Reproductive Rights Updates: Iowa, Missouri, New Mexico, & National

Hello all! I'd like to start off apologizing for my absence lately. Offline life has been in upheaval for months and has only really just now settled down. So, if you were glad I was gone: too bad for you now! Muwahahaha!

In Iowa, a judge recently temporarily halted the Board of Medicine's ban on people being able to use teleconferencing for medication abortion services (which, as you can imagine, mostly serves rural citizens).

Polk County District Judge Karen Romano ordered a temporary stay on a rule passed by the Iowa Board of Medicine, which effectively would ban use of the first-in-the-nation video-conferencing system. The medical board said its rule was based on concern for patient safety. But Planned Parenthood supporters said the rule was a political attempt to limit rural women’s access to legal abortions.

[...]

Romano wrote that medical board members “have not supplied the court with any evidence whatsoever that telemedicine abortions are unsafe or negatively impact patient health.”

The judge expressed sympathy for Planned Parenthood’s argument that the medical board’s rule singled out the private agency’s video system, which has similarities to other health care providers’ systems.

“With respect to the lack of an in-person meeting, it is peculiar, as petitioners point out, that the board would mandate this for abortion services and not any other telemedicine practices in Iowa,” Romano wrote. “There is simply no evidence the court can rely on to come to the conclusion that the telemedicine abortion procedures, which have been offered for five years without issue, do not ‘protect the health and safety of patients.’ ”

The Board of Health is insistent that they are so, so right (they are not so, so right) and the fight will continue in court. The Des Moines Register editorial board strongly believes in the judge's ruling and wrote a kickass editorial yesterday.

***

In Missouri, a federal grand jury has indicted Jedediah Stout with regards to attempting to torch Planned Parenthood clinics early in October.

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. — A federal grand jury returned a two-count indictment Wednesday against Jedediah Stout in connection with arson attempts at the Planned Parenthood center in Joplin on Oct. 3 and 4.

Stout, 29, of Joplin, had been charged with the failed attempts to torch the Planned Parenthood building at 701 S. Illinois Ave. in a complaint filed Oct. 21 in U.S. District Court in Springfield. The indictment handed up Wednesday replaces that initial complaint.

[...]

Court filings have indicated the existence of some physical evidence allegedly linking Stout to the Planned Parenthood attempts.

When police stopped him a few blocks away after the second attempt at the Planned Parenthood center, he reportedly had a lighter in his possession, and an officer reported that one of his hands smelled of fuel.

Investigators said they have tied Stout to the purchase of a backpack and other components of the device that was used in the first of the Planned Parenthood arson attempts through manufacturing tags, uniform price codes and surveillance footage at a Wal-Mart store in Joplin.

They also allegedly found his fingerprint on a bottle containing accelerants that failed to ignite in the Oct. 3 attempt at Planned Parenthood.

He is still being held without bond.

This is another reminder of what people who work--and volunteer--to provide reproductive health care must face when it comes to their workplace.

***

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Quote of the Day

[CN: extreme hostility to autonomy, violence]

Rep. Lynn Watchmann (R-Eprehensible), author of HB 125, Ohio's "Heartbeat Bill":

“I would remind you the real war on women are the abortionists, the slayers of those young babies, the young girls in the mother’s womb who take their lives. That is the real war on women.” , in response to the idea that the bill is part of a war on women.

You see, in 2011 Ohio Watchmann attempted to pass the now infamous "Heartbeat Bill". Back then the GOP even scheduled two embyro "witnesses" to "testify" for the bill (it didn't quite work as planned). Eventually the legislation stalled in the Ohio Senate after passing the House. Last November, Senate President Tom Niehaus said the bill may get "another look" and that "a substitute bill is being prepared".

That substitute bill is now being reintroduced.

In addition to the fetal heartbeat test, State Rep. Christina Hagan said the new bill mandates inspections of abortion clinics.

“We will now have inspectors in our abortion clinics to ensure that the regulations we’re putting in place, as far as fetal heartbeat detection goes, are being held up,” Hagan said.

This time around, Hagan said the bill also includes a commission to study ways to improve adoption in Ohio.

As with before, Ohio Right to Life does not support this legislation.

***

Hey Watchmann:

Detecting cardiac activity does not a viable pregnancy make. For one. Your asinine legislation is unconstitutional. Shut up.

