Big bad ultrasound
by Valerie Jane
Watch out! It’s evil. It’s horrible. It will invade your body! It will destroy your life forever! Yes, it’s the horrible Ultrasound machine.
According to the Associated Press earlier this month:
Women seeking an abortion in South Carolina would be able, but not required, to view an ultrasound first under a compromise bill that received approval Wednesday in the state Senate.
This bill does not force women to view the image; it just says that an abortionist must offer the opportunity. No biggie. However the Pro-Choicers have something to say:
Critics consider it a way to intimidate women who already have made an agonizing decision.
“I still believe that’s an intrusion, and I am concerned about the constitutional question,” said Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, a Democrat.
What are the abortion advocates afraid of? Abortion is a medical procedure. Ultrasounds are a medical device. As a matter of fact, the abortionist have to use the ultrasound to verify the age and size of the fetus. They need to do this so they know what procedure to use. But somehow this is supposed to hinder the woman’s right to choose.
It’s not like the ultrasound is going to lie to these women and show them just a cluster of cells. The ultrasound will tell the truth.
OH – I get it now. God forbid the truth be told.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Huzzah! Dr. Evil!
But in all seriousness, I don’t care about the ultrasound legislation. I mean believe it or not, even if they are shown the ultrasound a woman can close her eyes or pretend to look at it but not really see it (ie looking in the direction of the screen but not look at the screen) and what not. However I do think it would be beneficial for them to see the ultrasounds because then it would be truly informed consent and if they really want that abortion and even looking at the ultrasound they still want that abortion then they should be allowed to have one.
Anyway, that’s my convoluted two cents, pardon if they don’t make sense.
@Valerie: Have you seen the articles lately on portable ultrasounds that they are using in Africa and other impoverished countries as well as rural hospitals? Interesting stuff.
Legislation like this serves a superb purpose: to flush out the moonbats among pro-choice.
JASPER AGREES WITH ABORTION BOMBINGS!!!
“Critics consider it a way to intimidate women who already have made an agonizing decision. ”
Again, statistics show this will make their agonizing decision a much easier one. They will choose to keep their baby.
“I still believe that’s an intrusion, and I am concerned about the constitutional question,” said Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, a Democrat.”
Gilda, a suction hose up a woman’s vagina is NOT an intrusion???
Gilda, How does showing a woman a picture of her baby nestled warmly inside her womb raise a question of the contsitution?
OH wait!! I found the answer.
I think she means Abortion violates the IV Amendment
Amendment IV: Warrants and searches.
The right of the people (I would think this would include the unborn)to be secure in their persons, houses, (I would think again, this includes WOMBS) papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, (again,WOMBS), shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, (which there is none) supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Rae – The thing is, they don’t have to look at the image. All they have to do is sign a piece of paper that says they were offered to look at it. That is why I don’t understand all the hubbub. The reason legislation like this has to be passed is because of the amount of women who asked to see the image and were told they couldn’t. This is a good way to eliminate the quack abortionists. (yes, I think they are all quacks, but I digress….)
I have used a portable ultrasound machine but I don’t know if those are the ones you are talking about. Are they different than what we use here? Do you have any links? That would be interesting.
@Valerie: Precisely, which is why I don’t think it’s that big of a deal and why I’m not flying off the handle about it.
They had a really nice article in the St. Paul Pioneer Press about portable ultrasound machines either yesterday or today:
http://www.twincities.com/searchresults/ci_6006732
We’ve discussed this before, we agreed that the large majority of patients will prefer not to view their sonograms and the law will make almost no difference to anyone.
Here’s a rational argument against it–maybe the government will start trying to interfere with the choice of ultrasound machine. What if they try to mandate that you get an ultra-expensive fancy 4d device like they have in an academic imaging center? That could raise the cost of providing abortions, which of course you’d have to pass along to the patients.
That is a rational argument?!? Yikes!
