iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Laura Bassett
GET UPDATES FROM Laura:

Virginia Ultrasound Bill Passes In House [UPDATE]

Posted: 02/22/12 01:38 PM ET  |  Updated: 02/23/12 08:27 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- The Virginia House of Delegates passed on Wednesday a revised version of a GOP-sponsored informed consent bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before having an abortion. The new bill, which requires women to receive an external, transabdominal ultrasound rather than a more invasive transvaginal ultrasound, passed by a vote of 65-32.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) revoked his support for the original bill just minutes before the House began debate on it, saying that the government did not have the power to require the transvaginal procedure.

"Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state," McDonnell said in a statement. "No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure."

"For this reason ... I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily. I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision," he said.

Virginia House Speaker William Howell (R) said during floor debates on the measure that McDonnell had helped GOP House members amend the bill based on the recommendations in his statement.

Del. Kathy Byron (R), the sponsor of the original bill, said she supports the new version. "I rise in support of this bill," she said Wednesday. "We will still be one state of seven strengthening their informed consent law."

But Democrats said they were not satisfied with the changes, or with the fact that they were introduced right before the vote on the bill took place.

"I think we need to spend time with this -- we shouldn't be playing doctor on the House floor with this kind of language," said Del. David Toscano (D). "The public has an interest in this bill and has not seen it until 20 minutes ago."

Del. Jennifer McClellan (D) said the amended bill causes more problems than the original, because performing a regular ultrasound on an early pregnancy does nothing to assess the age of the fetus.

"It tries to fix an issue I've raised on this floor," she said, referring the transvaginal ultrasound mandate, "but in doing so, it not only doesn't fix it but it makes it worse. What you have done is mandated for any abortion done early in a pregnancy an ultrasound that will be utterly useless."

Members of the state legislature speculated Wednesday morning that Republicans were looking for a way to rewrite the bill to avoid having to fully back down from it, and McClellan tweeted from the House floor around 2:30 pm that "a substitute to the ultrasound bill is being circulated."

"A lot of rumors are floating around this building that the Republicans are trying desperately to find some way out of this Pandora's box," said a top legislative staffer who works with Virginia's Democrats. "I think the sponsors didn't realize when this law passed in North Dakota that this was an intrusive ultrasound. But it would look terrible with their base if they backed down now and didn't pass it."

Democratic State Sen. Barbara Favola said she also heard that Republicans lawmakers may be buckling under pressure from women voters. "They're backing off because they're now hearing from women about it," she said. "Yesterday we had hundreds of women line the walkway between General Assembly and the Capitol in silent protest."

The Virginia General Assembly postponed a vote on the bill twice before taking it up on Wednesday. It has generated a firestorm of controversy because it would force doctors to perform an invasive, often medically unnecessary procedure on women without requiring their consent. Del. Charniele Herring (D) said the law was "akin to rape," and fellow Democratic Del. David Englin pointed out that "object sexual penetration is a serious sex crime in Virginia."

Jon Stewart lampooned the law on "The Daily Show" Tuesday night, prompting former Virginia Gov. and current Senate candidate Tim Kaine to scold Republicans for turning the state into a "laughingstock" and "fodder for late-night comedy shows."

"I don't want Virginia to be known as a state carrying out an extreme and even comical campaign against women and their health care choices," Kaine told reporters on Wednesday.

One House Republican staffer told HuffPost that it is typical for the House to postpone bills that may require extra debate, like this one. Republicans have no plans to abandon the bill, the staffer said, because they believe it should not be controversial.

"Internal ultrasounds are standard medical procedure already for Planned Parenthood in an early pregnancy," said the Republican staffer, who asked that her name not be used because she is not an official spokeswoman. "Unfortunately, not all doctors follow standard procedure. So this bill is helping to prevent against malpractice or a mother being rushed to the hospital with an ectopic pregnancy because the doctor didn't do any imaging before the abortion."

The staffer said Byron was aware of all the medical implications of the bill, including the fact that the procedure would be physically invasive, before she sponsored it.

Favola said that in order to diffuse the controversy, some Republicans have suggested amending the bill's language to state that doctors may perform an ultrasound on a woman if the procedure is deemed medically necessary. "It's absolutely silly," she said. "What are they doing? Do they just want to show they have power over women's bodies? If an ultrasound is medically needed, the doctor is already doing it. This is the most demeaning piece of legislation you could come up with."

Seven other states, including North Dakota and Texas, already have mandatory ultrasound laws in some form on the books. A federal district judge in Texas initially blocked a law there that requires doctors to describe an ultrasound in detail and play the fetal heartbeat to a woman seeking an abortion. But a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overruled that decision in January and allowed the law to go into effect.

