iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Ohio Fetal Heartbeat Bill: State Senators Hear Testimony For Controversial Abortion Measure

Ohio Fetal Heartbeat Bill Abortion

ANN SANNER   12/ 7/11 07:12 PM ET   AP

COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio lawmaker on Wednesday touted the importance of the fetal heartbeat as an indicator of life as he urged a legislative panel to support a bill that would impose the nation's most stringent abortion limit.

The measure would outlaw abortions at the first detectable fetal heartbeat. That's sometimes as early as six weeks into pregnancy.

State Rep. Lynn Wachtmann, the bill's sponsor, told the Ohio Senate's health committee that doctors and nurses closely monitor patients' heartbeats and emergency responders check for pulses.

"Why, then, should we ignore this critical indicator of life when it comes to the very young?" asked Wachtmann, R-Napoleon, at the start of the more than four-hour hearing.

Opponent testimony on the measure has yet to be scheduled.

The bill drew criticism from one Democrat on the panel. State Sen. Shirley Smith of Cleveland called it "another attack on individual rights," contending the Republican-controlled Legislature has already tried to curb collective bargaining rights. The union law was recently rejected by voters.

If it's enacted into law, supporters of the so-called heartbeat bill hope to provoke a legal challenge and overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion in the United States. The ruling upheld a woman's right to an abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb, usually at 22 to 24 weeks.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio has said it would fight the heartbeat bill in court if it becomes law.

Questions about whether the bill could withstand a challenge before the U.S. Supreme Court have divided those in the state's anti-abortion community, who have had tactical disagreements over how best to quickly limit abortions.

Ohio Right to Life has remained neutral on the bill out of concern the legislation goes too far and that the high court's current justices would strike it down.

"The argument `we need to give the court the opportunity to change their minds' will likely backfire," said Stephanie Krider, the legislative affairs director for Ohio Right to Life.

Wachtmann told the panel bill has a chance. "If I felt confident that the courts would strike this down, I would not have carried this forward," he said.

Jack Willke, who founded Ohio Right to Life and the International Right to Life Federation, also told the committee members he believed the bill had a shot at overturning Roe v. Wade.

"This has scared the wits out of pro-abortion organizers," he said. "There is something almost magical about a heartbeat."

Willke has split from Ohio Right to Life to join Ohio ProLife Action, a new anti-abortion group that's pushing the heartbeat bill. The group has been urging state lawmakers to pass the proposal in a campaign-like effort that's included radio and television ads and a banner flown over the Statehouse in Columbus.

Ohio Right to Life is spearheading a coordinated effort among anti-abortion groups and their allies that's also linked to the fetal heartbeat. It's advocating bills in all 50 states that would require women to see and hear the fetal heartbeat before agreeing to an abortion, but would not ban the procedure.

Groups around the state have been dropping their affiliation with Ohio Right to Life, citing the organization's reluctance to back the heartbeat measure that would outlaw abortions. The largest chapter in Cincinnati, where the state movement was founded, has peeled away from the organization.

The GOP-led Ohio House passed the measure with a 54-44 vote in June. It's been stalled in the Senate since then. Wednesday was its first hearing before senators.

The heartbeat measure includes an exception for medical emergencies, but not in cases of rape or incest.

State Sen. Peggy Lehner, R-Kettering, said that while she is against abortions, she had concerns about having abortion providers determine whether a heartbeat can be heard.

Lehner said such questions over how the law would be applied "goes to the heart" of why the bill has received a less-than-enthusiastic response in the Senate.

The Senate hearing was more conventional in tone than those in the Ohio House, though just as crowded. At one House hearing, ultrasounds were performed on two women who were early in their pregnancies, so legislators could see and hear the fetal hearts.

One of the babies, whose heartbeat was heard in the House hearing, was carried into the room for senators to see.

"The House heard her heart," said Ducia Hamm, executive director of the Ashland Care Center, who oversaw the ultrasound in the House. "You get a chance to see her face and look into her eyes."

Bill Graber of Fairborn, Ohio, told the committee that he didn't want to see the state's money tied up in costly court battles defending the bill. He said lawmakers should instead focus on bringing down the state's 9 percent unemployment rate.

