Quote:
Originally Posted by AGDee
When the ultrasounds are required, most laws (not sure about the Ohio one) also state that the pictures have to be shown to the woman. There is no medical reason for a woman to view those images. Attempting coercion is the only reason to do that.
From this article: http://www.dispatch.com/content/stor...-abortion.html
State Rep. Ron Hood, an Ashville Republican, defended his ultrasound proposal during hearings.
“Ultrasounds not only make life visible inside the womb, but unveil the truth of the unborn child’s humanity and connect the mother with her unborn child,” he said. |
First of all, I love how a MAN can exclaim that this will provide a woman some kind of connection with her child. I'm sorry, but I don't think any man (or women who have never been in that situation) can truly speak to how a woman will feel. Again, the whole thing is just a way to try and get other people to think the same way as these politicians, who in most cases, have no personal experience with these issues... and in the case of a man, never will (except maybe through a second-hand experience by a woman in his life).
Also, according to the article below, in Wisconsin, the law requires an ultrasound, but the woman has the option to decline reading/seeing the results. This is a slightly better situation, but again, it seems to me to be a waste of time and money. And of course, it requires the woman to undergo additional medical procedures for no reason.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...-into-law?lite
Quote:
The law requires an ultrasound be performed on a pregnant woman at least 24 hours before an abortion, a requirement that can be waived if the pregnancy is the result of sexual assault or incest.
Results of the ultrasound including images, a description of the fetus and a visualization of the fetal heartbeat must be offered to the woman. The woman can decline the results.
|