I'm sure you all know about the two disgusting measures that were enacted in Oklahoma recently. One forces a woman to have an ultrasound before she has an abortion. The other protects doctors who lie to women about the health of their fetuses. Horrifying, right? Well, today I found this awesome video via Finding My Feminism. Seriously, watch this. This is AMAZING!
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
22 comments:
***PLEASE READ***
Due to constant spam and derailing coming from a few antis, I am now making this blog a "safe place". This does not mean that I won't allow opposing views. It means that I'm not longer going to allow hateful or unrelated/spammy comments. This will continue on until the anti-choice spammers get bored with harassing me and the people who post here, and is especially relevant when it comes to the topic of rape. I hope this doesn't deter any respectful people from commenting. :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for making this a safe place, by the way.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, these laws in Oklahoma are totally indefensible. And it's why we call the people who advocate for these laws (or do nothing to stop them) anti-choice, not pro-life. Sure women should have the right to choose to see an ultrasound or not be told about any defects the fetus might be developing. But to force this on women is absolutely disgusting. The ultrasound law is particularly intrusive. Doctors have to put the implement in the woman's vagina if they think it gives a better view of the embryo. If the woman doesn't want that, too bad. Sounds like sexual assault to me.
Current law makes it clear that anyone can refuse medical treatment of any kind. This includes transvaginal ultrasound. It is unreasonable to correlate this requirement with 'sexual assault' and give the impression that the clinic employees are just waiting to violate you the minute you hit the door. All you have to do is say, "no transvaginal ultrasound, thank you", and they will either perform a regular sono, or refuse their services. You have the right NOT to seek service if transvag is a requirement. The new law in OK seems to have been crafted by people who want to make access to abortion more difficult. Whether you like it or not, however, it is not reasonable to hype the rhetoric and compare the procedure to 'sexual assault' (which many are already doing). Transvaginal ultrasound is performed routinely on early first trimester pregnant women, not to mention women receiving gynelogical services. It give a very 'up close' look at the uterus, ovaries, tubes etc., and can be an excellent tool to assist in diagnostics. When a friend went to her first OB appt, at about 10 weeks they offered it to her, and she simply said "no thanks", they did a trans abdominal us, and there was the little 'baby bean'(that's what she called it)which appeared very clearly using that method.
ReplyDeleteWhen you are fighting for a cause FEMily, it's better to stay on topic. My guess is that you are upset that the laws are going to make it harder to get an abortion. Argue your position reasonably.
ps. PCG, It is my wish to remain anonymous. This comment doesn't agree with FEMily, and while I understand why you like it, I think the 'poem' is a little over the top with drama. There is a point well made,however, that many in the pro-life camp won't put their money where their mouth is, so to speak,by offering REAL help, and I think that is very unfortunate. In all fairness,however, some do. I really do believe if some women had very tangible help, they wouldn't feel so desparate about carrying their pregnancy to term. Some, but not all -- anyway, I'll be waiting. Whether or not you post this will be very telling.
No. The law states that women who seek abortion must undergo an ultrasound. If the doctor believes a transvaginal ultrasound would give a better view of the embryo (so that the doctor can describe the embryo, not to perform the abortion), the doctor must perform that type of ultrasound, whether or not the woman wants to go through with it. It makes it illegal for a woman to want an abortion but not a transvaginal ultrasound. And when a woman is forced against her wishes to have an implement inserted into her vagina, that's sexual assault. I don't care how often it's done and when. I only care whether or not the woman consents to the procedure. So don't tell me, "Oh this happens all the time. It's no big deal." Does it happen all the time by force? It will now in Oklahoma.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the idea of a doctor not telling a patient what he/she knows about a baby. I think that a person has a right to know, that is one of the reasons why they GO to a doctor, so they can be prepared for the roads ahead. Though I understand the need for the doctors to be protected if he/she DIDN'T know about a problem, but to not tell a woman there might be a problem is wrong.
ReplyDeleteAs for the ultrasound thing, a woman NEEDS an ultrasound before having an abortion- medically speaking. First off, there needs to be a confirmation that there is a baby in there (sometimes women get false positives), second that there aren't multiple babies in there (seems that a doctor would need to know that before hand) third that the woman isn't farther along than she thinks she is and fourth what if the baby has already miscarried/has no heart beat/etc. Why have a woman undergo what she thinks is an abortion, when in reality it isn't?
Once a woman is 6 weeks along, there is no need for a transvaginal ultrasound. They can do it on your belly. And even a transvaginal ultrasound is nothing more than an examination- just like doctors do with their hands, except they can see inside to better understand the situation.
Again, I think women need to have all the information presented in front of them. If you can't make an informed decision when you have facts in front of you, then you need to rethink your decision. Because I'd rather a woman to know what she is getting herself into before hand than afterwards and live like I have for the last almost 9 years. And that is why many women HAVE the Post Abortion Syndrome...because they WERE NOT informed beforehand and now they are and they regret their decision.
Before you have ANY medical procedure, you should know the facts. Like I've said before, it should be from a third party that doesn't stand to gain money from the woman having the abortion and doesn't have a strong tie to either pro-life or pro-choice side.