Also? Effectively banning--because that's what this would do--a legal, necessary medical procedure because you don't like it is, in fact, a hostile act of aggression against the autonomy and agency of anyone who wants and needs to access it. You spouting off that it isn't is such disingenuous bullshit that I'm almost surprised you weren't struck by lightening on the spot by the universe-at-large for sheer offensive lying asshattery.

And you want to talk "abortionists" and war, you willfully ignorant fuck? Ok, let's do that.

Just yesterday a federal judge ruled that threatening people who provide health care via doing abortion procedures is, in fact, just fine.

From 1977 to 2011, there have been:

218 arsons and bombings
99 attempted arson or bombing
656 bomb threats
191 incidents of assault and battery
420 death threats
4 kidnappings
15,062 incidents of hate mail or hate phone calls

Last year in 2012: a Pensacola, FL, clinic was burned down, a Wisconsin clinic was attacked with homemade bomb, two clinics in Georgia were set on fire, a clinic in Louisiana was set ablaze. Those are "just" the fires.

Dr. David Gunn was murdered in 1993.
In 1993, Dr. Tiller was shot but not killed.
In 1994, Dr. John Bayard Britton and his escort, James H. Barrett, were assassinated.
In 1994, Dr. Garson Romalis was shot but not killed.
In 1995, Dr. Hugh Short was shot and killed.
In 1997, Dr. Jack Fainman was shot but not killed, the shooter was a suspect in an unnamed NY physician's murder
In 1998, Dr. Barnett Slepian is shot and killed. His murderer, James Koop, was the suspect in 1997's shooting of Dr. Fainman and the other unnamed doctor.
In 2009, Dr. Tiller was shot, again, and killed.

In 1994, Shannon Lowney and Leanne Nichols were shot and killed at clinics in MA.
In 1998, Officer Robert Sanderson was killed during a clinic bombing and nurse Emily Lyon was severely injured.

More about the violence faced by health care providers: here and also here.

So, Lynn Watchmann, your hyperbolic jackassery is not only flat out factually wrong, it's an offensive, disgustingly dramatic and saccharine call-to-arms to anti-choicers. It's dangerous. And you know it.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Oh, Ohio

[Content Note: Hostility to consent.]

In an effort to not be left behind in the anti-autonomy race to the bottom of the barrel, this is Ohio republicans' House Bill 200:

A BILL
To amend sections 2305.11, 2317.56, 2919.171, and 4731.22 and to repeal section 2317.561 of the Revised Code to modify the notification requirements given by a physician 48 hours prior to the performance or inducement of an abortion, to require the physician to perform an obstetric ultrasound examination 48 hours prior to the performance or inducement of an abortion, to modify the definition of medical emergency that applies to the law regulating abortion, and to eliminate medical necessity as a reason to perform an abortion without complying with the 48-hour notification requirements.

This bill, well. "Horrendous" or "inhumane" don't even begin to cover it. Here is the legislation, as edited and written by Rep. Ron Hood (R)--and co-sponsored by 34 of his republican colleagues. Strike-outs are where they eliminated parts of the current law and underline is their new addition.

Sec. 2317.56. (A) As used in this section:

(1) "Medical emergency" means a condition of a pregnant woman that, in the reasonable judgment of the physician who is attending the woman, creates an immediate threat of serious risk to the life or physical health so complicates the medical condition of the woman from the continuation of that the death of the woman would result from the failure to immediately terminate the pregnancy necessitating the immediate performance or inducement of an abortion.

(2) "Medical necessity" means a medical condition of a pregnant woman that, in the reasonable judgment of the physician who is attending the woman, so complicates the pregnancy that it necessitates the immediate performance or inducement of an abortion.

(3) "Probable gestational age of the embryo or fetus" means the gestational age that, in the judgment of a physician, is, with reasonable probability, the gestational age of the embryo or fetus at the time that the physician informs a pregnant woman pursuant to division (B)(1)(b) of this section.

(3) "Conflict of interest disclaimer" means a written statement divulging the gross income from the previous year of a physician who performs or induces an abortion or of a facility where an abortion is performed or induced, the percentage of that income that was obtained as fees for the performance of an abortion, and a statement concerning the monetary loss to the physician or facility that would result from the woman's decision to carry the woman's pregnancy to term.