Read McDonnell's full statement below:

I am pro-life. I believe deeply in the sanctity of innocent human life and believe governments have a duty to protect human life. The more our society embraces a culture of life for all people, the better country we will have. Over the course of my 20-year career in elected office, I have been glad to play a leading role in putting in place common-sense policies that protect and defend innocent human life in the Commonwealth. One of those bills was Virginia’s informed consent statute, of which I was the chief patron in the House of Delegates, finally seeing its passage in 2001. This session, the General Assembly is now considering amending this informed consent statute to include a requirement that any woman seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound in order to establish the gestational age for appropriate medical purposes, and to offer a woman the opportunity to voluntarily review that ultrasound prior to giving her legal informed consent to abortion.

Over the past days I have discussed the specific language of the proposed legislation with other governors, physicians, attorneys, legislators, advocacy groups, and citizens. It is apparent that several amendments to the proposed legislation are needed to address various medical and legal issues which have arisen. It is clear that in the majority of cases, a routine external, transabdominal ultrasound is sufficient to meet the bills stated purpose, that is, to determine gestational age. I have come to understand that the medical practice and standard of care currently guide physicians to use other procedures to find the gestational age of the child, when abdominal ultrasounds cannot do so. Determining gestational age is essential for legal reasons, to know the trimester of the pregnancy in order to comply with the law, and for medical reasons as well.

Thus, having looked at the current proposal, I believe there is no need to direct by statute that further invasive ultrasound procedures be done. Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state. No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure.

For this reason, I have recommended to the General Assembly a series of amendments to this bill. I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily. I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision.

I have requested other amendments that help clarify the purposes of the bill and reflect a better understanding of prevailing medical practices. It is my hope that the members of the General Assembly will act favorably upon these recommendations from our office. We will await their action prior to making any further comments on this matter.

Earlier on HuffPost:

FOLLOW POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- The Virginia House of Delegates passed on Wednesday a revised version of a GOP-sponsored informed consent bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before ...
WASHINGTON -- The Virginia House of Delegates passed on Wednesday a revised version of a GOP-sponsored informed consent bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6,505
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (184 total)
12:56 PM on 03/12/2012
Just another thing. When man becomes evil, God makes them blind and stupid. Well, that's what happening in our Government and elsewhere. Men have really become stupid.
12:53 PM on 03/12/2012
Abortion was illegal. Most women had abortions in the back alleys or self inflicted them. Many died. You can't tell me that they weren't crushed, but children don't ask to be born to abusive parents, to a poor life, and to parents that suffer from mental illness, take drugs, etc. I'm for pro-life and happy I wasn't placed to make a decision to choose.

The upside was that women weren't so eager to give away their good thing. That caused men to marry women in order to obtain sex. Marriages are declining now.

Our goverment is out of control. I'm against alot of the inferences by government. They forget that they are servents of the people. Their attitude and acts are pushing the US into a potential war. Read the headlines. I've never in my life seen so many stupid people running our government, both Democrats and Republicans alike. We need a third or fourth alternative.

I am a Christian, but God does not condone religious fanatics, nor accepts disrepect for any woman. He holds them with respect He knows that if man is not God fearing, he will destroy those precious individuals. Once crazy people took God out of this country, here is the backlash. Nothing is ever perfect, but the way things are going now, it's a nightmare.
12:57 AM on 03/08/2012
Requiring - FORCING - someone to get a medically unnecessary procedure: Is this even legal? Is it constitutional? Can its legality be challenged in court? (I hope so.)

And, oh yeah -- who is paying for this medically unnecessary and unwanted procedure? And how does this cut spending in Virginia?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nevergiveup
10:28 AM on 03/08/2012
The GOP cannot win anything with its War on Women and Women's Rights.

Are women in Virginia this dumb to elect Republicans this November?

I hope not.
01:16 PM on 11/07/2012
Good point.
By the same token, is requiring - FORCING - someone to get obamacare or be fined/taxed constitutional?

And, oh yeah -- how does this cut spending in the country?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lisa SpomerKrasnoff
06:05 PM on 03/07/2012
Gov. Bob McConnell is sharon-angling to be Romney's v.p.

Good luck with that! haha
JVene
Software Engineer, Parent, Cook & Musician
05:21 PM on 03/07/2012
Let me get this straight, because I'm not sure I can believe what I think I've read thus far:

First, their primary purpose is to show an image of the fetus to a woman seeking an abortion as a means of informing her that this is a child, and that they should think carefully about whether or not the abortion is murder.

Second, they learn that in early pregnancy the only way to get an image is with a trans-vaginal ultrasound, and without realizing what that is, motivated to put the image in front of the patient, they started to legislate that method as a requirement.

Third, once they realized where that probe goes, they re-thought their strategy, realizing that forced penetration of the instrument is repugnant even to them. At this point they probably haven't realized that the picture they would get doesn't resemble a human form, which would limit the purpose of the image in the first place.

