Obama On Late Abortion: Mental Distress Doesn't Justify It

WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says "mental distress" should not qualify as a justification for late-term abortions, a key distinction not embraced by many supporters of abortion rights.

In an interview this week with "Relevant," a Christian magazine, Obama said prohibitions on late-term abortions must contain "a strict, well defined exception for the health of the mother."

Obama then added: "Now, I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term."

Last year, after the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortions, Obama said he "strongly disagreed" with the ruling because it "dramatically departs form previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women."

The health care exception is crucial to abortion rights advocates and is considered a legal loophole by abortion opponents. By limiting the health exception to a "serious physical issue," Obama set himself apart from other abortion rights proponents.

The official position of NARAL Pro-Choice America, the abortion rights group that endorsed Obama in May, states: "A health exception must also account for the mental health problems that may occur in pregnancy. Severe fetal anomalies, for example, can exact a tremendous emotional toll on a pregnant woman and her family."

The 1973 landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, established a right to an abortion, and a concurrent case, Doe v. Bolton, established that medical judgments about the need for an abortion could include physical, emotional and psychological health factors.

"Senator Obama has consistently maintained that laws restricting abortions must contain exceptions for the health and life of the mother," Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said Thursday. "Obviously, as he stated in the interview, he has consistently believed those exceptions should be clear and limited enough to ensure that they don't undermine the prohibition on late-term abortions."

Story continues below

advertisement

Obama's position is similar to that taken by a bipartisan group of senators in 1998 who tried to counter efforts to ban certain late-term abortions with their own legislation. That proposal, which failed, would have banned all late-term abortions except for those that are necessary to protect the physical health of the mother.

In a statement, NARAL Pro-Choice said Obama's magazine interview is consistent with Roe v. Wade.

"Sen. Obama has consistently said he supports the tenets set forth by Roe, and has made strong statements against President Bush's Federal Abortion Ban, which does not have an exception to protect a woman's health," the organization's statement said.

A leading abortion opponent, however, said Obama's rhetoric does not match his voting record and his previously stated views on abortion rights.

David N. O'Steen, the executive director of National Right to Life, said Obama's remarks to the magazine "are either quite disingenuous or they reflect that Obama does not know what he is talking about."

"You cannot believe that abortion should not be allowed for mental health reasons and support Roe v Wade," O'Steen said.

In the interview with Relevant, conducted on Tuesday, Obama also defended his opposition to restrictions on induced abortions where the fetus sometimes survives for short periods. Obama voted against such a bill when he was in the Illinois Senate. He has said he supported a federal version of the law that contained more specific language because he feared the Illinois proposal would have applied to all abortions.

"There was a bill that came up in Illinois that was called the 'Born Alive' bill that purported to require life-saving treatment to such infants. And I did vote against that bill," Obama said Tuesday. "The reason was that there was already a law in place in Illinois that said that you always have to supply life-saving treatment to any infant under any circumstances, and this bill actually was designed to overturn Roe v. Wade, so I didn't think it was going to pass constitutional muster."

Comments

[LillianB]

So, if your pregnancy is making you mentally ill, you'll make a great mother. You'll be all right once the baby is out, and the baby will be all right too? Stop fussing, get real, let's all celebrate family values?

I repeat, and this time, I am not satirical: Get real. No law should create an artificial devide between mental or physical problems. They all concern a person's health. Mental health problems should be taken as seriously as physical problems. They can be as problematic. They, as physical problems, appear to different degrees.
The degree and not the character of the illness should be what's significant.

And no politician, no PERSON, has ever been against family values. We all value family. We all value life. No one wants MORE abortions to happen. We all want less of them. But women needing abortions, not getting them, ARE women at serious health risk. These women have illegal abortions. Or they kill themselves as well as their babies. And no one wants that. What we should be discussing is how to prevent abortions from being needed in the first place. And that includes not shying away from sex ed and talking contraception. In utter consequense, learning kids how not to get pregnant before they want to is protecting life too.

[rivrgrrl]

Well said.

[rzan]

I agree with you.

[mike53]

Late term abortion is murder. Its not about religion or when someone gets a soul. And to think I used to be pro choice. Having children of your own can make you think.

[juevosrancheros]

Yes, but thinking clearly can make you think better.