And when it comes to be pro-choice and pro-life I wish I could see something from both sides besides just abortion. What about those women who choose to keep their babies. If we're so willing to bowl for a woman's right to abort a baby, can we not bowl for a woman's right to keep her baby? I wish there were more mother/baby houses. The ones where a woman can live there during her pregnancy and after the baby is born to help her while she finishes schooling and/or gets a job to help her get on her feet if she has no other place to go.
Why cannot we as people help these women who have chosen a different path? We are so quick to help women get abortions and put babies up for adoption, but what about these other women?? Isn't that what being pro-choice is about? Shouldn't we be offering help to ALL pregnant women- regardless if they chose to abort, adopt, or keep the baby? Shouldn't we be FIGHTING for their rights just like abortion? So that these women and their children that they chose to have have a chance for a better life? Just a thought...
:-)
Allison
FEMily-
ReplyDeleteI'm not a doctor, so I am only saying what I've experienced, but...
When I was pregnant the third time, I went in at 5 weeks for my first visit. They did a transvaginal ultrasound then. That is when they first noticed that I was pregnant with twins. One of the babies had a heart beat, the other they weren't sure about. They didn't have a regular ultrasound machine at that doctor's office, so they made me go to their other location to get the kind that is on your stomach.
So I don't know why a doctor would believe that a transvaginal ultrasound would give them a better view? Because in my case they sent me to the regular ultrasound to get a better view. (Which the other baby did have a heart beat and I did end up having twins, lol!)
So I guess my question would be (to anyone out there in medical field land) why a doctor would feel that a transvaginal ultrasound would give a better view when in my case they didn't feel that way?
FEMily:
ReplyDeleteA doctor can NOT force you to have a transvaginal ultrasound. I realize that the OK law says you must have an ultrasound. But as a patient, you have the right to REFUSE any treatment. Subsequently, the Doc has a right to tell you to pound sand if you don't do it his/her way, but they can not strap you to the table and ream you with the transducer against your will. Please. I am 20 year veteran of the obstetrics medical field land. A transvaginal ultrasound does not have to bounce sound waves off of all the competing anatomy. It goes up next to your cervix, and when you are very early in a pregnancy, this is the best view of the fetus. Once again, let me reiterate....regardless of the new law in OK, a doctor may NOT FORCE A PATIENT TO UNDERGO ANY MEDICAL PROCEDURE. You are correct - that would constitute assault. If they are adamant about a transvag us, and you refuse, the only thing they can do is fire you as a patient (refuse to treat you). THAT IS ALL! Take care to be reasonable. If you disagree with the law, at least present your argument based on what is in the law, not what you personally think MIGHT happen.
Kudos to Allison for saying:
"Why cannot we as people help these women who have chosen a different path? We are so quick to help women get abortions and put babies up for adoption, but what about these other women?? Isn't that what being pro-choice is about? Shouldn't we be offering help to ALL pregnant women- regardless if they chose to abort, adopt, or keep the baby? Shouldn't we be FIGHTING for their rights just like abortion? So that these women and their children that they chose to have have a chance for a better life? Just a thought."
Just a thought, but a very good one.
To the anon with twins:
ReplyDeletePerhaps the doc couldn't view your other twin transvaginally because the first twin was in the way. Therefore scanning your abdomen would give a better view from above.
No, the twins were in different sacs. They saw a heartbeat flicker in one, but the other sac was much smaller and they couldn't see if there was a flicker or not. On the regular ultrasound we saw both flicker heartbeats :-)
ReplyDeleteAllison
(sorry I forgot to sign my name to the last post I did)
This poem (yes, POEM, not 'poem') was amazing!! It gave me chills. Where did you find this PCG?
ReplyDeleteAnon, about the women who don't choose abortion, who instead chooses adoption or to raise the child herself: pro choice is fighting for these women too. The difference is, anti choicers aren't wasting time money and effort trying to strip rights from these women, only the ones that choose to abort. That's why you may see pro choicers being more vocal about them.
Thank you for being respectful on PCG's blog. It's not often we see people that disagree that also aren't name calling like 3 year olds. :)
I don't know how a doctor would get a better view with a transvaginal ultrasound, because I'm not a doctor either. I'm just telling you what the law says.
ReplyDeleteregardless of the new law in OK, a doctor may NOT FORCE A PATIENT TO UNDERGO ANY MEDICAL PROCEDURE. You are correct - that would constitute assault. If they are adamant about a transvag us, and you refuse, the only thing they can do is fire you as a patient (refuse to treat you). THAT IS ALL! Take care to be reasonable. If you disagree with the law, at least present your argument based on what is in the law, not what you personally think MIGHT happen.
You are not disagreeing with what I'm saying. You're misunderstanding me. The woman might have a right to refuse a transvaginal ultrasound, but not if she's in Oklahoma. She'd have to go to another state. And if she doesn't have the means to travel outside of the state, then her civil rights are stripped from her based on her socioeconomic status. And I'm not imagining things. Making doctors perform transvaginal ultrasounds on women is written in the law, so obviously the legislators thought the chance of a woman not wanting one is a possibility.