(4) "Viable pregnancy" means a pregnancy in which a fetal sac is located inside the pregnant woman's uterus and fetal cardiac activity is present within the fetal sac.

Yes, you read all that right: "medical necessity" is no longer allowed (only death is a reason for an emergency abortion); a doctor must disclose how much they made/how much they'd make from the abortion (the fuck, really?)/how much not having an abortion would affect a clinic financially; this defines 'viable pregnancy' as one that has an in-utero embryo and any cardiac activity. Which is blatantly another bullshit "heartbeat" law.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Reproductive Rights Updates: Arkansas, Virginia, & National

Earlier this year, Arkansas legislature overrode the governor's veto to enact one of the most restrictive anti-autonomy laws in the country, banning abortion after 12 weeks of gestation.

Last Friday, U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright granted a temporary injunction, putting the law on hold. For now. Judge Webber Wright hasn't given any clear indicators in how they will rule about the law:

Wright on Friday sided with lawyers for the groups who argued that the ban could harm the doctors and their patients.

“I believe that there is a threat of irreparable harm, because these doctors ... could face loss of their licenses,” she said Friday. “... They also have established that their patients could suffer irreparable harm by not being able to have abortions post 12-weeks but during that pre-viability period.”

However, Wright said she believes parts of the law may not pose an undue burden to a woman’s right to have an abortion.

“I do not believe it would be an undue burden on a woman’s right to have an abortion for the doctor to determine whether she has a fetal heartbeat and to tell her when she does,” Wright said, referring to another part of the law.

Meanwhile the bill's main sponsor, Jason Rapert (R-Eprehensible), had this completely ironic horseshit to say:

“When there is a heartbeat, there is life. And it is time in this nation and in our state, when you have 55 million human beings that have been taken, we must have a more rational and a more humane policy in abortion in our nation.”

But the life of the person who is pregnant is inconsequential, right Jason?

Look you arrogant fuck, if you want "more rational and more humane" policy around abortion: YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG. I'm sure you're all up in arms about Kermit Gosnell but you know what? It's laws like yours who drive people to be taken in by charlatan opportunists like Gosnell. Restrictive measures such as yours do not create or celebrate a "culture of life", they do the exact opposite. Hopefully the courts will not let the likes of you further harm people with your narcissistic, sanctimonious bullshit.

***

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Reproductive Rights Updates: Michigan, North Carolina, Kansas, Iowa, North Dakota, Hawaii, & National

Quite a bit has happened in the past few days, some good and some, well, the same anti-autonomy bullshit as ever.

In Michigan, some legislators are trying to make it so more people can legally opt-out of doing their jobs if they don't want to because they choose to believe in some sort of supernatural rule system.

For 35 years, Michigan law has protected health care providers who refuse to perform an abortion on moral or religious grounds.

Hospitals and clinics can't be sued. Doctors and nurses can't lose their jobs for objecting to terminating a pregnancy.

Legislation that could be voted on as early as this week in the Republican-led Legislature would extend the same legal protections for any medical service such as providing contraception or medical marijuana, or taking someone off life support. Employers and health insurers — not just medical providers — also could opt out of paying for services as a matter of conscience.

Supporters say the legislation protects religious freedom and is needed particularly in the wake of the federal health care law mandating employer-provided birth control in their health plans. ...

You know what? If you cannot do your job because of your choice to believe in some set of religious rules, you should find a different fucking job. ESPECIALLY when your job is to provide needed health care and services to people. You are supposed to be a HELPER. Be a sanctimonious asshat when you aren't on the clock.

Also: we see your attempt at a workaround for employers to provide health insurance that includes birth control coverage, Michigan.

***

In North Carolina, eyeballs are now on the governor:

This session, [legislators] presented a bill that would require doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at local hospitals, which can be difficult to obtain.

One recent bill would establish civil penalties for doctors who knowingly perform abortions in cases in which the child's sex is the driving factor. Another would broaden so-called protections of conscience and exempt businesses from providing contraception coverage to employees, which its sponsor acknowledges contradicts federal law.

In his last election debate, Gov. McCrory promised he would not sign any new anti-choice legislation into law. His spokesperson said that McCrory will make the decision when the legislation is on his desk.

***

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Reproductive Rights Updates: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Ohio, Texas, North Dakota

It's been an active week for anti-autonomy legislators across the country. Don't you think they look tired?*

In Alabama, the governor signed TRAP legislation into law:

MONTGOMERY, Alabama --- Gov. Robert Bentley signed into law this morning a bill that will set new regulations on abortion clinics that supporters say will improve care and safety for patients.

