Center for Reproductive Rights sues Oklahoma over anti-choice legislation
by Anna
Web Correspondent
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund
Ever since the Supreme Court upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban last year, anti-choicers have been taking advantage of this turn of the tide to work their bills past state lawmakers all over the country. The latest example is Oklahoma’s new anti-abortion law, set to go into effect November 1 after legislators overrode Governor Brad Henry’s veto in April. This legislation states that a woman must receive an ultrasound prior to having an abortion and must listen to her doctor describing physical characteristics of the fetus.
The Center for Reproductive Rights sued the state of Oklahoma over this legislation, arguing that “the Oklahoma law profoundly intrudes upon a patient's privacy, endangers her health, and assaults her dignity.”
Oklahoma would be the fourth state to require an ultrasound before abortion, following an example set by Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. But Oklahoma’s policy contains a few provisions that the others do not, such as requiring the doctor to turn the ultrasound screen towards the woman and describe what the fetus looks like. (Proponents of the legislation claim that it does not force information on the woman because the law specifies that she is permitted to “avert her eyes.” I’m not convinced.) Furthermore, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the law “prevents a woman from suing her doctor if he or she intentionally withholds other information about the fetus, such as a severe developmental defect.”
Oklahoma State Senator Todd Lamb, originator of the new law, says “I introduced the bill because I wanted to encourage life in society. In Oklahoma, society is on the side of life.” Lamb does not have much to say about whether this legislation is necessary from a medical perspective, probably because it isn’t. Trying to persuade a woman not to terminate her pregnancy, even if it means withholding important information about the fetus’s health, sits firmly in the realm of the ideological, not the medical or scientific. And it disrespects her ability to make intelligent decisions of her own accord.
Stephanie Toti, the Center for Reproductive Rights attorney in the Oklahoma case, sums it up best: "Anti-choice activists will stop at nothing to prevent a woman from getting an abortion, but trying to manipulate a woman's decisions about her own life and health goes beyond the pale. Governments should stop playing doctor and leave medical determinations to physicians and health decisions to individuals.” With an argument like that, we can only hope that the Oklahoma District Court finds it difficult to justify the ultrasound law.
Trackback: http://www.plannedparenthoodadvocate.org/trackback/484/f3CINeio/