[KaAp]

I have children and I can think clearly ... and mike53 since you are a male (given your screen name) chances are you cannot "have" children (you can father children) ... since you cannot give birth eg: have children you cannot think clearly ... because if men could get pregnant (to wax axiomatic) abortion would not be an issue.
Late term abortion is a wedge issue ... it is rarely performed medically and it is never approached lightly

[GeorgeKaplan]

In fact it is not murder. Want you want is to make it murder. Just saying something does not make it true. This issue is between a woman and her doctor.... alone and without your permission anything less is akin to slavery. It is a medical issue and a very personal one... none of your business and none of Obama's. If we wanted this we could have voted for a Republican.

[WatchIt]

No one is pro-abortion, unless they are NUTS. Simply, the only way to reduce or make redundant abortion is to educate, raise with kindness and to support our kids in these troubled times. What pro-choice seeks to do is counter the forces of authoritarianism, paternalism, and intimidation by church forces. Wouldn't a better way be to remove the punishment for pregnancy and replace it with support, education and nourishment of the new family (however numbered it will be, eh?). I agree with Obama (and I am a liberal), that mental distress doesn't justify it. That mental distress can be neutralized with education, kindness and support. However, we MUST bring to every American family (and person) the challenge to stop having more babies and to financially reward those families who do not have more than 1. Oh yeah, here it comes, trollies, China One-Child hits. No, consider if EVERYONE had three kids. We would be upwards of 12 billion by 2050, and literally floating in sewage. That can't happen. Better to control ourselves.

[truthynesslover]

Good for Obama! I am pro choice but have always been queezy about late term abortions.­If their is a medical nessesity for the mother thats I can get my head around but waiting till the latest time to abort is just disgusting and selfish!

[kay]

I don't know how to break it to liberals, but the science and technology have changed since 1974.

Every NICU unit in the country has 5 and 6 and 7 month term babies. Fact. To argue that it hasn't is ludicrous. To argue that the law shouldn't change is also ludicrous.

But, keep doing it. It puts you square in the ideologue anti-science crowd, Left wing version.

[inthecolour]

I don't see why anyone would have a problem with this? Most people share his belief.

He's not extreme. He never claimed to be.

[pupbayer]

I have a problem if, as a governmental figure, he is pushing his personal belief on me. The decision is between a woman and her doctor. It's not the business of senators or presidents.

[girard1991]

Obama's Masterplan. Keep the Republican attack machine off balance and unable to paint him into the far-left corner. Refine, redefine, pivot, shift, change position, flip position; however, do not FLIP-FLOP. A flip-flop is negative because of our current understand of the work 'flop'. It sounds like a lose or that your fell flat. Obama, please run as fast as possible to the center-left position. You have your base locked-up and you will not look so bad to the center-right and right wing conservatives when as you move to the center. As far as the extreme far-right and those Fox News racists, the best you can hope is that they just stay home because they dislike McCain almost as much as they dislike you. Obama just got another donation from me last week. Let's shut the Republicans down.

[TexasT]

I don't understand why people can't see this. He's doing a great job framing the issues in ways that other people understand -- but perhaps drives progressives crazy.

He hasn't changed positions on anything except FISA, and since the Senate hasn't actually voted on it yet, I am reserving my opinion on this one.

These "flip-flop" smears have Karl Rove's hands all over them.

That it seems to be working is frightening.

[aristippe]

Misrepresenting worked for Bush

[Totto]

Merci, Girard!

[Agnim]

Americans need to raise the standard of eduction.
Americans need to raise the standard of eduction.

"Wedge issues" will rule a mind that has substandard education.

Abortion is not a victimless act.
Those who abort, WILL in time be aborted themselves.

A woman ALWAYS have the power of life and death over a fetus in her 'belly'; yet the vast majority of women choose life over death, and the population rises as a result?

Women who are healthy overall, don't even contemplate abortion; because healthy women were designed to Produce, Preserve, Protect and Promote LIFE!

A society that would be healthy cannot support the destruction of potential members.

So should a society adjust itself downward, so as to support the feelings of the unhealthy females, who are too mentally mixed up to see the huge downside of abortion?

Also, a doctor should be one committed to preserving and protecting LIFE; so how can a so-called 'doctor' be part of abortion?
Who trusts a so-called 'doctor' who does not respect life?

In the delivery cases where it's 'the life of the mother or of the baby', the state should allow such a decision to be taken by the family'.
Other than such cases, one can see how a society can support the killing of its members.

Abortion is not a victimless act. It is not a act without grave costs!; so those who are not FAMILY and are directly connected with a pregnant woman should butt out!

[pleeezzze]

Agnim.....­.There will Never come a day when YOU can push Your will onto me or anyone even close to me .
You are not only Not God you're not even close .

