iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Terry O'Neill

GET UPDATES FROM Terry O'Neill
 

Mandatory Ultrasound Laws Violate Women's Rights and Bodies

Posted: 02/27/2012 10:03 am

For decades, the radical right has been chipping away at women's access to reproductive health care. After the 2010 elections, these attacks escalated into an outright War on Women. Now, the Republican presidential primaries are offering a disturbing glimpse into the supposed conservative vision for this country. In this right-wing utopia, women will no longer be able to exercise the right to control their bodies, plan their families or safeguard their own health. The church and the state will tell women what is best for them, and religious entities' "liberty" will consistently trump individual women's right to live and work free from discrimination and in accordance with their own religious and moral beliefs.

Much of the current he-man chest thumping is done for the benefit of voters who might be swayed to cast their ballots for the GOP based largely on social issues. And, as demonstrated in Virginia this week, conservative politicians are perfectly capable of putting on the brakes when proceeding with a piece of their anti-woman agenda appears to be backfiring.

Still, the right-wing commitment to keeping women in check is surprisingly strong and reveals a frightening disrespect, even contempt for women who aren't sufficiently submissive. Turning the clock back includes shaming women for their sexuality and punishing them for terminating a pregnancy (which is still legal, by the way). This brings us to one of the more degrading tactics up the radical-right sleeve: mandatory ultrasound laws.

Under these laws, before a woman can undergo an abortion procedure, a doctor must perform an ultrasound and offer the woman an opportunity to view the image of the fetus or hear a detailed description. As ultrasounds are rarely medically necessary prior to an abortion, these laws exist to demean the woman and make the procedure more expensive to boot. Ultrasound costs range from $300 to $700, and the woman, of course, is typically expected to pay for this state-mandated exam.

But the most disturbing aspect of these laws is that in the vast majority of abortions, which occur far too early in pregnancy for an external ("jelly on the belly") ultrasound to produce an image, the ultrasound must be transvaginal -- i.e., a long wand-like ultrasound probe must be inserted deep into the woman's vagina. This is, quite simply, state-sponsored rape. Even the FBI recognized last year, as most states did long ago, that vaginal penetration without a woman's consent is rape.

Currently, women living in seven states are subject to laws mandating ultrasounds as part of abortion services and two more have laws that are on hold pending legal challenges. But the issue did not come to national attention until the battle over Virginia's ultrasound bill blew up in a big way, thanks to online and on-the-ground organizing that helped spark public outrage.

Negotiations over the Virginia bill have unfolded throughout the month of February. With the Virginia Senate, the House of Delegates and the governorship under GOP control after the last election, legislators must have felt pretty confident adopting a bill with so little regard for women's dignity. Some Democrats pointed out that a mandatory ultrasound would be state-sanctioned rape and would violate a Virginia law making sexual penetration by an object a criminal act. The extremists were unfazed, one of them actually saying that women had already decided to be "vaginally penetrated when they got pregnant." Right. Tell that to the victim of rape or incest.

Earlier this week, Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell, cringing before a growing public backlash, rescinded his promise to sign the Virginia bill. He announced he wanted a requirement exclusively for an external ultrasound before abortion, saying he didn't think an "invasive procedure" should be a "precondition to another medical procedure." But he fully supports humiliating women with a medically unnecessary, nonconsensual, expensive procedure as a legal precondition to an abortion -- which, it bears repeating, is still legal.

The Virginia legislature then went back to the drawing board, with the House inserting a series of convoluted amendments that soften the bill but still require an abdominal ultrasound and the offer of a vaginal one if gestational age cannot be determined. But that just made the conservatives mad, and they threatened to kill the bill altogether. Its fate is now uncertain.

For supporters of women's rights, it's too soon to claim victory just yet. For one thing, any mandatory ultrasound law -- vaginal or abdominal -- is a violation of a woman's right to bodily integrity and an ugly intrusion on her right to choose to terminate a pregnancy. For another, two more states (Illinois and Pennsylvania) just announced that they are pursuing mandatory ultrasound laws.

