North Carolina Abortion Law Partially Blocked By Judge

RALEIGH, N.C. — A federal judge blocked part of North Carolina's new abortion law Tuesday, ruling providers do not have to place an ultrasound image next to a pregnant woman so she can view it, nor do they have to describe its features and offer her the chance to listen to the heartbeat.

The law was set to take effect Wednesday, but U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles' decision puts a key section of it on hold until she can hear more arguments.

North Carolina legislators and officials have argued that by offering the image to a woman seeking an abortion and other information they would promote childbirth and protect patients from emotional distress associated with the procedure and possible coercion. The judge said she received no evidence supporting those arguments.

North Carolina officials "have not articulated how the speech-and-display requirements address the stated concern in reducing compelled abortions, and none is immediately apparent," the judge wrote in a preliminary injunction.

Attorneys for abortion providers and abortion-rights groups argued the ultrasound directives, carried out at least four hours before the scheduled procedure, actually would subject women to emotional pain and violate the medical ethics of doctors who feel the government is forcing them to carry out the Republican-controlled Legislature's ideology.

"If the ultrasound requirements were put into effect, this law would place doctors in a murky legal situation and inflict unnecessary harm on women," said Katy Parker, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation "The state should not be using women's bodies as political pawns, as this law clearly seeks to do."

The judge, nominated by President Obama last year, allowed other parts of the law to be enforced, including a 24-hour waiting period to make information about abortion risks and alternatives available. The abortion providers who sued didn't specifically challenge the waiting period.

"The bulk of the bill was upheld," said House Majority Leader Paul Stam, R-Wake, a key proponent of the law.

Stam said the 24-hour waiting period would put North Carolina on par with more than 20 other states that have similar waiting times. Based on Mississippi's abortion law, Stam predicted that 10 percent of women who prepare to have an abortion in North Carolina will change their mind.

Noelle Talley, a spokeswoman for the state attorney general's office, said late Tuesday its attorneys were reviewing the ruling.

State medical rules already required abortion providers to perform ultrasounds before an abortion to determine the gestational age of the fetus.

The abortion bill became law in July when the Legislature overturned a veto by Democratic Gov. Beverly Perdue, who said the bill was extreme and encroached upon the doctor-patient relationship.

The judge planned another hearing in December.

A federal judge in August blocked a Texas law that would require women seeking an abortion to view a sonogram and make the heartbeat audible.

Comments

[piperflyer]

06:24 PM on 11/21/2011

Poe said it best in his story in his story THE TELL TALE HEART. If the mother hears the baby's heart beat, her own heart melts, and the liberals faint from the strength of their own. But this dichotomy does explain one thing---the birth of the moniker, "bleeding heart liberal."

[carolina919]

07:33 PM on 10/31/2011

reducing compelled abortions...

Another fabrication to justify the indefensible. Just like photo ID and voter suppression to combat non-existent "voter fraud" and a constitutional amendment or DOMA to "strengthen" heterosexuals marriages....

[banana republican]

05:04 PM on 10/30/2011

We need to accept that abortion is sometimes appropriate and necessary. By the same token, we need to accept that a woman coming in for a second abortion needs to be sterilized to protect her from the hazards associated with her own inability to responsibly control her reproductive capacity.

[WSAY]

06:36 PM on 10/30/2011

What an idiot.

[slimjim87]

01:30 PM on 10/30/2011

Actually, even as a person who is Conservative, abortions really don't bother me. We have seven billion people in the world, I believe, if not, close to it. Only thing I do not want is the government taxing us, so women can get them. If they want to get an abortion it should be on their own dime.

[WSAY]

06:37 PM on 10/30/2011

And what if they can't afford one? You figure then a child should be born?

[carolina919]

07:35 PM on 10/31/2011

These are the same folks, however, who think viagra and penile implants are absolutely necessary for men's health....go figure.

[averagezoe]

02:30 PM on 10/26/2011

Seeing an ultrasound image causes emotional distress? To whom? When I had an abortion, they could have papered the walls with images and piped in the heartbeat through headphones, it would not have had any bearing on my decision. You know when an abortion is the right thing to do under the circumstances and any of these lame efforts are an exercise in futility. And I also disagree with abortion being a painful decision to make. Every woman I know who has had one or more, myself included, never gave it a second thought. It was a necessary medical procedure - nothing more, nothing less.