I will Never accept Your thinking and your Dictatorship against women and girls,until Men give up s e x , just as "they" have always assumed any woman who gets pregnant ,did so of her own free will .
Your way of thinking belongs in the 1700s. and has no place in todays world .

[juevosrancheros]

Agnim,
Did you just say 'eduction' twice? As something WE need?

[landmine]

Well, Obama is correct on this. I hope he also sounds off on "partial birth" abortions.

[kay]

The science has changed since 1974.

Oddly, liberals won't admit this, although there's clear evidence in every hospital in the country.

The 6 and 7 and 8 month gestation preemies are now run of the mill "babies". It's tough to keep calling them "fetuses" when we're they're now regularly surviving.

Things change. Law should keep up.

[hharmon]

Okay.... To all of you out there who think that because a woman happens to get pregnant, that she should be legally forced or morally obligated to share her bodily systems with the fetus for a grueling 9 months, and then risk her life giving birth consider this:
If congress passed a law requiring everyone to donate blood or body organs to keep people alive who would otherwise die, would you support that? The need for donors is always higher than the availability.
After all, are the lives of living breathing people less important than fetal lives? If you are the match for a much needed kidney or bone marrow transplant,, would you be guilty of murder not to comply, if the person in need died? How about a law like that? No matter what disruptions in your plans, hopes or dreams, or how you feel about the risks involved, drop everything and report to the hospital. You would not be in control of your own body.
Sort of puts a different light on it doesn't it? especially for you anti-choice men out there who think it should only women who are obligated to give up their bodily integrity, their hopes, plans and dreams to keep alive a fetus!.
If such an "altruism" law were ever passed...
You'd be screaming bloody murder all the way to your new home in Canada!

[WatchIt]

Are you a doctor? Are you sure that many (if any) "partial birth" abortions are truly done in place of birth control? Are you a social worker? Can you judge what you don't see? I think not, Fristicle. But seriously, what is needed is to document and better understand the constraints and drivers of "partial birth" abortions and to find a way to remove the need for them. That costs money, and that money will be spent on lower economic level folks, not just the rich. That OK with you? No, I don't endorse abortion at all, I would be NUTS to say that. However there are many ways (MANY WAYS) we can act to remove the needs and drivers of abortion so that it is rare or non-existent. I am of course against repealing Roe v. Wade. Utterly against repealing it. That would take us back to the Middle Ages.

[pupbayer]

There is no such thing as "partial birth" abortions. It is a made up term to make people disgusted by abortion. It is not a medical term. Ask your doctor.

[rzan]

Really? I believe you, if you say so. I hope it is just not a real medical procedure.

[rzan]

The procedure itselt is really horrifying, no matter what they call it. Often the baby kicks its legs and opens and closes its fingers as the doctor plunges scissors at the base of its neck and sucks out its brains. Between 2500 and 3000 such procedures are performed each year. Many of these babies are viable. And the mother is usually not in a state of ill health.

[Mattie]

Pupbayer, NPR agrees with you, I goggled the term after I read your post, I read the article by NPR because I thought it would be the least biased, and they said the same thing you did. It was a very informative article. I learned a lot of things I didn't know. Thanks for the info

[GeorgeKaplan]

You and Obama can leave the bodies of women alone. The state should stay out of this issue. They have no role.

[rzan1]

If a baby in the womb is able to live independently outside of the mother, then the choice is no longer there. The child's rights also matter. I cannot imagine any woman being so cruel as to tear a fully formed baby out of her body and allow it to die. Late term abortions should be illegal. Also, any physician who condones such a practice should lose his/her license. I know this is a radical point of view for the Huffington post. If the baby is unwanted, then put it up for adoption.

[Pammy1151]

I consider myself pro choice but I totally agree with your point. I have no problem with saying NO to late term abortions except under extreme circumstances.

[KaAp]

Late term abortions are NEVER done flippantly ... they are extremely rare and the reasons are to use your term "extreme."

[GeorgeKaplan]

It is an issue of privacy. It is an issue between a woman and her doctor. Not the role of the state or Obama or any other person.

[rzan1]

When a child's life is at stake, it is everybody's business. Sorry, I don't agree with you regarding late term abortions.

[juevosrancheros]

Could you elaborate on 'independently' there for me? You mean, able to forage for food and shelter on its own?

[rzan]

You well know what I mean. Don't be ridiculous.

