59Z")
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. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > 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. 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. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > 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. 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. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/17 "2014-07-21T16:01:23Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > The reason I say that is that, in most cases, an abortion is an elective procedure. I disagree. For women who do not desire to be pregnant and have a child, an abortion is no more an elective procedure than removing a benign growth. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/18 "2014-07-21T16:55:41Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > 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. But are they any more so or less so than are unwanted births? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/19 "2014-07-21T16:58:44Z")
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? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282/20 "2014-07-21T17:01:10Z")
**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. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/womens-health-protection-act-a-pro-choice-senate-bill/693282.md?page=2)