But it's not to soon to learn a few lessons from this whole debacle. First, the right wing is trying to curb access to reproductive health care by any means necessary, and they're not afraid to use humiliation, shaming and even state-sponsored rape in the process. Second, and most importantly, women (and the men who support our fundamental rights) are powerful enough to stop them -- especially when we sound the alarm online, surround the statehouses, gather petitions and call, email, write and personally visit elected officials to tell them to get out and stay out of women's wombs. That is how we will win -- by standing up and speaking out, loud and unapologetically.

And it doesn't hurt to have Amy Poehler and Jon Stewart on your side.

 

Follow Terry O'Neill on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Terryoneill

 
 
  • Comments
  • 575
  • 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)
07:29 PM on 03/06/2012
It's really quite simple. Quit going to church and giving money to churches. They will all fold up
and we will not have to worry about women's health issues being run by religion. Bart have you got yourself fixed yet since you are so fixed on choices.
07:00 PM on 03/06/2012
I have a suggestion. Why don't women quit going to church and contributing money. That would
get rid of religion quicker than anything. All it really is a money making machine and to control
peoples' lives. If women are too afraid to do that then just quit going and contributing money
until religion gets out of our vaginas. If you do not want an abortion do not get one.
06:27 PM on 03/06/2012
It never ceases to amaze me that people are talking about this stuff in 2012. Women have had
to fight this same battle since Roe v Wade.If you do not want an abortion, don't get one. If men
don't want abortions, then get fixed. Talk to your teenagers about sex. Why are so many people
embarrassed about something that is natural. Teenagers are going to have sex, teach them how
to protect themselves from STD and how birth control is used.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ms Liann
F&F Feedback Appreciated
02:53 PM on 03/02/2012
Conservanazis want to force women to be state-controlled breeders of cannon fodder for their perpetual wars. Unplanned pregnancy and large families keep women weak, impoverished and easily controlled.

Family planning, with controlled timed pregnancies when a family is in position to afford a xchild makes families and women strong and ultimately better educated, both mothers and children, seeing through the lies of the totalitarians who seek 1%-er total control right down to the last pubic hair.
photo
Americanwoman55
live, laugh, dance, run with scissors
02:32 PM on 03/01/2012
transvaginal -- i.e., a long wand-like ultrasound probe must be inserted deep into the woman's vagina. This is, quite simply, state-sponsored rape. Even the FBI recognized last year, as most states did long ago, that vaginal penetration without a woman's consent is rape.

THIS IS A CATLLE PROD. nothing more nothing less.

women need to remember this when going to vote for the GOP men and women .
THIS IS WHAT THE CHURCH AND REPUBLICAN PARTY WANTS TO DO TO US WHEN WE DO NOT OBEY THEIR ORDERS>
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThurmanLady
more fun - and logical - to be right
09:40 PM on 02/29/2012
This is BS. "As ultrasounds are rarely medically necessary prior to an abortion..." is not accurate. Check out this study (.pdf) and search for the word "ultrasound" and check out the context. (http://www.ipas.org/Library/Other/Early_abortion_services_in_the_United_States_A_provider_survey.pdf)

Anyone who would use the word "rape" in the same sentence with "ultrasound" should be ashamed. Rape is an act of violence forced on a woman, often by knife or gun point, intent on doing harm, injuring and, too often, death. An ultrasound is a routine medical procedure. To even compare the two is unconscionable. It will never be done without a woman's consent, if she wants an abortion.

What is the real fear here? That a woman can actually see, if she so chooses, exactly what she is doing? In a surgical abortion, a whole lot more goes on vaginally than a simple ultrasound.
08:24 AM on 03/01/2012
If ultrasounds are routinely done for abortion then why do these legislatures (VA, PA, etc.) feel the need to make them guaranteed to be done by law? The fact is these laws are being pushed as "informed consent", as if women do not know why they are seeking an abortion and as if the doctor isn't going to explain the procedure to the woman.