SoMG:
Why doesn’t the government mandate what drugs are used in surgery. Or the government could mandate what type of X-Ray machine, what type of Autoclave to use, what brand of scissors to use. Wow – the list could be endless.
Maybe you should go back to the drawing board and come up with an argument that is worth discussing.
Yeah, I agree, it looks pretty innocuous.
“Here’s a rational argument against it”
Well, it’s an argument against requiring such an expensive device, perhaps. But as long as the law doesn’t do that, it’s not a rational argument against such an actual law that doesn’t do that. :-/
“Here’s a rational argument against allowing children to bring their own lunches to school; what if someone required that parents put rat poison in the lunches?”
“Here’s a rational argument against allowing children to bring their own lunches to school; what if someone required that parents put rat poison in the lunches”
now that is like mandating the HPV vaccine
SOMG, why did you post personal info. about Paul Hill’s wife and children?
That was Doctor Defense, a thoroughly disreputable character.
And i thought he made his reasons for posting pretty clear.
Oh Ms Valerie this has absolutely nothing to do with ultrasounds but I am ecstatic that John and Marlena have been reunited on Days of Our Lives, and I thought you could probably appreciate that, being that you are at home with your babies during soap time.
=)
I don’t see the problem with this law either. I think it rather lame, as it won’t really make a difference either way, but not particularly threatening. The woman doesn’t have to look at the image. I don’t see what the big issue with this is.
SOMG, Beep, beep, beep goes my BS detector.
Holy waste of legislative time! I’ll be they spent a couple years getting this one to the floor (never minding what they might have accomplished otherwise). Could the bill be any more fruitless? No!
And how many aborting mothers are going to say… yes… show me the ultrasound? Zero! I suspect they’ll trump-up a poster mom though to show the bill works by sending in someone never intending to get an abortion, having her request the images, followed by a tear jerking emotional recount of her changing her mind. Should make for good fodder in continued emotional extortion campaigns of the anti-choice.
If it’s a fruitless bill, and if there’s no chance any woman will want to see the ultrasound, then why fight the bill? No reason not to just ask women if they want to see something or not. Takes about 5 seconds.
http://snipurl.com/1mtuk
“If it’s a fruitless bill, and if there’s no chance any woman will want to see the ultrasound, then why fight the bill? No reason not to just ask women if they want to see something or not. Takes about 5 seconds.”
They’re not fighing the bill. It’s the compromise. Certainly some are going to complain about having to ask though.
I just went for my 2 week check up (after the knee surgery) and the doctor showed (and gave) me 25 pictures of the operation. Ligaments, and hamstrings, and whatnot.
Didn’t ask me if I wanted them. I don’t think anyone is going to take him to court tho, for forcing me to look at pictures of something that was done to my body.
And if the baby isn’t a person, then I don’t see the difference between looking at innocuous pictures of my meniscus or my anterior cruciate ligament, or looking at a “clump of cells” on an ultrasound screen.
What exactly is everyone afraid of? Even supposing that women DID change their minds? Does this offend abortion advocates? What would you say if 50% or 60% of women actually change their minds after viewing these ultrasounds? I would assume, since everyone claims to be pro CHOICE and not pro ABORTION that you’d be thrilled that women are getting all the info possible. For any other procedure (from open heart surgery to getting new glasses), I bet you’d demand every possible scenario be presented to you. Am I wrong?
No MK, you hit the nail on the head.
And people see the inconsistency too. You can’t say on the one hand, when a bill is introduced that would give a woman more information about what she is about to do, that a woman is smart enough to make her own decisions and doesn’t need outside help thank you, and on the other hand demand that “sexuality” education be mandated in the schools because, don’t you know, the constant problems of “unwanted” pregnancies prevail because there is not enough education going on and their resources are “necessary” at that point.
Which one is it? Are women smart enough to figure things by themselves out or are they robots who don’t know anything that need “medically accurate” sex ed rammed down their throats?