[...]

It requires abortion clinics to use doctors who have hospital admitting privileges in the same city where they do abortions, which supporters of the bill said is an important requirement for follow-up care when women have complications.

The bill will also require clinics to meet the same building safety code standards as ambulatory surgical centers.

Proponents claim it is for the "health and safety" of people needing abortions, however, that's horseshit. Retrofitting clinics to surgical center standards just isn't an available reality for most. Also, most clinics there have doctors come from out of state to perform abortions (with agreements with local doctors for follow-up care). Here is bill author Mary Sue McClurkin, she of the "fetus is the largest organ" fame, on the bill:

“We only think it’s fair that when a woman goes to have an abortion that it be in a very safe and protected environment and that she get the utmost of care. We would hope that one day she would choose not to.”

The law is supposed to take effect starting July 1st.

***

In Alaska, the senate has taken out the mental health provision for people who need abortions and happen to also need Medicaid:

The legislation would only allow for Medicaid payments if a woman is at serious risk of physical harm if she goes through with her pregnancy or if the woman is a victim of rape or incest. It specifically excludes mental health conditions. Supporters of the legislation have characterized that as a loophole through which women can get Medicaid coverage or elective procedures.

Anti-abortion groups have gotten behind the bill, saying that it would reduce the number of abortions in the state because low-income women are less likely to go through with the procedure if they can’t secure payment. [...]

Yes, that's right! You are correct anti-abortion people: if a person cannot afford an abortion, they are less likely to get one. But. BUT! If they cannot afford an abortion, they cannot afford to have a child either. A medication abortion (generally) costs around $450. A (first trimester, uncomplicated) surgical abortion runs a bit more. A child's related needs? Costs a metric fuckton more than that in years of ongoing costs. But it's never really about quality of life for anyone with you people, is it? No. It's merely about subjugating others to your randomly chosen set of beliefs under some creepy guise of "greater good for children". You? Are gross.

***

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Reproductive Rights Updates: Arkansas, Virgina, Washington, Michigan, North Dakota

You know what they say: new legislative session, new asinine horseshit legislation. They do say that, right? I'm pretty sure they do.

In Arkansas, Republican Jason Rapert proposed "heartbeat" legislation that would ban abortion if cardiac activity is detected.

LITTLE ROCK — Arkansas senators advanced a proposal Wednesday to ban most abortions if a fetal heartbeat is detected, a move that would prohibit the procedure as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, despite a warning from opponents that it would open the state up to legal challenges.

The Senate Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee endorsed by a voice vote legislation that would require a test to detect a fetal heartbeat before an abortion is performed. If one is detected, a woman could not have an abortion, except in cases of rape, incest and if a mother's life is in danger.

The measure heads to a vote in the Republican-controlled Senate, where it's sponsored by 19 of the chamber's 35 members.

"I simply recognize that without a heartbeat, there is no life, and life must be protected," Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, the bill's chief sponsor, told reporters after Wednesday's hearing.

And I simply recognize that a heartbeat does not a viable fetus make. Or even a heart itself: cardiac cells can beat in a petri dish. But, Jason Rapert (R-Conway), don't let science get in the way of your self-righteousness!

If you recall, Ohio attempted this same sort of thing, though this Arkansas legislation comes with even harsher penalties: medical personnel who perform abortions "could face a Class D felony, punishable by up to six years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000".

***

In Virgina, the final bill left to help fight against mandatory ultrasounds was defeated.

RICHMOND — A Republican-run Senate committee swiftly killed legislation Monday that would have made Virginia’s mandatory pre-abortion ultrasound exams optional after the committee chairman blocked discussion of the bill.

The hastily convened Privileges and Elections Committee special meeting lasted just minutes with Sen. Ralph S. Northam’s bill dying on a party-line vote. Six Republicans opposed and three Democrats supported it. Once proxy votes from absent Republicans were added, the final tally swelled to 8-3. Four committee Democrats did not vote.

“What a kangaroo court this is, Mr. Chairman. This is an embarrassment,” Mr. Northam huffed after committee Chairman Stephen H. Martin ordered a roll call vote while stifling efforts by Mr. Northam, a Norfolk Democrat who is a doctor, and at least one other physician to testify for the bill.