"I'm just here because I've had enough," Graber, a part-time construction worker, told reporters after the hearing. "If I was working full-time, I wouldn't be over here trying to torpedo their bill."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio lawmaker on Wednesday touted the importance of the fetal heartbeat as an indicator of life as he urged a legislative panel to support a bill that would impose the nation...
COLUMBUS, Ohio — An Ohio lawmaker on Wednesday touted the importance of the fetal heartbeat as an indicator of life as he urged a legislative panel to support a bill that would impose the nation...
Filed by Luke Johnson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 476
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
09:19 AM on 12/08/2011
Just a ole country boy here,but I think the question is,is this bill right?I don"t know how anyone can say that a moving fetis, taking nurishment, with hands an feet is not alive. God help us to stop the killing .
07:03 PM on 12/08/2011
You get that what people are actually saying is that neither an embryo or a fetus is a PERSON, right? That when you claim that this foreign entity that acts like an organ in the woman's body (in that it depends entirely on her circulation to exist) and that can and often does in this country KILL her, is somehow of greater importance and more of a person than the woman carrying it, you're saying something rather vile.

If you'd like to stop the killing, then start supporting politicians who support health care for these women, so that these "moving fetis" inside her actually has a chance at life, and that she can both afford to carry a pregnancy and do so in a healthy manner. Supporting boneheaded laws like this just wastes time, money and frankly won't do a darned thing to decrease the "killing' in fact it does quite the opposite. If life matters to you, you don't support this.

Also, this time and money wasting is done at the expense of jobs. Any backwater that enacts laws that are this idiotic in nature will ensure that no one moves to the blighted state of Ohio. What kind of employer would wish to subject their employees to foolish and ridiculous laws like these?
08:37 PM on 01/27/2012
[You get that what people are actually saying is that neither an embryo or a fetus is a PERSON, right? ]

Yes, but there's no logical reason to believe that. It's wishful thinking on the part of those who want to avoid the consequences of their own actions. It's human and has it's own DNA.
photo
mac2jr
The truth always wins out
12:53 AM on 12/08/2011
There is an easy solution to this debate.

Let us have a national vote on the issue, with each person providing their name and address on the ballot.

Then make it illegal for a woman to have an abortion, therefore she must have the child, which will be given to those that voted for NOT HAVING ABORTIONS.
bgeditor11
Answering that question is above my pay grade
11:38 PM on 12/07/2011
The main question of the abortion debate is, "When does life begin?" People have different ideas of when life begins, on a continuum from conception to birth. I happen to believe that life begins at conception­, meaning that I cannot advocate for abortion as an acceptable practice. At the same time, I think that as long as a woman (or teenager) is given medically accurate informatio­n about the choice she is making, (instead of just being told "it's not really a baby" or "make out the check to abortion clinic X") she should be able to make her own choice.
07:10 PM on 12/08/2011
The question actually is when is this mass of cells a person, and when does it acquire greater importance than the person it exists in. The problem here is that one side is arguing about life, all cells are alive, no one disputes this. All cells are not people, all masses of cells are not people. People come into being when they're born and when their lungs can work. Since the respiratory system is the last one to develop, it's what determines if that cell mass is capable of carrying on the basic processes of life or not. So all this nonsense about heart beats, and teeny tiny little babies swimming out of men and into women is just a lot of bunk most of which either has never been supported by science, or was refuted centuries ago.

A patient is NEVER told the things you're suggesting, unless she finds herself in a "crisis pregnancy center" which is a propaganda organization masquerading as a clinic and preying on women at a vulnerable time. If a real clinic were to behave in the manner that the fraudulent ones were, or as the propaganda claims they do, they'd lose their license. It's really just that simple. A woman makes her own choice, but she makes an informed one when she's given the actual facts on both sides, rather than simply being shown abortion porn and told a bucket full of lies.
bgeditor11
Answering that question is above my pay grade
07:20 PM on 12/10/2011
So just because a fetus relies on the mother for lung support you do not consider him or her (or "it" by your reasoning) human? Plus, if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying that the lungs develop at the moment of birth, which is unlikely to happen in most cases.