MK… I think the AP sums up concisely what people are complaining about.
“Critics consider it a way to intimidate women who already have made an agonizing decision.”
Perhaps, after your spouse has been in persitantly vegitative state for 10 years, such that the brain scan looks like a rotten walnut, and you are compelled to pull the plug, someone should make you review all your old photo-albums.
“I would assume, since everyone claims to be pro CHOICE and not pro ABORTION that you’d be thrilled that women are getting all the info possible.”
exactly what imformation is being provided that wasn’t already provided? Perhaps the mother was uncertain that the fetus was actually there??
It’s stupid law… and I really don’t care one way or the other, but I suspect some women seeking an abortion would twist their face in disgust when offered an image of their fetus. It’s called emotional extortion, and there’s no medical reason for it.
Even as a pro-choicer, I have no qualms about this law. FORCED viewing is the problem…as long as a pregnant woman is offered the CHOICE and isn’t FORCED to view an ultrasound, I am thoroughly for the law. Again, yes, INFORMED consent is important…You pro-lifers are right when it comes to saying that a few on our side are being ridiculous when it comes to these laws. They make us look bad and undermine the meaning of “choice” and “informed consent”.
Perhaps, after your spouse has been in persitantly vegitative state for 10 years, such that the brain scan looks like a rotten walnut, and you are compelled to pull the plug, someone should make you review all your old photo-albums.
No but I bet they are offered the chance to see the brain scans before making the choice to pull the plug.
AP: “Critics consider it a way to intimidate women who already have made an agonizing decision.”
Cam, why is this so agonizing?
Cameron,
Perhaps, after your spouse has been in persitently vegatative state for 10 years, such that the brain scan looks like a rotten walnut, and you are compelled to pull the plug, someone should make you review all your old photo-albums.
A better question would be should they be required to view the brain scan.
We are talking about a medical procedure here.
The brain scan would be a determining factor in whether or not you should remove life support.
An ultrasound would be a determining factor in whether or not you should remove life support.
Showing the family a photo album could better be compared to showing a video of the night the prospective couple copulated and created the life that they are about to snuff out.
I must add here, that I have wondered whether or not there are two Camerons on this site. You’re arguments of late have been, intelligent, well thought out and free of name calling. I’m very impressed. Perhaps you really aren’t only 14. Keep up the good work. You’re post are actually worth reading.
mk
@MK: Oooooh, I want to see those surgery pictures! That sounds so awesome! I wish I had pictures from my surgery…I wish I could have been awake to watch, but noooooo.
“Cam, why is this so agonizing?”
Well Jasper, contrary to your beliefs that slutty women thrive on and look forward to numerous pre-baby murders… no doubt for satanic purposes. Most women find abortion to be difficult decision. Some would likely keep the kid if they thought they could manage.
Why do you insist on such stupid questions all the time? Seriously… why ask such a question? Do you realy think woman wouldn’t agonize? What sort of answer were you expecting? Perhaps you percieve that their actually finding the decission troubling somehow supports you notion that it is always wrong? Try being thoughtful for once.
Hopefully you’ve been viewing the brain scans all along.
However, in this case, the sanctity of life crowd would be more likely to try to pass a law to prevent you from seeing how deteriorated the brain actualy is, and in place compel you to look at emotionally burdensome artifacts of your past relationship with said spouse.
Honesty and informed consent are not a priority for pro-life so much a moral authority.
“Do you realy think woman wouldn’t agonize?”
but why is it agonizing?
No such thing as a stupid question.
“but why is it agonizing”
Some would likely keep the kid if they thought they could manage.
Perhaps you should try something other than repeating the same question if you’re not satisfied with the answer. You know… maybe tell me what you think the answer should be. Just to venture a guess… you must think agonizing over the decision is akin to guilt about murdering the pre-born babieeeeez, as opposed to just general sadness for it having to come to this.
‘The reason legislation like this has to be passed is because of the amount of women who asked to see the image and were told they couldn’t.’