[synergie]

01:19 AM on 10/27/2011

To quite a few people. Just because your circumstance didn't cause you any distress and you and your friends didn't have any pain making the decision, don't assume that everyone else has the same experience.

How about if you're a 12 year old who has been gang raped and finds herself pregnant, somehow I doubt you'd have been so blasé about it. Perhaps you would have, whatever. The point is that you should be forced to have an necessary medical procedure against your will and on your dime, and you shouldn't be forced to listen or watch something also against your will. It's unnecessary, it's intrusive and it doesn't result in any change whatsoever.

For many women it is a painful decision to make, again, perhaps not for you, but for quite a lot of women. You're not representative of every woman who makes that decision, for every one who thought nothing of it, there is one who still thinks about it.

[CoastalNC]

10:12 AM on 10/27/2011

Mine caused me distress and it was a painful decision but no matter what they could have done it would not have changed my mind...it would have only added to my emotional overload that I was already enduring.

I don't regret my decision, I regret finding myself in the position of having to make that decision.

As a sign on the wall said..."Lord please save us from the Christian zealots." I hate that my state has been shanghied by the Christian zealots at this time.

[PinkyToe]

02:50 AM on 10/28/2011

Wise words indeed. Once the girl or woman is at the clinic, the decision has already been made.

It's sadly naive to think ultrasounds, waiting periods and unconstitutional legislation requiring religious "counseling" lies that abortion causes breast cancer, sterility and lifelong horror will change over a million minds every year.

It's not called pregnancy "scare" for nothing. I have not regretted my decision in the 30 years since. I was in fact relieved I could make a choice as a young, uninsured, working but broke woman who found herself suddenly without a partner at the sight of a positive pregnancy test.

That decision allowed me to educate myself, plan for a more secure future, gave me hope instead of horror, let me choose the right time to have children, and prevented further descent into poverty from which I may never have recovered.

[relentless63]

12:23 PM on 10/26/2011

It’s devastating to me that we have politicians influencing women’s rights who don’t understand the complexity and weight of a woman’s decision to suffer an abortion. Make no mistake, abortions are devastating, no matter how necessary. That anyone would demand that a woman watch images or listen to heartbeats before her procedure is cruel, unusual and senseless. We don’t kick dogs. Why do we kick women?

[beeholy]

09:25 PM on 10/26/2011

@ relentless63...read averagezoe comment above you.. she or others she knew who had an abortion never gave it a second thought? Cause them emotional stress? Nahhhh not at all. What I find cruel, heartless and senseless is the slaughter of innocent human beings! Yes, in this world people do kick dogs,women and kill babies and none of it is ok and all of it we will be held accountable for.

[cwebster]

10:23 PM on 10/26/2011

It would depend on WHY the woman had to get an abortion. For some it is a relief, for some it is heartbreaking.
Fact remains...it is not the business of anyone other than the pregnant woman.

[synergie]

01:23 AM on 10/27/2011

That was her personal experience. There are also people who bomb orphanages and think nothing of it. You call these people heroes and finance their future missions, advance their rank and throw them parades.

Abortion isn't about dogs and it's not about babies. Those who do actually slaughter innocent human beings and those who vote for policies and politicians who encourage such behavior and whose party is run by those who manufacture the machines of slaughter will indeed be held accountable.

[jimimosey]

10:20 AM on 10/26/2011

What is the financial cost to the state? There appear to be plenty of funding to administer this intrusive law and to pay attorneys but nothing to pay teachers and first responders. More double speak and hipocrisy from the right wing theocratic party.

[synergie]

01:24 AM on 10/27/2011

Someone should really calculate the numbers on what these types of wasteful "laws" are actually costing the nation.

[mskitty71]

09:19 AM on 10/26/2011

I never understand the 24 hour waiting period. It takes a woman a few weeks to even realize that she is pregnant. By the time she walks into a clinic, she has had months to decide and get the money for the procedure. What is the waiting period for? These politicians just can't stand the thought of women enjoying sex and controlling their own bodies. They still want to punish. Aren't the men who put their sperm to be aborted "killers" too?
Why don't they start a campaign aimed at men to prevent unwanted pregnancies? They should be encouraging men to find non-hoes to marry and settle down with. That's the Godly thing to do, right?

