Virginia Mandatory Ultrasound Bill Passes In State Senate

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Virginia Mandatory Ultrasound Bill Passes In State Senate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/28/virginia-mandatory-ultrasound-bill_n_1307472.html

The Virginia Senate narrowly passed a bill on Tuesday by a vote of 21-19 that would require women to have an ultrasound procedure 24 hours prior to having an abortion.

The Senate passed a similar bill earlier this month that would have required women to undergo an invasive transvaginal ultrasound procedure. After that bill stirred up a firestorm of controversy, Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) helped House Republicans write and pass a revised bill that mandates the more common transabdominal procedure, even when it's not deemed medically necessary or the woman does not want to have it.

Senate Democrats charged that even though the controversial transvaginal procedure would not be mandated, the bill still constituted government overreach into women's personal medical decisions and the doctor-patient relationship.

"We have taken out the state required rape from the bill, but the way it is now is still an assault because it's an unwanted touching," Sen. Janet Howell (D) told HuffPost on Monday, "and the woman is being coerced to have that happen in order to exercise her constitutional right to an abortion."

[alp227]

1. It's now mandatory for good Virginians to vote against ANYONE who voted for this.

[noiretextatique]

2. how in the hell is the crap going to be enforced?

and did they keep in the part about requiring the ultrasound to remain in the woman's permanent medical record? sick motherfuckers you want war...you got it.

[cstanleytech]

3. Not to mention that it needlessly wastes money by adding on something thats not medically

needed and for some reason I suspect the legislature didnt vote for funding to pay for it.

[peacebird]

5. Not medically needed AND will require women to take off work for a second day

[sofa king]

4. Haha! They're doomed!

Last edited Tue Feb 28, 2012, 08:54 PM - Edit history (1)

All Virginia women plus me are going to deliver us a Senator, several extra House seats, and thirteen electoral votes.

But good idea on toning it down there, Republicans. That's gonna get you real far with the ladies on election day!

(P.S. You want to know one more way Virginia is in the bag? Because on the ballot, as an independent, will be one "Robert Lee," running for both Senate and President, I think. Now, what flag-waving conservative Virginian is going to vote for a random Republican chump when they can say they voted for Robert Lee?)

[Returning Survivor]

6. When do the witch trials start?>

@#$&%!

[nyy1998]

7. And then these same Republicans accuse Obama of "socialized healthcare"

Yet these idiots are the ones coming between the doctor and the patient

[aquart]

8. Any woman who votes Republican better be walking two steps behind any man.

[blue neen]

9. Dear Virginia Republican Legislators and Govenor McDonnell:

My husband is retiring tomorrow. We are planning on doing a lot of traveling; we like to visit Civil War sites, Presidential homes, historical monuments. Your beautiful state has an abundance of these things.

Please be advised that we will be doing NONE of our vacationing in Virginia. We will not even be driving through so as to avoid spending ANY money for people like you to profit from. It's a shame that all of the citizens will have to suffer because of the ignorance of control-freak politicians like you.

This isn't about any of you being "pro-life." It's about the fact that you need to take out your authoritarian attitudes on women.

All of you Republican politicians proclaim that you are for "less government". Well, if that's true then:

Stop Legislating Womens' Bodies

[lark]

10. What she said

[blue neen]

11. Thanks.

We will stick to this...

We now have the same idiocy (actually worse) being proposed in Pennsylvania, so we're going to get to work protesting.

Stop Legislating Womens' Bodies!

[Sparxo]

12. Outrage why?

Am I the only one that thinks there is nothing wrong with this bill?
I can see that this article is written from an entirely biased point of view. Can anyone tell me how in anyway this is going against a woman's rights?
For one, an ultrasound is a medical exam. Not only is it used to date a pregnancy, it is used to look at the shape and position of the uterus, and look for any potential hazards that can complicate an abortion (fibroids for example). It is not used as a show and tell, nor is it used to try to "coerce" or make a woman change her mind. The gynecologists order an ultrasound for every woman getting an abortion at our hospital and would not perform the procedure without it. It is to make the abortion as safe as possible. Therefore, yes it is medically necessary. We've seen enough uterine perforations with an ultrasound before hand. I would hate to know how many perforations occur doing an abortion blind. Maybe women would prefer to have a hysterectomy and colectomy after her abortion because a piece of her bowel gets sucked into her uterus (yes I've seen it happen).
And are you kidding me? A woman's rights are at risk having an "invasive" procedure like a transvaginal ultrasound? Yet she's willing to have a curette and vacuum put inside of her? Give me a break.
As far as paying for the ultrasound goes, I think should be factored into the price of an abortion as a whole. And you have to take an extra day off work or get a babysitter so that you can have that ultrasound? Boohoo. Maybe you should be thankful to be so privileged to have it in the first place.

And just so everyone knows I'm speaking from a medical point of view, I'm Canadian (neither a republican or democrat) and pro choice. Maybe people should think from a less political point of view and just use a little common sense here.