Mr. Martin, Chesterfield Republican, contended the committee had already discussed the bill. Its history in the Legislative Information System, however, showed that Senate Bill 1332 had never been before a committee or a subcommittee.

When that excuse didn't work, Martin then said that there wasn't any need to discuss it because it was just like other legislation they shot down, any minor differences in wording aside. Another committee member, Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) said she wasn't aware of it being on the agenda until minutes before the meeting started.

That's some awesome governing right there.

***

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Reproductive Rights Updates: National, Virginia, Texas, Arizona, Michigan

A new year and the same horrendous anti-autonomy horseshit with many very familiar names.

So, national news first:

Last Thursday, Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) intro'd HR 23: "To provide that human life shall be deemed to begin with fertilization". Also Thursday, Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) intro'd HR 61: "To amend title X of the Public Health Service Act to prohibit family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions, and for other purposes".

If you'd like to know what Title X does in your state and the population served by Planned Parenthood, Guttmacher has information for you.

---

In Virginia, Gov. McConnell certified TRAP legislation into being:

These TRAP laws were designed to force existing abortion clinics to meet the same building codes as new hospitals. If enacted, the new regulations would require existing clinics to come into compliance with the regulations within two years or face closure. In September 2012, the Virginia Board of Health voted 13-2 to reverse their previous decision to grandfather in existing clinics, thus exempting them from new, hospital-like restrictions.

The board's reversal on grandfathering in existing clinics came after Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli refused to accept the grandfather provision and asserted the board did not have the authority to amend the regulations by adding the provision. Cuccinelli also released a memo in September 2012 threatening Board of Health members by stating that they would not be able to receive state legal counsel if they disregarded his recommendations.

There is expected to be a 60-day public comment period before a final vote by the Board of Health.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Today in Totally Not Terrorism

[Content Note: Anti-choice terrorism.]

Annie-Rose at Think Progress: New Orleans Women's Clinic Becomes Latest Target of Arson Attacks.

A New Orleans women’s health organization was destroyed last week by an unknown arsonist, becoming the latest target of attacks on women’s health clinics in the south.

The organization, Women With A Vision, was likely singled out because it offers AIDS prevention help, HIV testing, and substance abuse assistance to sex workers, transgender women, poor women, and women of color. The clinic also does community outreach and education on those issues. Like two incidents in Georgia last week, no one was injured in the fire, but the clinic lost a good share of its resources.

...The New Orleans fire department is still looking into the fires at Women With A Vision, but witnesses reported seeing a man run from the building where the fire was set.

There is more at the link about the extent of the physical damage done and how you can help.

Have I mentioned once or twice or three million times that this is fucking terrorism? Have I mentioned that maybe our president should say something about it?

It is. He should.

This flagrant, shameless campaign of intimidation, harassment, threats and acts of violence against healthcare providers who offer services to women and other people with uteri, and the spaces in which they offer them, is not just a terrorist movement in defense of an inherently violent ideology, but it is a national referendum on whether this country cares about women et. al., bodily autonomy, and agency.

The silence from our alleged allies speaks volumes.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Quote of the Day

"We let Willow cut her hair. When you have a little girl, it's like how can you teach her that you're in control of her body? If I teach her that I'm in charge of whether or not she can touch her hair, she's going to replace me with some other man when she goes out in the world. She can't cut my hair but that's her hair. She has got to have command of her body. So when she goes out into the world, she's going out with a command that it is hers. She is used to making those decisions herself. We try to keep giving them those decisions until they can hold the full weight of their lives."—Will Smith, in an interview with Parade.

I love this so, so much.

[H/T to Shaker alabee, who saw it at STFU Conservatives.]

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

A Personhood Amendment, for Ladies

Shaker ma_am recently suggested, in response to the onslaught of anti-choice legislation that includes encroachments on reproductive rights that undermine the autonomy of women and other people with uteri as well as proposed "Personhood Amendments" to confer personhood on fetuses, that we need a Personhood Amendment for women and other people with uteri to establish our rights as autonomous people. I suggested we compose the amendment, and then try to get a clever Democratic Senator to introduce it into the US Senate.

So we did!

And then we composed a petition, and ma_am launched it at Change.org.