[pbr56]

09:56 AM on 10/26/2011

To make it harder to get an abortion. Just like all the other laws republican legislatures have been passing.

[cwebster]

11:57 AM on 10/26/2011

The main reason for most abortions is financial. Many women obtaining abortions are married, and their husbands are supportive. if you can't afford to feed another child, abortion is the only choice left when you have an accident.

[slimjim87]

01:23 PM on 10/30/2011

Well there are orphanages, too.

[Sunstreaked]

08:48 AM on 10/26/2011

You are aware that the House recently voted to let women die, yes? H.R. 538 would let a medical provider "opt out" if their "conscience" didn't let them perform a medically-necessary abortion on a woman at a hospital that received federal funds.

They were also not obligated to refer her to another hospital - which is moot as in many areas there is only one, which may or may not receive taxpayer funding.

What this means is that while your dear wife, or daughter, or sister, or mother is lying there, bleeding out from placenta previa or some other misfortune, she may be next to someone who just killed 5 in a drive-by shooting. The doctors will be hard at work saving that person.

I urge you to verify this for yourself. I am not exaggerating. http://digitaljournal.com/article/313036

Reproductive decisions are between a woman, her partner, and her physician.

This "social experiment" was tried in Romania, under Nicolae Ceaușescu, and I urge you also to look at Romania's Lost Generation http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=124078&page=1

I have never met a single woman who, when she found out she was pregnant, she yelled, "Yippee! I get to have an abortion!" Apparently those predominantly men legislators think we are ourselves children who must be educated about a basic fact of life.

[mskitty71]

09:22 AM on 10/26/2011

I feels it's okay for hospitals to have these policies. BUT they should have to register and publicly announce their policies. That way, women can choose which hospitals, doctors to patronize. Once hospitals start losing millions I bet they would change their tunes, or only employ more open-minded doctors.

[pbr56]

09:58 AM on 10/26/2011

Medical needs of patients far outweigh some religious objection that some of the staff may have.

[cwebster]

11:58 AM on 10/26/2011

What if it is the only hospital within driving distance before the woman bleeds out?

[zippy335]

08:09 AM on 10/26/2011

Whenever a right is strengthened, all of our rights are strengthened.

But whenever liberty is limited, everyone's liberty is diminished.

This is a victory for Americans' Rights against the Republicans trying to undermine the Constitution.

Don't let the Republicans lead you to believe they are against "Big Government" or oppressive regulations. Republicans ARE Big Government and create onerous regulations - just not on the richest 1%.

[FiftyGigs]

07:51 AM on 10/26/2011

"... protect patients from emotional distress ..."

In other words, for your own good.

Government *IS* the solution. Conservatives say so.

[susandiane]

08:47 AM on 10/26/2011

Don't forget the "coersion" because Heaven knows, we have millions of women being force marched at gunpoint into abortion clinics daily!

[carolina919]

07:43 PM on 10/31/2011

I'll believe in "conservative compassion" when I see fully operational and well supported orphanages attached to every single so called "Crisis Pregnancy Center" where the self righteous propaganda is often delivered in cruel and deliberately hurtful and psychologically damaging ways.....

[AndyPhx]

07:48 AM on 10/26/2011

How many of you so-called pro-lifers are also against in vitro-fertilization?

How many of you supported Ws war in Iraq?

How many of you support the the death penalty? Knowing innocent people have been put to death and are currently on death row waiting for their turn to be murdered by the state for crimes they did not commit?

Why are there hundreds of thousands of children in this country who will never be adopted in to a loving home in a country many of you claim to be a Christian nation?

Why do 2 million children go to bed hungry in your Christian nation?

To bad you don't put the same energy into helping the children who are already born as you do for the ones who lack the ability to survive out side of the womb..
Why do you care so much about what happens when they are in the womb and then forget about them once they're born?

[pbr56]

10:00 AM on 10/26/2011

you won't get any responses from the right. The reality, is they don't care about people. This is just an issue created out of thin air to divide people.

[AndyPhx]

05:25 PM on 10/26/2011

I didn't think I would either. But I did. How do you think they responded? By changing the subject.

Both told me what a horrible person I was for saying our so_ldiers mu_dered children in I_raq. Which of course I didn't. But they love to do that anytime you criticize W. Their response is always to deflect responsibility away from him by accusing you of ha_ting the tr_oops.