[Mattie]

You are misrepresenting the health of the baby.! You need to do some research on why these abortions are being done. You just can't walk in and demand an abortion at eight months if you and your baby are completely healthy. That is just not true,

[rzan1]

Then why is there so much commentary on the subject on this site? I hope you are correct in what you are saying. If the law protects the rights of a viable baby, then that is a relief to me.

[SaulGoode]

Wha-? Obama changed his position for political expediency sake? That's so unlike him...unle­ss you take into account his positions on Iraq, campaign finance, guns, FISA, etc

WOW

[InformedVoter08]

Check out Dailykos: Obama, the flip-flopper? Give me a break.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/5/13146/00395/160/546980

[kay]

It's also Russ Feingold's position. Yup. Obama's position on late term abortion tracks that wild-eyed conservative, Russ Feingold.

Like faith based initiatives were begun under Bill Clinton, in 1996. And Gore proposed an expansion in 1999.

I'm starting to wonder how long you people have been following politics.

You're being duped. When the Left starts to sound like Karl Rove, I would think they would step back and read something. Apparently, that's asking too much.

[TheAdviceWeAllNeed]

How many pro choice people do you actually think supports late term.

I know you have boarded this blog to spread hateful propaganda but lets try thoughful when it comes to this type of jubject.

[pupbayer]

Pro choice mean people are for the woman (and in many cases, her doctor) making the choice...n­ot the government. I don't know that you can be pro-choice by degrees. You either believe it is not the government's business or you don't.

[GeorgeKaplan]

Oops, there goes another one!

[SarcastroBO]

Obama on abortion, July 2008: "I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don't think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.­"

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life_art icle.php?i­d=7591

Obama on abortion, April 2008: "On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that."

http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Barack _Obama_Abo­rtion.htm

[WatchIt]

Thanks for putting it in context. {Applause}

[Soundofthunder]

From an article:

http://www.ktka.com/news/2008/apr/07/many_women_cross_state_line_abortion_especially_la/

"In 2007, as in years past, abortions performed past 22 weeks of pregnancy made up a small percentage of Kansas’ overall total, less than 4 percent. Yet more than 90 percent of the women getting late-term abortions were from outside Kansas."

This reveals two things: First, late term abortions, at least in Kansas, are rare. Second, women who don't have access to abortion services will seek them elsewhere.

So unless Obama is proposing an Constitutional ban on late term abortions for mental reasons, he needs to drop the issue. Women will travel to another state for a procedure outlawed or with limited availability in their home state. And if such an Amendment did pass, I imagine the suicide rate and "accidental" death rate among late term mothers who change their mind will rise. Desperate people are susceptible to trying desperate things.

SOT

[WatchIt]

Well, this issue is so polar. Do we need amendments for this? No. Do we need wisdom, kindness, and tolerance? yes. Do we NOT need close-mindedness, harshness, and intolerance, AMEN!

[Pammy1151]

Oh my, I thought I was a true liberal until I started reading these blogs on here these days. Do any of you understand that being healthy minded is to be in the middle. Not to far right or far wrong but in the middle. Nothing is ever black or white most often it is gray. That is Obama and the way he thinks and acts. That is what I want in a president. A person that takes a look at an issue and makes a decision on where that middle ground is. For the most part that is usually the best answer. You are blaming him for fooling you but he didn't fool you. You fooled yourself. If you would have paid close attention he very much showed his ability to think through issues. That if you like it or not is how it should be!!!!

[HumeSkeptic]

Do any of you understand that being healthy minded is to be in the middle
----------
Prove it.

Right now I (on the Left) say that it is 2:49 PM on the East Coast. A person (on the Right) says that it is 2:49 AM.

According to you, it would be "healthy minded" to say that it is 8:49 PM? That's right in the middle.

No. You must make decisions based on facts and rational bases. The rational basis for deciding the conditions under which a particular medical procedure is justified is not public opinion or politician's opinion.

.

[Pammy1151]

I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. You are exactly right about making decisions. However, each person sees things different at different times about different issues. It takes a smart person to take all of that in and make a decision based all the information available. Yes some things are concrete. Most things are not!!!

[kay]

The Left are being duped. They stuck with this candidate.­..how long? Two weeks?

Now they've adopted the Right wing flip flop meme. All of a sudden, incredibly, telecom immunity is the Number One Issue in the country.

There's no cure for stupid. Don't try. Obama might have a shot if he didn't have three opponents: the far Right, the Left and the media.

[gobarackgo]

Thanks Pammy1151. I couldn't agree more!!!

Stop the drama. Vote Obama!