Now, they've mandated a 'softer' external ultrasound which will produce virtually no recognizable image of the fetus in early stage pregnancy, completely undermining their intent, all the while ignoring the fact that competent medical care would have already used appropriate ultrasound where medically pertinent.

...and this from small government conservatives.

After this, do they expect us to take them seriously on anything else?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
powermuffn
Humble, progressive viewpoints since 1972
05:50 PM on 03/07/2012
You pretty much summed it up, but you left out one thing:

And charge the patient for the cost of the ultrasound, which can range in price (depending on the provider) from $300 to $1,100.
JVene
Software Engineer, Parent, Cook & Musician
06:21 PM on 03/07/2012
Ah - decrease affordability - I get it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nevergiveup
10:29 AM on 03/08/2012
Why DO Republicans hate women so much?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tracy Shaffer
Realtor/Writer: I move people
05:17 PM on 03/07/2012
So... all of a sudden we need to do an ultrasound to determine gestational age? Whether it's done externally or vaginally, it is psychologically invasive. It is purely an attempt to humanize the fetus and guilt the woman into changing her mind about terminating the pregnancy. As long as the procedure remains legal, women have the right to have their safety and privacy respected.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
anoise
My micro bio is too small to fit here....
05:17 PM on 03/07/2012
Perhaps men should just stop asking woman for sex unless they're married and planing on having a kid -
11:57 AM on 03/12/2012
I agree. They don't want to help in any birth control whatsoever. So in essence they are the ones making these babies and the woman suffer for it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MexiChick67
Que? Que? Queee?
05:13 PM on 03/07/2012
If you are a conservative you should know that free birth control would save the tax payer so much money in the long run. Imagine not having to bare the cost of welfare for babies born to single moms, WIC, food stamps, education, section-8, chasing after dead-beat parents, medical to cover uninsured pregnant women & infants (big ticket item), foster care, child welfare agencies, children those unwanted kids may be housed in one of our tax payer funded prisons. More burden on the tax payer.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
powermuffn
Humble, progressive viewpoints since 1972
05:42 PM on 03/07/2012
But...but... you're asking them to be REASONABLE!! THAT will NEVER happen!!
11:59 PM on 05/25/2012
the same could be said about Liberals. Many Conservatives think that Liberals are not reasonable. The free birth control may be a good idea and would probably help, but It wouldn't fix the problem. I think some of the ones who need it most wouldn't use it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:10 PM on 03/07/2012
I can cross a Virginia vacation off of my bucket list..! I will avoid that state at all costs and when I do have to go there, I wont spend a cent!!!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
LaurieAnn
Charity is NOT a substitute for justice.
06:51 PM on 03/07/2012
I'm with you on that 100%.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:18 AM on 03/09/2012
Williamsburg/Jamestown *area*
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:18 AM on 03/09/2012
I am right with you and it's a shame because the Williamsburg/Jamestown are is terrific and is one of my favorite spots for a quick getaway.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AmericanDoughboy
Equal Justice Under Law
05:08 PM on 03/07/2012
Can anyone explain how this law can be prosecuted without violating federal HIPAA regulations...
photo
DawgBone5
Airborne Beagle
05:08 PM on 03/07/2012
No sex for Virginia Republicans ...
11:33 PM on 09/24/2012
That might be a good thing. I am 70y.o. but am incensed about this b.s.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
missygoose0314
05:08 PM on 03/07/2012
If men could get pregnant, there would be drive-thru abortion clinics. And any man who does not support a woman's right to own her own body is her sworn enemy. Period, end of argument.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ultrawiz
Holding the Middle Ground
05:05 PM on 03/07/2012
Here's a n idea Republicans: Get the hell out of people's personal lives. Who appointed you God and said you should be involved in women's medical decisions? That is between them and their doctor and NO ONE else.
05:04 PM on 03/07/2012
An abortion done purely for convenience is the ultimate in selfishness, in my opinion.

But if a woman is comfortable enough to go through with the procedure for that reason, who am I to take away her right to choose? It's a decision best left to the mother, her doctor, and her conscience.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nevergiveup
10:31 AM on 03/08/2012
Your comment is crass, uncaring and simplistic.

Nobody has an abortion "for convenience."

You must be a MAN!
05:07 PM on 04/15/2012
Take a look at the statistics and then say that again with 100% honesty.
On average, women give at least 3 reasons for choosing abortion: 3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities; about 3/4 say they cannot afford a child; and 1/2 say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner (AGI).
There are all reasons of convenience and there are ALWAYS ways around these things. People have really lost touch with their humanity and with God.
05:03 PM on 03/07/2012
Where did "SWAT" come from? Trolling I suspect for whatever reason who knows.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:47 PM on 03/07/2012
Looks like someone turned over a rock and it escaped. Don't make the same mistake I did by feeding it.