Mandating ultrasounds before abortions

In states around the country, anti-women's health legislators are trying to eliminate funding for family planning or block Planned Parenthood's participation in public health programs.While state attacks on Planned Parenthood patients vary, the outcome would be the same: women's ability to receive basic health care -— including cancer screenings, well-woman exams, and birth control — from their trusted health care provider would be severely undermined. Constitution protects a woman's right to make her own medical decisions, including her decision to have an abortion.Doctors have for years used transvaginal ultrasounds to evaluate intrauterine fibroids and tumors.The probe is standard protocol among obstetricians: The grainy, black-and-white images provide information about the viability and stage of gestation and give women Facebook bragging rights.Twenty states already have laws dictating rules for ultrasounds, according to the Guttmacher Institute.Here are seven other states that have advanced similar measures in the last year: Alabama: State Sen.In this case, argued before Judge Tanya Pratt of the U. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, PPINK argues that requiring a woman to receive an ultrasound 18 hours before a scheduled abortion is unconstitutional and seeks a preliminary injunction.The relevant portion of the law states, “At least eighteen (18) hours before an abortion is performed and at the same time that the pregnant woman receives the information required by [the state’s informed consent laws], the provider shall perform, and the pregnant woman shall view, the fetal ultrasound imaging and hear the auscultation of the fetal heart tone if the fetal heart tone is audible unless the pregnant woman certifies in writing” that she does not want to do so.

“I have fought too many battles, too much discrimination and harassment, and I’ve watched how hard women have worked to get equality,” said Dr. I have strong feelings about anyone trying to tell us how to handle our own reproduction.” The same-sex marriage debate has in recent years eclipsed the issue of abortion.Go to our Planned Parenthood issue page to see the latest attacks on access to care at Planned Parenthood, and how women's health advocates are fighting back. Therefore, a state may not ban abortion prior to viability.Reproductive health care services are among the safest and mostly commonly sought forms of care in the U. But that hasn't stopped the anti-women's health movement from dialing up efforts to eliminate access to abortion through the introduction of TRAP ("targeted restrictions of abortion providers") bills and regulations that place unreasonable requirements on health care centers. In the 40 years following that landmark ruling, in decisions including Casey v.Proponents of the bill see it as a salvo in the ongoing battle against the abortion law.Opponents of the bill view it as the latest attempt to erode abortion rights.The amended law effectively combines these two previously existing—and unchallenged—requirements into one.

157

Leave a Reply