Depending on the state, rape is usually legally defined as the commission of unlawful sexual intercourse or unlawful sexual intrusion. If these laws go into effect, women will not be able to obtain a legal abortion without having the transvaginal ultrasound done so she is being forced by the state to undergo an intrusive ultrasound to satisfy some legislator's need to shame her about what is her legal right. Read the law....the woman can avert her eyes from the screen but she cannot refuse the ultrasound if she wants an abortion.

The point is the state has no right to push itself into the room and make a doctor do something that the woman has no say over as a governmental hoop to jump through in order to obtain a legal procedure...that is wrong.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThurmanLady
more fun - and logical - to be right
01:26 PM on 03/01/2012
And you looked at the study I linked to and still decided you didn't know if they were fairly routinely done? Part of it appears to be giving women an option to see those ultrasounds; something I'm pretty sure abortionists don't routinely do (for the very reason I'm in favor of it).

Why doesn't the state have a right to make their own laws? What part of the Constitution is that from? Is that like saying New York State had no right to legalize abortion back in 1970?

Just because you don't like the idea, doesn't make it wrong. Conversely, just because I like the idea doesn't make it right, either. I have a habit of looking to the Constitution first. Amendment X probably covers this. If not, I'm sure it'll be taken to the courts.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deminmo
just looking for answers
01:33 PM on 02/29/2012
There is a circular argument about when life begins, whether it's at conception
or at the time a fetus has a heart beat or when a child is born. The bottom line
for me is it's my body I get to decide. The female has always been the incubator
and source of families. At this point only women carry a child to birth. It is the
woman who decides when and if that egg is fertilized. It amounts to rape when
an ultrasound is done internally because that procedure is invasive. And to use
an ultrasound to intimidate a woman, a procedure that might not be viewed as necessary
by her doctor, and ordered by a state law, is in my opinion non-Constitutional. Everyone
is entitled to their opinion, they are just not entitled to make these kinds of decisions
for me.
photo
Americanwoman55
live, laugh, dance, run with scissors
02:35 PM on 03/01/2012
my body , my decison.
06:07 PM on 03/01/2012
"Your body" (true). However you discount the other "body" which is having a procedure performed on him/her and who has no say in the matter. By the way, a procedure that will end his/her life. "My decision" (not so true) as your decision was rendered at the time you chose to engage in sexual intercourse, an activity known to occasionally result in pregnancy. A more accurate way of phrasing your post might be: Another body destroyed by my decision.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deminmo
just looking for answers
04:07 PM on 03/02/2012
Exactly.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:33 AM on 02/29/2012
From the article:
But the most disturbing aspect of these laws is that in the vast majority of abortions, which occur far too early in pregnancy for an external ("jelly on the belly") ultrasound to produce an image, the ultrasound must be transvaginal -- i.e., a long wand-like ultrasound probe must be inserted deep into the woman's vagina. This is, quite simply, state-sponsored rape. Even the FBI recognized last year, as most states did long ago, that vaginal penetration without a woman's consent is rape.
photo
Americanwoman55
live, laugh, dance, run with scissors
02:37 PM on 03/01/2012
It's a cattle prod if you do not want it. it is a vicious invasive device meant to intimidate and humilate you.

It is cruel and nasty.

