A Michigan law requiring abortion providers to ask women if they want to see the ultrasound before they consented to abortions was proposed. The women would not be forced to see the ultrasound. This law mandated that abortion providers perform an ultrasound for their patients. In many ways, this is a safety issue, for the only way to know for sure how far along a woman is is to do an ultrasound. Also, an ultrasound is the only way to make sure a woman does not have an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy. Most clinics, including Planned Parenthood clinics, routinely do ultrasounds before abortions.
But clinics didn’t want women to have a chance to see their unborn baby. According
REBEKAH WARREN of Lansing-based abortion rights group MARAL Pro-Choice, gave NARAL’s position:
“…requiring a doctor to ask a patient if she’d like to see an ultrasound in proximity to an abortion is a move Warren has described as “emotionally manipulative.”…
So is it emotionally manipulative to allow a woman the CHOICE to look at information that might let her make a more informed decision? Keep in mind that the woman would not be forced to view anything.
Abortion clinics also said that a woman would have to pay for the ultrasound out of her own pocket, and therefore it was a burden on women. They could, of course, offer to do an ultrasound for free…but abortion clinics don’t do ANYTHING for free.
If the woman wanted to save money, she could go to a crisis pregnancy center where she could get an ultrasound for free. According to Warren:
“One of the biggest changes in this legislation is putting a list of places women can get free ultrasounds on the state Web site,” Warren says. Typically, an ultrasound costs between $300 and $700, depending on the stage of the pregnancy.
Some of clinics that offer free ultrasounds, Warren says, are geared toward influencing women against abortion.
“We would rather not have that on the state Web site…”
So the pro-choice group doesn’t want the woman to go to a place where she will be able to see her ultrasound and, quite possibly, learn more information that might sway her abortion decision. They don’t want anything to interfere with their profits. Is this pro-woman?
“Partial abortion victory” Metrotimes 12/14/2005 See article here.
Share on Facebook