Plus, a patient is told that the fetus is not a baby (in line with your arguement) and is asked to pay for the operation, which is how the abortion doctor makes his or her money.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
independentvoter007
God bless America
11:11 PM on 12/07/2011
There is a problem when abortion is used as a tool to limit certain parts of the population. Abortion is the leading cause of death in the African American community.
photo
mac2jr
The truth always wins out
12:38 AM on 12/08/2011
Having babies or being pregnant at age 11 to 18 is the leading cause of death for white and black women.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
independentvoter007
God bless America
01:37 AM on 12/08/2011
Interesting attempt at a response. The thing is, though, my statement is factually correct. Look it up.
07:24 PM on 12/08/2011
Actually, that's heart disease, followed by cancer, stroke, unintentional injuries, and diabetes.

There is a problem when absolute and total lies are used as tool to limit the rights of some parts of the population, namely women.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
independentvoter007
God bless America
08:02 PM on 12/08/2011
Actually, according to the CDC, abortion kills more African Americans than all those combined. Look it up.

http://cnsnews.com/node/55956
10:44 PM on 12/07/2011
The greatest fear of Conservative Republicans is letting people think and decide for themselves!
12:34 AM on 12/08/2011
Lead me through the thinking that allows you to decide to take your baby's life.
01:22 AM on 12/08/2011
It's called freedom of choice! It is also none of your business! Terminating a pregnancy is the most personal and intimate decision that a woman can make but Make it, she can without the "Womb Police" telling what she should or should not do!
05:58 AM on 12/08/2011
A bit assuming, aren't you?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gloriaswanson43
Ask and you will get more info.
09:20 PM on 12/07/2011
The woman's heartbeat started first. She wins.
photo
goatini
We are two-legged wombs, that’s all
09:03 PM on 12/07/2011
Let an obstetrician who used to practice in a Catholic hospital tell you how this legislation works in real life to KILL living, breathing women:

"I’m on call when she gets septic, and she’s septic to the point that I’m pushing pressors on labor and delivery trying to keep her blood pressure up, and I have her on a cooling blanket because she’s 106 degrees. And I needed to get everything out. And so I put the ultrasound machine on and there was still a heartbeat, and [the ethics committee] wouldn’t let me because there was still a heartbeat. This woman is dying before our eyes. I went in to examine her, and I was able to find the umbilical cord through the membranes and just snapped the umbilical cord and so that I could put the ultrasound—‘‘Oh look. No heartbeat. Let’s go.’’ She was so sick she was in the [ICU] for about 10 days and very nearly died. . . . She was in DIC [disseminated intravascular coagulopathy]. . . . Her bleeding was so bad that the sclera, the white of her eyes, were red, filled with blood. . . . And I said, ‘‘I just can’t do this. I can’t put myself behind this. This is not worth it to me.’’ That’s why I left."

http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/68/documents/When%20There's%20a%20Heartbeat%20article.pdf
08:30 PM on 12/07/2011
What I wish is that the people who push for these bills would actually read the Roe decision. Potter Stewart's question notwithstanding, Roe never hinged on whether or not the pre-viable fetus was alive or not, was a person or not, or any other such issue.

Roe was, in fact, the very model of what conservative always say they want: a law-based decision. What Roe said, in a nutshell, was that as a matter of law, the Court didn't know what the abortion of a pre-viable fetus was -- that made it a matter of opinion and in America people get to make up their own minds about matters of opinion.

Reversing Roe won't make the Court say that abortion is murder, because Roe never said it wasn't murder. If they did, somehow, reverse Roe, they couldn't say that the legal precedents have changed, because they haven't. That leaves their only option for reversal to say that on matters of opinion, in America the state gets to make up your mind for you. (I guess the neocons would LOVE that!)