I never fall for it and directed them to anwer the question. Which they will never do.

[carolina919]

07:48 PM on 10/31/2011

I just posted earlier that I'd believe in "compassionate conservatism" when I see a fully operational, and well funded orphanage tied to every single one of the self-righteous and often cruelly operated "Crisis Pregnancy Centers"....You want to see where some "mean girls" wind up? Go in for a "consultation" in one of these centers.....the psychological abuse practiced there can be incredibly (and deliberately) hurtful. Talk about mind games and psychological "torture"...those who staffed Abu Grahib have counterparts at many of these centers...

[AndyPhx]

07:08 AM on 10/26/2011

The phonies feigning outrage about abortion mostly supported W bo_mbing the h_ell out of I_raq where 10s of thousands of innocent children were mu_rdered.

Most of them also support and vote for candidates who keep capital punishment legal even though every single one of them is aware that innocent people are put to d_eath. Mostly poor people who didn't have the option of hiring a good lawyer.

Their selective morality isn't morality at all. It's amorality.

[intellifran]

09:00 AM on 10/26/2011

Um, tens of thousdands of innocent children were not murdered. You have no idea what you're talking about. Frankly I'm sick of people who have never served or never been to Iraq making up lies about what happened. Soldiers I served with SAVED children while insurgents tagreted them for their own gain. If you want to call the war illegitimate fine, but don't question the morality and integirty of the entire US military. Apparently morality is subjective to you as well.

[AndyPhx]

03:17 PM on 10/26/2011

You know what is si_ckening about people like you?

Your di_shonestly!

I put 100% of the blame on W. I never mentioned or blamed any soldier serving or served in I_raq. NEVER!

Why don't you comment on the premise of my post? Because then you would have to take a look at yourself and you don't want to do that. So you do what any co_ward in your positions does: YOU CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

SO I'LL BE WAITING FOR A RESPONSE TO MY QUESTIONS WHICH YOU WILL NEVER ANSWER.

[carolina919]

07:51 PM on 10/31/2011

What "nerve" . re read the post. AndyPhx isn't blaming American soldiers....as a matter of fact, I suspect he includes their casualties as being among the indefensible losses in that unneccessary war.....

[taoistpunk]

09:43 AM on 10/26/2011

killed.

the innocent children were killed.

the word murder implies an illegal act.

unless your argument is that abortion is murder, you're going to have to admit that there are, like it or not, some legal avenues for killing human beings.

[AndyPhx]

03:28 PM on 10/26/2011

Why don't you answer the questions? Instead of changing the subject?

Answer?

Because you are too co_wardly to look deep within your heart where you know my statement is true. You would have to finally admit that W l_ied to you. You know in your heart of hearts that no man who made so many professions about his faith, who said Je_sus changed his heart, who claimed to follow the Prince of Peace, would perpetrate such horrendous at_trocities on millions of people. That no man who says he loves and follows the Lamb of God would have so blatantly l_ied to those who trusted and believed in him.

Let me tell you: it happend.

THAT IS WHAT MAKES IT AN ILLEGAL ACT: When you deceive people to get them to go along with you and innocent children d_ie as a result of your l_ies.

Maybe not in the eyes of the law. But in the eyes of G_OD it does.

Good day.

[Franklin1776]

07:08 AM on 10/26/2011

Just a fact, you're posting sp@m.

[Stan Cunningham]

09:04 AM on 10/26/2011

Not at all! I just know the difference between life and death!

[imokit]

07:35 AM on 10/26/2011

Just a fact refusing to abort an ectopic pregnancy is double murder (not only does the fetus not live, the mother is dies from a preventable occurance)!!!!

[Stan Cunningham]

09:09 AM on 10/26/2011

I know that. I worked in surgery for 20 years. a ectopic pregnancy is not viable and is all ways an emergency, But like me you know that and have assisted on many of these procedures.

[intellifran]

09:02 AM on 10/26/2011

Yes it is cruel. It is cruel to force a woman who is already making a traumatic choice to undergo further hardship and distress. Furthermore, it is cruel to impose your religious beliefs on others.

[pbr56]

10:03 AM on 10/26/2011

If it is not medically necessary, then it is part of the problem we have in our health care. Why is the government trying to make health care even more expensive.