[blue neen]

13. The whole point of the bill is to "coerce or make a woman change her mind."

"Boohoo?" You cannot be serious.

I suppose you know that now in Pennsylvania they have an even more heinous version of the
"Women's Right to Know Act."

"The bill, proposed by Rep. Kathy Rapp, a conservative Republican from Warren County, outlines what women seeking an abortion would undergo in great detail."

"The bill requires that the woman not only get an ultrasound, but that the ultrasound screen be in her line of sight. The woman can choose to look away, the legislation states, but the technician performing the ultrasound would have to note if the woman viewed the results."

"The patient would also have to hear the results of the physician’s finding, sign a written report to give to the abortion provider, and receive a sealed copy of the ultrasound’s image."

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/02/pennsylvania_house_bill_would_2.html

Please explain how this would not be a violation of women's rights.

[blue neen]

15. <crickets>

Still waiting for that explanation...

[blue neen]

14. Right here they are actually admitting what their motives are:

"If a woman sees the heartbeat or other movement before her, it’s going to be that much more difficult for her to have an abortion, said Maria Gallagher, legislative director of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation."

“I think it gives them pause, where they will have to look deep within themselves and decide: ‘What should I do next?’” Gallagher said."

Also,

"Abortion opponents in Pennsylvania are buoyed by their successes in requiring tougher licensing and inspection standards for abortion providers last year. They say they will continue to press for the ultrasound bill."

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/02/pennsylvania_house_bill_would_2.html

This is their agenda in Virginia, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and a host of other states.

[2ndAmForComputers]

17. You're a pro-choice Canadian?

Nice to meet you, I am a bass player from Alpha Centauri.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

18. it goes against the rights of a woman to determine her own medical care

did she need an ultrasound or want it? was it advised by her doctor? no. it was the states decision to make an arbitrary and forced choice for this person. that's the problem

[fifthoffive]

26. If you can tell me...

Please name other instances of the state mandating medical procedures that are not related to public health, such as vaccinations.

I can think of no other such instances.

The state has no right to tell doctors what procedures to perform, or to tell any person that they must have any medical procedure, needed or not, before being allowed to receive some other legal medical care.

The waiting period, and the requirement for the patient to listen to the heartbeat, are just means to coerce women not to have a perfectly legal medical procedure.

[uppityperson]

28. I know you are PPR'd and can't reply, but perhaps you will read and I need to respond anyway.

" mandates the more common transabdominal procedure, even when it's not deemed medically necessary or the woman does not want to have it." It is mandated EVEN when it's not deemed medically necessary. EVEN when the woman does not want to have it.

NOT medically necessary but mandated. This is a cause for outrage. Read that again and see if you can find anything wrong with it. NOT medically necessary but mandated.

You ask Can anyone tell me how in anyway this is going against a woman's rights? . If she doesn't want it, if it is not medically necessary, this is going against her rights. Simple. See?

A woman's rights are at risk by forcing her to have a unnecessary unwanted procedure. Is it that difficult to understand?

Now off to what you write. There are other ways to date a pregnancy, to determine the shape and position of the uterus. Good grief, I've done enough pap smears over the yrs to know that. Palpating the size of the uterus gives a good estimate of the length of the pregnancy, of what all is going on in there. Of course women might be off with their last menses date, but palpation easily differentiates the difference between 8 and 12 weeks.

Most women have a typical, "normal" shaped uterus and there are several "normal", typical positions which as easily ascertained by a simple pelvic exam. If fibroids are noticed, or some other abnormality, then an ultrasound can be helpful. But for the majority of women? Not medically necessary. If a woman wants one, to be extra-careful, or if her health care provider deems it medically necessary, she can get one. But to mandate all must? Pshaw.

It is not used as a show and tell, nor is it used to try to "coerce" or make a woman change her mind. But that is exactly what this is for. There is another post here talking about how if a woman sees movement, it can "MAKE" her change her mind. A medically unneeded, unwanted procedure is only to be used for coercion.

We've seen enough uterine perforations with an ultrasound before hand. I would hate to know how many perforations occur doing an abortion blind. If the place you work at perforates that many uteruses WITH an ultrasound, maybe they need to look at what they are doing rather than mandating ultrasounds in medically unnecessary instances.

And are you kidding me? A woman's rights are at risk having an "invasive" procedure like a transvaginal ultrasound? Yet she's willing to have a curette and vacuum put inside of her? Give me a break Yes. If it is medically unnecessary and unwanted, her rights are being trampled on. What if they mandated a woman eat a grape popsicle before an abortion? Medically unnecessary and unwanted, but hey, why not? There is no reason for it, but why not? Would you consider this going against her rights? Mandating something unnecessary for a procedure is wrong.

And you have to take an extra day off work or get a babysitter so that you can have that ultrasound? Boohoo. Maybe you should be thankful to be so privileged to have it in the first place. OK, here is where you prove you are not involved with providing reproductive health care. "Boohoo"? Placing another obstacle in the way of someone getting health care is "boohoo, maybe you should be thankful to be so privilege to have it in the first place"? Placing more unnecessary obstacles in the way of getting health care gets your condescension going.

I am glad that you made your views known and very much doubt you in any way help PROVIDE reproductive health care or are in any way pro-choice.

[truthisfreedom]

16. Nothing short of a tax on women and depriving employers of valuable workers for an additional day.

Hey repukes! You're costing America valuable work time and money playing your vaginal inspection games! Get out of women's vaginas!

[MrMickeysMom]

19. I believe this type of legislation induces fraud... medical fraud.

Somebody convince me otherwise... but, you couldn't, because it's bull shit.

How about an explanation of what in the HELL is medically necessary about having the ultrasound? Or, WHY would the procedure would not be "covered"?

There are too many ways this law is WRONG. Give me the aspirin that Republican jackass told me to use between the knees and let's put it to better use... up his urethra.

[IndyJones]

20. So who gets to pay for the procedure? Is the state going to foot that bill or is the woman saddled

with that extravagent cost?

[Tripod]

21. It will never end now.

All of our rights taken away by the Machines. "We will not surrender". WTF! I knew when I was six years old, and my ten year old Brother had to by a calculator in Jr High. IN the 70's That this was the end of my time... it was a Texas Instrament. My Father worked for IBM, Honeywell, and Bull, a defense org for the US. I respect all of this in some ways, but I don't want my picture taken in a coffee shop, or have my phone tapped. So be it.

[Sparxo]

22. A woman's right

As I said before I'm speaking purely from a medical point of view. Yes I'm Canadian so I'm not biased by your democratic vs republican bs.
Do you people not understand how many things can go wrong during and after an abortion? It's only right that a woman get complete details of the risks, gestational age, etc. so that she can make an informed decision. Hearing a basic ultrasound report and signing off consent for the physician to do the procedure is just standard practice.

When it comes to the woman being forced to watch her ultrasound and it being documented whether or not she looked at it is just a joke. If you've ever had an ultrasound you would know that the screen is almost always somewhat in your line of sight, really who's going to make sure the woman sees the screen and whether or not she looked at the images? The pro life police? Give me a break. Even if the bill passes I can tell you most definitely there is no way they can implement this. It's silly. And if the doctor has information that the patient looked or didn't look, do you think that will change the patient's care? No, these doctors are some of the most non-judgemental people you could ever meet.
I do understand that these hill billy anti abortion politicians are trying to use ultrasound as a tool to coerce women. That is wrong. Ultrasound is a medical device and you people are making it seem like a show and tell. But if an ultrasound can change a women's mind to get an abortion, maybe she isn't sure and shouldn't have it done in the first place. She should know exactly what she's doing (terminating an embryo/fetus) without having to see it on a screen. Most of our patients actually want to see everything, do you think it makes them change their mind? No. Those that have doubts after voluntarily looking at the screen go for more counseling. None of our patients have ever been forced to look at the ultrasound, nor have they been forced to have a vaginal ultrasound and never will be. Ultimately the woman has all the control, and I really don't think this bill will change that.

[blue neen]

23. "Do you people not understand?"

Yes, we understand quite well what the purpose of the ultra-sound bills in these states, and it is NOT purely medical.

Oh, and as for the assertion that ultimately the woman has all the control, check this:

"It would require the ultrasound screen to face the woman while the doctor narrates the images, although the law states that it should not be “construed to prevent a pregnant woman from averting her eyes,” the bill reads. Doctors who do not follow the prescribed routines could face felony charges and could be sued by the potential father and grandparents." You see, these politicians are trying with their every ploy to take the control away from the woman.

That's what it's all about. They don't want women to control their own bodies.

"You people are making it seem like a show and tell." No, Republicans are.

I'm sorry that you do not seem to understand that we as women only want to exercise the rights that are guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

[Ian David]

24. Then how come one of the states has an exemption for rape?

If a woman is raped, then they don't need the transvaginal ultrasound.

Why make an exception like that, if the procedure is for sound, medical reasons?

Why make an exception like that, unless you don't think rape victims need to be punished?

Why have that procedure in place, with that exception, unless it is intended solely to humiliate and punish?

[randome]

25. The doctor and patient should decide what is medically necessary.

Not the government. Surely you can agree with that.

[fifthoffive]

27. Listen, boyo

I've had plenty of trans-vag ultrasounds, and have never been able to see the screen. Never had an abdominal ultrasound, but my guess is the screen doesn't have to face the patient at all.

This is all an attempt to make the woman feel guilty for something she shouldn't feel guilty about.

If the state can mandate one procedure, it can mandate any procedure. Be careful what you ask for.

[tlcasey]

29. What I Learned about My State's Legislative Process, and It is Nowhere Near Schoolhouse Rock

Here is a link to an essay I wrote as a Virginian in response to the Senate's passage of this overreaching legislation:
http://rvamag.com/articles/full/14008/what-i-have-learned-today
The progress of this offensive legislation only further fuels my disappointment in our legislative and political process.