Again, I think women need to have all the information presented in front of them. If you can't make an informed decision when you have facts in front of you, then you need to rethink your decision. Because I'd rather a woman to know what she is getting herself into before hand than afterwards and live like I have for the last almost 9 years. And that is why many women HAVE the Post Abortion Syndrome...because they WERE NOT informed beforehand and now they are and they regret their decision.
If you truly believed that women should have all of the information in front of them before they made a decision about their pregnancy (or if you really thought about it), you would support the same type of legislation for women who choose to give birth. Where's the law telling women that they run the risk of suffering from post-partum depression or post-partum psychosis if they give birth? Nowhere. Where's the law telling women that you're 10 times more likely to die from giving birth than from having an abortion? Nowhere. These laws don't exist because paternalistic legislators don't feel the need to protect these women, because these paternalistic legislators believe these women have made the "right" decision. They target women who want abortions because they don't support their decision. They think something must be wrong with the woman if she chooses abortion, because they don't have a very positive view of women. Women already know what they're doing when they get abortions. They know what it entails. And if they regret their decision, that's fine. There are women who regret giving their babies up for adoption or who regret motherhood. That's a possible consequence of making a decision. It's not grounds to take the decision away from the woman.
Allison, you can post just under your name without a URL if you pick the Name/URL option and just fill in your name. It might be easier that way.
ReplyDeleteOk FEMily, we are clear then. What we both understand is that people in OK would have to seek abortion elsewhere IF they don't want to have a trans vag u/s. I believe I conceded that in my first post, and I agree, it seems as if they have done this to make access to abortion more difficult. But they are not forcing women against their will. If you wish to have an abortion in OK, and the law truly states that the doctor has to perform a trans vag u/s, then by agreeing to this condition, you have given legal consent (probably by signature), therefore it is not sexual assault (even though it might seem like it to you). There is certainly some ambiguity in stating that you are stripping someone of their civil rights based on their socioeconomic status by causing them to go elsewhere to seek an abortion. While this may be your point of view, there are many who don't share it, and although I'm not an attorney, I have never heard of any successful litigation in this area when a woman can't get across state line to get an abortion. Could be wrong on that one, and I'm sure if a case has set legal precedent, then the courts in OK will be hearing about it.
ReplyDeleteThe trans vag being a better view is a fact. Allison, perhaps they sent you to a facility that was able to perform a higher level ultrasound (more sophisticated equipment, more detailed view).
Brenda- I found it via the blog Finding my Feminism. Good blog, the author is a person who posts here sometimes (Not Guilty)
ReplyDeleteAnon, since you are an attorney (I am in law school), then you would know that one can "consent" under duress. Just because you "consent", it does not mean that it isn't still sexual assault. If these women want an abortion, they must consent under duress. In Canada, this law would never stand in court. But of course in the US, the rights of women are trumped by a fetus with no capacity for pain or thought.
ReplyDeleteNot Guilty -
ReplyDeleteUntil I was duly recognized by the licensing agency which regulates my profession, I was unable to practice in the medical field, except as a student under supervision.
In the United States, signing a consent means you have been informed of the details of the procedure you are about to undergo. This is why it is important, as a patient, to make sure your physician answers every question you have about your procedure. Once you sign, you acknowledge you have been informed, and that your consent is not given under duress. This does not mean the fetus is trumping anyone's rights. It means the procedure has been explained, and you are giving informed consent to that procedure. If the physician explains what a trans vag u/s is, and why he/she has to do it, and you sign consent for that procedure after being informed, then legally, it is not assault.
....I'm not an attorney.
ReplyDelete...and like it or not(even when a woman, in her extremity, feels abortion is the only answer she has), abortion is still an elective procedure and therefore women must submit to any standard of care deemed appropriate to the situation.....even legislated standards.....that is, if she wants an abortion.
ReplyDeletedoes anyone have the lyrics to this?
ReplyDeleteQuestion:
ReplyDeleteIf a woman feels violated by a trans-vaginal ultrasound preceding an abortion procedure, wouldn't she also feel violated during a surgical abortion procedure, which is far more traumatic (in the clinical sense of the word) and invasive than the ultra sound transducer? (i.e. Injection up the vagina to the cervix to artificially dilate, suction curette in the vagina and into the uterus to evacuate the contents, etc., etc.)
Respectfully submitted,
A.
Not necessarily. If the abortion is a wanted procedure and the ultrasound is an unwanted procedure, it makes sense that she'd feel violated by the forced ultrasound, but not the abortion.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. But if the abortion is a wanted procedure, and a transvaginal ultrasound is required, then doesn't the ultrasound become a wanted procedure also? That is, if the abortion is also wanted. What difference does it make if one more thing is up your vagina? (with all due respect, of course)
ReplyDeleteNo. If an abortion is a wanted procedure, then you can't automatically assume that any other procedure that might come along with it is wanted. Why don't you ask a woman who would feel violated by the procedure what difference it makes, instead of telling her what she "should" or "shouldn't" feel?
ReplyDelete