How and why could abortionists keep these women from seeing ultrasound pictures of their own babies?
“Cam, why is this so agonizing?”
Well Jasper, contrary to your beliefs that slutty women thrive on and look forward to numerous pre-baby murders… no doubt for satanic purposes. Most women find abortion to be difficult decision. Some would likely keep the kid if they thought they could manage.
Most women find abortion to be difficult decision.
Cameron,
I am looking forward to your statistical analysis to back this statement up.
Well Sandy,
McCarthy et al. (2003) found that liberal types that got abortions were mostly morally concerned about harming the fetus, and religious conservatives seeking abortions were mostly morally troubled because they were violating religious authority. On an arbitrary relivance scale, liberals were 48% more concerned about harm to fetus than religious types, and religious types were about 4% more concerned about religious authority than liberal types. Fairness was also an important moral component to liberals, which was markedly less important to religious types. Respect and sanctity were only slightly less important to religious types than religious authority, where there were significantly unimportant to liberals.
Samantha T,
Am I missing something here? Valerie at home watching soap operas? I’m a little curious as to how you know John and Marlena reunited on Days of Our Lives if you are not also at home watching soap operas.
Lyssie,
Some very good points about informed consent.
Not that I think Jasper actually cares, but maybe some others will…
I found some studies regarding the abortion decision. For most women, it’s not agonizing. However, for ones who want to be mothers it is. These conflicted women fell into two categories… those who were conflicted about it because of their
Cameron,
You fabricated a study? You obviously have too much time on your hands. However, thank you for giving us all a lesson in humility.
Actually Cameron,
Wrong again.
I tried to find your “study” and came up with zippo. I only wish I would have been available to call you on it before you had a chance to admit it.
I also tried to find the statistics you posted regarding the BC/Breast Cancer study. I was unable to find them as well. As I stated in a response post to you, I have yet to find those statistics included in any of the articles I have read regarding this issue.
Please give me a sight where I can find those statistics. (If there is one) I would like to further review them when I have more time.
Thanks.
Sorry I forgot to add this:
According to Cameron May 31st, 5:29 pm
“Most women find abortion to be difficult decision.”
Acording to Cameron June 1, 11:24 am
“I found some studies regarding the abortion decision. For most women, it’s not agonizing.”
Thank you for correcting your propagandic agenda.
Anything else you want to fess up to?
Sandy,
Go girl!! By the way, I was being sarcastic on the humility issue. I wonder why Cameron would find it necessary to fabricate anything at all if he can just present the facts and back them up with real and valid studies.
Sandy… and cheerleader Mary,
The first one is in regards abortion decision… per this thread. The next two are the studies you cited but clearly didn
I used to automatically post my sources here, thinking I was educating, but several people claimed they wouldn’t ever read anything that indicated a reality which counters their foolish notions… so I stopped posting them.
Are you even going to read these?
Cameron,
I still have to wonder why you would fabricate anything at all if you have such statistics at your fingertips. You must realize this only discredits you. What would be the response of the institution you study/work at were you to present a fabricated study as a “joke”?
Sorry I forgot to add this:
According to Cameron May 31st, 5:29 pm
“Most women find abortion to be difficult decision.”
Acording to Cameron June 1, 11:24 am
“I found some studies regarding the abortion decision. For most women, it’s not agonizing.”
Haha, good find, Sandy. Cameron can’t ever seem to keep his stories straight. :-P
Again, Cam goes round and round in circles.
Cam, how about the mother is agonizing because she’s ending her childs life. what the heck are they teaching you in college. Did you say you were going for your PH.D?
“I still have to wonder why you would fabricate anything at all if you have such statistics at your fingertips.”
I enjoy pointing out that prolifers get abortions too.
“I still have to wonder why you would fabricate anything at all if you have such statistics at your fingertips.”
It’s called humor.
No Cameron,
Its called fabrication and falsehood.