Here is our prosed Personhood Amendment:

A person identifying as a woman and/or having a uterus shall retain all of the full, basic, and fundamental rights of a US citizen as guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence—life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Congress and the States shall make no law that infringes upon a person's life, including but not limited to access to life-saving or life-improving healthcare, and/or medicines and procedures deemed necessary or beneficial by a medical professional and/or by the person having the uterus, procurement of which shall not by denied in and of itself by the presence of a uterus. Congress and the States shall make no law that infringes upon a person's liberty, including but not limited to autonomy over hir own body and the ability to make decisions regarding hir own healthcare. Congress and the States shall make no law that interferes with a person's pursuit of happiness, including but not limited to access to a full spectrum of reproductive options, freedom from forcible reproduction, and the ability to make decisions regarding family planning and family resources.

Please sign the petition in support of the Personhood Amendment here. Once it has 1,000 signatures, it will be delivered to Senators Patty Murray (WA), Al Franken (MN), and Kristen Gillibrand (NY) with a request to introduce the proposed amendment into the legislative session.

And please spread the word about the petition via social networking sites. Let's change this conversation. It's time to change "women's rights are human rights" from a radical statement to settled fact.

Teaspoons ahoy!

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Pres Obama's Women's History Month Proclamation Fails to Mention Reproductive Rights. Again.

Today, President Obama signed a proclamation, the full text of which is below the fold, recognizing Women's History Month, 2012. And, just like last year, he has failed to make even passing mention of reproductive choice.

This glaring omission by our ostensibly pro-choice president was made despite the all-out legislative assault on our reproductive rights which has seen on both the state and federal levels attempts to undermine access to abortion, to contraception, and even to woman-centered healthcare providers; and despite record numbers of anti-choice legislation being passed across the nation; and despite increasing incidents of anti-choice terrorism; on a day when the Senate was taking a vote on an amendment that treats women's basic reproductive healthcare as a negotiable item; in a week in which the Secretary of State testified before the Senate about the deadly effects of a failure to support family planning.

We're assured that "no dream is beyond [our] reach," but whooooooooooooooooops bodily autonomy remains elusive for women and other people with uteri as increasingly invasive and infantilizing legislation seeks to obtain ownership of our bodies and ever more control of our choices.

But, hey, our "struggles" are being commemorated. What more could we possibly want? And don't worry—"fair pay" got another explicit shout-out. Huzzah!

Someone who can loftily talk about "mak[ing] headway on the crucial issues of our time" while NOT EVEN MENTIONING THE ROLLBACKS ON REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE may be pro-choice in the most technical, most politically expedient terms, but they're no kind of pro-choice advocate, and they're no kind of ally.

The profundity of my contempt is cavernous.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

Reproductive Rights Updates: Virginia & South Dakota

Some sorta good news, some...not.

The sorta good news from Virginia yesterday was that the "personhood" bill was killed in the Senate for this legislative session.

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A bill that would define life as starting at conception is done this year in the Virginia Legislature.

With no debate, the Senate voted 24-14 Thursday to send the so-called "personhood" bill back to committee and carry it over to 2013.

So, it will still likely come back. Especially after this WTF-ery (emphasis mine):

The vote sidetracking the most sweeping of several anti-abortion bills came hours after the Senate Education and Health Committee endorsed it on an 8-7 party-line vote, with Democrats voting against it. The bill passed after an amendment clarifying that no provision in it would restrict the use of federally approved contraception.

At least three times, the committee chairman, Sen. Steve Martin, threatened to have police remove opponents of the bill after they spoke out during debate.

Just. What. What the hell?

Also, they have this to consider:

Another bill still before legislators would eliminate government funding for abortions under Medicaid for indigent women whose fetuses with severe deformities.

The House has has already passed that legislation.

GOP: We hate the poor SOOOOOOOO MUCH!

***

In South Dakota, the state all other anti-choice legislators try to make their state emulate, the legislators have re-written aspects of anti-choice legislation (which Liss and I wrote about here and here) that is currently in court.

PIERRE, S.D. (AP) — Even though South Dakota's year-old abortion law is tied up in a court challenge, the state Senate on Thursday gave final legislative approval to a bill that would change some of the law's counseling requirements for women seeking abortions.

The bill leaves intact the current law's requirements that women seeking abortions wait 72 hours and undergo counseling at pregnancy help centers that discourage abortions. But it changes provisions dealing with a woman's first consultation with a doctor at an abortion clinic and requires that counselors at the pregnancy help centers be licensed.