Totally unnecessary.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:30 PM on 03/01/2012
Absolutely, Americanwoman55! It takes cruel and nasty minds to think up this stuff. I've called them pornographic sadistic voyeurs legislating from that empty place inside their core where others, humane humans, own a conscience. These are the very same sort of person who approved, even applauded, war and torture. It's the same, every time ... sadistic voyeurs!
No doubt about it!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bynddrvn5
My Micro-bio is unwritten...
07:41 PM on 03/01/2012
Absolutely true!

fanned, already a fan
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PELAGIUS2
Justice belongs to all, or it belongs to none
08:19 PM on 02/28/2012
Ok ladies, it's time to pull a Lysistrata and go on strike. No work, no cooking, no laundry and most especially NO SEX until this nonsence is finally buried in a coffin full of garlic, closed with silver nails, with several wooden stakes through it, encased in concrete and dumped in the deepest part of the Pacific.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:35 AM on 02/29/2012
Lysistrata!. I've seen that recommended strategy repeated again and again. Yes!
06:02 PM on 03/01/2012
Just imagine if that behavior was invoked on a more regular basis, there would be need for far less abortions, right? I say that because in earlier exchanges with other pro abortion folks they seemed to feel that asking a woman (or a man) to practice abstinence was rout of the question. Yet in this case, it seems to be considered valid and totally possible. I guess the practice of limiting one's sexual interactions is doable after all...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PELAGIUS2
Justice belongs to all, or it belongs to none
08:07 PM on 02/28/2012
Women with plenty of money will travel to a state where this procedure isnt required. Women with less money will go to a back door clinic. Those with no money will end up bleeding to death like my farmer's wife great aunt who bled to death on the way to a hospital.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
roroma
My offer is this: nothing.
08:18 PM on 02/28/2012
This is exactly why some women (and men) are questioning the intent of the legislation. If the lawmakers in these states really wanted to reduce / prevent abortion, they would have included covering the cost, hoping that the woman would change her mind after the ultrasound. The only reasons for this requirement of an medically unnecessary and worthless ultrasound are to humiliate women, control women, make it financially impossible for poor women, and make money for the medical industry.
photo
Americanwoman55
live, laugh, dance, run with scissors
02:38 PM on 03/01/2012
this is a poor women's nighmare.
05:53 PM on 03/01/2012
But it is the hope of the poor woman's child,,,as at least he/she will be given a chance to live.
02:49 PM on 02/28/2012
Thanks for getting the word out. I have already written my rep. and the Governer of Alabama.
photo
Leticia Velasquez
Author of the book "A Special Mother is Born" advo
12:26 PM on 02/28/2012
Let me get this straight, the most common operation performed today is abortion. The least regulated medical clinics are abortion clinics, and the operation done with the least amount of informed consent is abortion. So its still "safe, legal and rare" right?
photo
goatini
We are two-legged wombs, that’s all
06:54 PM on 02/28/2012
Don't like it? Don't have one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ms Liann
F&F Feedback Appreciated
03:22 AM on 02/29/2012
The GOP solution is big govt regulation and forced insertion of a foreign object into a woman's private parts all to uphold your crazy scheme that there's a soul in that zygote that needs protecting.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThurmanLady
more fun - and logical - to be right
09:48 PM on 02/29/2012
We have no way of knowing if there is a "soul" or not, yet. There are a lot of things we do know, though. We know he or she is human. We know what happens at each stage - heartbeat, bainwaves, spinal column, etc. We know when the baby can feel pain.

And there is no "forced insertion of a foreign object." If a woman wants an abortion, she'll consent to the ultrasound. No one is going to tie her down, hold her at knife or gunpoint. That, plus the fact that an ultrasound is often routine, regardless. (http://www.ipas.org/Library/Other/Early_abortion_services_in_the_United_States_A_provider_survey.pdf) To add to that, if a woman requires a surgical abortion she'll have a lot more inserting going on.
photo
Democrat in the South
Empathy, the most important word
09:06 AM on 02/28/2012
Here is an outstanding idea...

"http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/13347"
08:50 AM on 02/28/2012
I want to know who the genius was that advised the Republicans that they could win the election if only they made a political issue out of the vagina. You just don't see that kind of wisdom every day. Expert counsel like that doesn't come cheap.
02:54 AM on 02/28/2012
i assume if this were to pass, it would go to the supreme court and be struck down.
03:36 AM on 02/28/2012
You'd would have thought so, in any civilized society, so in the US of A, apparently not:

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf