A Republican lawmaker wants to require women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound and listen to the heartbeat of the fetus at least one hour before the procedure, saying it would give them the necessary information to make an informed decision.
HB 2416, a wide-ranging bill sponsored by Rep. Kimberly Yee, R-Phoenix, would mandate that doctors point out the fetus’ various extremities, describe its position and offer a picture of the ultrasound to the woman. It would also ban phone or video consultations with doctors before abortions.
“Choosing an abortion is a decision that’s wrought with consequences, both physical and emotional,” Yee said. “We in this community need to make sure the decision can be made fully informed.”
The measure would redefine abortion under Arizona law to include abortion by pill, placing new surgical accreditation requirements on facilities that dispense the pills even if they don’t perform surgeries.
The House Health and Human Services Committee passed the bill Wednesday on a 6-3 vote, with Democratic Reps. Sally Ann Gonzalez and Matt Heinz of Tucson and Katie Hobbs of Phoenix dissenting. It was headed to the floor by way of the Rules Committee.
The bill is one of many introduced this session that would further limit abortion. Others would restrict state or tax money from being used at clinics or practices that perform or support abortions and ban the use of student tuition dollars to provide abortion training at public universities or community colleges.
Several nurses and supporters of HB 2416 described to the committee scenes where women originally set on abortions changed their minds after seeing ultrasounds. Opponents said the bill would restrict access to health care in rural areas and place new burdens on facilities that perform abortions, possibly raising costs for patients.
Gonzalez, one of those who voted against the bill, said women in rural areas like Arizona’s reservations would be financially strained by being forced to drive to Tucson or Phoenix for care if they weren’t allowed to consult with doctors by phone or video conferencing.
“It will put more emotional stress on mothers and fathers having to make these difficult decisions,” she said, especially on reservations where telemedicine is more common.
Dr. DeShawn Taylor, an OB-GYN and medical director for Planned Parenthood Arizona, said making it more difficult to get an abortion pill and increased waits before procedures might instead push women toward later-term, more dangerous surgical abortions.
“This does nothing to improve the safety of the abortion pill,” she said. “All it does is make it more difficult for women to access this type of care.”
Planned Parenthood doesn’t currently practice telemedicine for abortions, Taylor said, and already does an ultrasounds before every procedure, including offering each woman a picture.
The general community standard is to do an ultrasound before any abortion, she said.
Democrats Heinz, who is also a hospital physician, and Hobbs said there are few other medical procedures that require such a high level of doctor consent.
Government micromanagement of medical procedures could increase costs and delay care, Heinz said.
Deborah Sheasby, a lobbyist for the conservative Center for Arizona Policy, which supports the bill, said abortion pills should be regulated the same way as surgeries.
“I don’t see why we need to wait for a tragedy to occur in abortion medication before we make changes,” she said.
rrffcc1 posted at 7:28 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
Makes it nearly impossible for women in the rural areas to obtain a safe, legal abortion.
Nice going, Yee. Make a bad situation much much worse for many people. Ran on a single issue and got elected -- nice going voters...
Freethinker posted at 7:39 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
How nice.
I wonder if Kim Yee owns stock in wire hangers.
We need to recall this waste of oxygen IMMEDIATELY.
abimopectore posted at 7:47 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
The other problem here in the bill is that the state wishes to mandate a procedure but doesn't provide a means to pay for it. You can't have it both ways. If you care so much about making sure less people have abortions then pony up the funds to make sure that an undue burden doesn't occur upon this person; otherwise the upcoming lawsuit against it is going to have something by which to argue against this bill. Making feel good laws don't prevent abortion and don't replace good policy for providing the means by which these girls/women can actually decide whether to have their babies.
scalesofjustice posted at 8:43 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
Having an abortion is a grave decision. There is nothing wrong in viewing an ultrasound, understanding the consequences of your actions. But should we not also then require the Governor and Republican legislature of Arizona to watch videos of the last breaths of those denied AHCCCS surgeries? Putting a dying face to the consequences of their actions.
rrjenn posted at 8:46 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
BtW, ever wonder how many women had abortions only to regret their action for the rest of their lives? Norma McCorvey and Sandra Cano, the women whose Supreme Court cases (Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton respectively) made abortion legal on demand in the U.S., both now oppose abortion. So many young women have abortions early in their lives only to be haunted by regrets for the rest of their lives. McCorvey spent time assisting the pro-abortion movement after the case by was treated poorly by pro-abortion leaders and haunted by simple things like empty swings in a playground." McCorvey: "They were swinging back and forth but they were all empty. And I just totally lost it, and I thought 'Oh my God. are empty because there's no children, because they've all been aborted'"
Cerulean posted at 10:30 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
Every second that passes a woman somewhere is having a spontaneous abortion for reasons known and unknown. It is natural. Between 10 and 50% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, nature works that way. It is also natural to plan an abortion. Never let an individual or an institution force 'guilt' upon a reproductive decision.
Cerulean posted at 10:38 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
rrjenn, [sad]
People regret things they do, that is natural. I regret many decisions I have made or failed to make. "Regret" is not a reason for or against the responsibility of raising a child.
Cerulean posted at 10:42 am on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
rrjenn,
". . . haunted by simple things like empty swings in a playground. "
Awww, lets fill the swings with "anchor babies".
Rascal53 posted at 1:48 pm on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
I just read the bill. This bill is totally unnecessary. First: any abortion clinic is going to do an ultrasound to find out how far along the pregnancy is. That is used to determine which procedures are available. Second: The part about the woman watching the ultrasound, listening to the heartbeat and/or being given a picture of the ultrasound are still voluntary on the woman's part. Under the bill it only says those must be offered to her, but she can refuse. Third: The telemedicine part is even more ridiculous. It just says "A. A health care provider shall not use telemedicine to provide an abortion." The only way a doctor could perform a remote abortion would be by prescribing the pills used for medical abortions. No doctor in their right mind would risk getting hit with a malpractice suit by doing that.
EmperorSmith posted at 2:14 pm on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
I can not speak on this particular issue but I have made choices that haunt me to this day. That you take as it is.
samkat posted at 5:47 pm on Thu, Feb 3, 2011.
Perhaps Ms. Yee should be more actively engaged working on ways to put people to work and resolving the state budget problems.
hoopydreams posted at 7:36 am on Fri, Feb 4, 2011.
Ultrasounds are done before an abortion takes place, the mother sees the ultrasound, hears the heartbeat already. But for an hour? That would be maddening. Regardless, this government that AZ voted in is supposedly behind personal freedom (or so they say). Abortion is one of those medical procedure that should be between a doctor and a patient. If the patient has moral or religious convictions against it is her right not to have one. If she has weighed her options with her doctor and decide to have it, then so be it. And by the way it's not PRO ABORTION, it's PRO CHOICE. If it was up to me no one would have abortions and everyone who had children would be excellent parents. But unfortunately that's not the way of the world. May as well keep abortion legal and keep it safe as to avoid more deaths because of back alley abortions.
rrjenn posted at 10:04 am on Fri, Feb 4, 2011.
Well hoopy,
Maybe not as maddening as having to spend the rest of your life living with the fact that you killed your baby. Interesting, killing your baby as a personal freedom. Just a medical procedure? I'm pretty sure Dr Josef Mengele thought the same way. Legal or not it all boils down to the same thing. Killing your baby is killing your baby. Inside the womb or nestled in your arms, killing your baby is killing your baby.
Argosy posted at 2:50 pm on Fri, Feb 4, 2011.
This is a very good measure and the Representative should be commended, we just saw Planned Parenthood get busted for Sex Trafficking of Minors, we just saw this Dr. Gosnell and a number of workers indicted in Philadelphia for murdering a woman or even 2 and killing live babies, seven. Clearly Planned Parenthood needs to be reined in and is operating often outside the law and is not regulated properly.