Finally, if you read Justice Rehnquist's dissent where he says Roe was wrongly decided, he means that it was wrong that they came to a decision, not that they came to the wrong decision; in his opinion Roe didn't have standing for the suit.
10:10 PM on 12/07/2011
I apologize. In the first paragraph I should have said "Justice Stewart".
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pjohns
Let nature be a teacher
08:21 PM on 12/07/2011
Why is there no talk of vasectomies? It's one more option. No sperm, no pregnancy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gloriaswanson43
Ask and you will get more info.
09:22 PM on 12/07/2011
I would still like to know why a whole bunch of men are having sex with women they don't want to have children with. Why take the chance that the birth control will fail?
07:35 PM on 12/08/2011
They face no consequences. If they were at the other end of that placenta and were dealing with all the physiological consequences, they'd all be singing another tune.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:17 PM on 12/12/2011
How old are you?? 12??? SEX that's why. They can't keep it in thier pants.....and girls no longer stop them, take a break, give them a chance to cool down....oh yeah I'm 100 years old LOL but it worked!
photo
mac2jr
The truth always wins out
12:41 AM on 12/08/2011
My God, cut a man's strength from him.. How can you even think about doing something like that?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pjohns
Let nature be a teacher
12:37 PM on 12/08/2011
Strength? As in his ability to procreate when all he wants is a sexual encounter and no responsibility?
07:54 PM on 12/07/2011
The quote at the end of the article by Gary Dougherty sums it up - "Women are watching them waste time and money to make a bad situation worse for Ohio women and families." This really is not an issue to be decided by the government. I'm a Christian, too, but I believe if you deny a woman's right to choose you are creating a much uglier situation. It sends us back to the days of back alley and DIY abortions.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:22 PM on 12/07/2011
Bill Garber maybe the only person at the committee who has any common sense.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
henrypapillon
Put a Psychiatrist in every NRA meeting.
07:00 PM on 12/07/2011
Ok, if women should have to get the state's Ok before they have an abortion, men should have to get the state's Ok before buying guns or selling or buying land .
photo
alterego55
Flash your citations or leave!
07:42 PM on 12/07/2011
If men could get pregnant, the politics around this issue would be unrecognizable.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
the964kid
Friends don't let friends vote GOP
07:00 PM on 12/07/2011
State Rep. Lynn Wachtmann's pic is so creepy, anybody with common sense knows he's on the wrong side of any issue he's talking about.
06:58 PM on 12/07/2011
I have struggled with this issue for years. Being a man I cannot pass judgement on a woman or a woman's body. I have finally come to the conclusion that it is the woman's choice and if the there is a God in Heaven (and a Satan in Hell), women who had abortions will eventually face their maker without the help of Democrats and the ACLU and explain to God why she took a life.
photo
alterego55
Flash your citations or leave!
07:42 PM on 12/07/2011
I don't think the Christian God who killed off Sodom and Gomorrah, wiped out all of humanity except Noah and family, and who calls for world massacre will have a problem.
09:19 PM on 12/07/2011
It was not a Christian God who did all of the things mentioned. These events happened in the old testament.
08:01 PM on 12/07/2011
It took TWO to create that life. It looks to me that it's a shared responsibility to nurture it to adulthood. OR offer it up for adoption. AND BTW, you should be more concerned about where you'll be spending eternity rather than wait until it's too late. "It's once for man to die, then then judgement.." { Bible } One is as sure as the other.
08:27 PM on 12/07/2011
Thank you for the Bible thiumping, as Jesus once said, "Stick it where the sun don't shine." Oh, and don't knock on my door on Sunday mornings either. Thank you and have a great day.
bgeditor11
Answering that question is above my pay grade
06:24 PM on 12/07/2011
The main question of the abortion debate is, "When does life begin?" People have different ideas of when life begins, on a continuum from conception to birth. I happen to believe that life begins at conception, meaning that I cannot advocate for abortion as an acceptable practice. At the same time, I think that as long as a woman (or teenager) is given medically accurate information about the choice she is making, (instead of just being told "it's not really a baby" or "make out the check to abortion clinic X") she should be able to make her own choice.
photo
alterego55
Flash your citations or leave!
07:16 PM on 12/07/2011
The Pope believes life begins at erection.
bgeditor11
Answering that question is above my pay grade
07:47 PM on 12/07/2011
The Roman Catholic church, including the Pope, believes that life begins at conception.
photo
goatini
We are two-legged wombs, that’s all
08:07 PM on 12/07/2011
What "accurate information" are you referring to? Since a zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus ISN'T a "baby", and ALL medical facilities require payment for services rendered.