The Senate voted 26-7 to pass the bill, which has also been approved by the House. It next goes to Gov. Dennis Daugaard for his signature.

[...]

Sen. Eldon Nygaard, R-Vermillion, said the new requirements would even require a doctor at an abortion clinic to talk to a woman about her religious beliefs.

"This bill, if we pass it, would provide unnecessary government intrusions into private decisions," Nygaard said.

While it's nice you realize this, the bills you all already passed "provide unnecessary government intrusions". Ahem.

So this bill, on the good side--if there can be one--requires the counselors at "crisis pregnancy centers" actually be licensed professionals. CPCs are notorious for not having any actual medical personnel on staff (and not telling anyone that they do not). The completely asinine aspects--as usual--is that it says that a doctor who is going to perform the abortion must take into account a person's mental health history, their religious beliefs, any coercion attempts (so discussing their familial/living situation), and their age to determine if they will "risk mental health problems" because of having an abortion.

So, if a person's beliefs generally say that abortion is wrongity-wrong-wrong-wrong and their home life is heavy on that environment but they have, for whatever reason, decided it was the option they need now, a doctor must take into account those beliefs and their environment to determine if they're at risk for depression after & therefore, not do the procedure. And if you recall (.pdf):

There is evidence that stigma around abortion, rather than the abortion itself, can have negative mental health consequences. A woman may have negative emotions after an abortion because she thinks her partner, family or community will condemn or exclude her for deciding to have an abortion. According to the APA, the “most methodologically strong studies...showed that interpersonal concerns, including feelings of stigma, perceived need for secrecy, exposure to antiabortion picketing, and low perceived or anticipated social support for the abortion decision, negatively affected women’s postabortion psychological experiences.”

Oh South Dakota, you never really change.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!

I Cannot Truly Want What I Am Told I Must Have

This is my experience: I have never wanted children.

When Iain and I first started talking about the possibility of spending some significant part of our lives together, I told him flatly: "I don't want children. If that's a deal-breaker, I understand, but don't get involved with me thinking you'll change my mind, because I won't." He said, with the obnoxious confidence of a young privileged man dating his first feminist, "It's not a deal-breaker, although I think you might change your mind." I chuckled. Instead, he has changed his.

Our family is complete.

Part of being a straight cis woman who is childless by choice is that you get asked why—why you don't have children, and, if you are bold enough to say you don't want them, why it is that you don't.

I started saying I don't want children from a very young age—my oldest ladyfriend, the oft-mentioned C whom I have known since I was 11, once described a shocking event by saying, "The only thing weirder would have been you announcing you were pregnant!"—so I've been asked to consider why it is that I don't want children for much of my life, and I've never had a great answer.

I used to say, simply and straightforwardly, "I'm selfish," which is true. I like lots of time to myself, and I relish the particular flexible liberty that can't coexist with obligation, and I enjoy the psychic freedom of never having to stay on top of a child's schedule in addition to my own. But it's more than that. I knew that even when I said it, and I said it primarily because that is what people tend to believe, irrespective of its veracity.

I sometimes say, to people with whom I can be more frank, that it is because I am afraid to be pregnant (true) and that I am afraid to duplicate the same dysfunctions that defined my family of origin (also true). But it's more than that, too.

Not having an answer isn't something that plagues my mind, because "I just don't" is sufficient for my own self-satisfaction, and I have never felt as though I owe anyone a more detailed explanation than that which contents my own curiosity.

But watching the onslaught of legislative attacks on reproductive rights unfold over the last couple of years, something has begun to percolate at the back of my mind—an answer to that question, a response to the why. In the last few weeks, under the oppressive drumbeat of this dehumanization, this thought has crawled out of its chrysalis and inched its way forward toward conscious thought.

I have never been more acutely aware of my reductive purpose as a babymaking machine, more subject to incessant, inescapable, insistent reminders that my personhood is debatable, that I am nothing if I don't use my body to have children, that I am a uterus with some meat attached in service to its reproductive capacity.

And comes the realization from deep down in the darkest depths of me that I do not want children, that I have never wanted children, because of my desperate yearning to be a whole person, to matter, always and only, on the value of me and not the other little people I am supposed to create.

Please understand: I do not judge other women who are parents by the measure of their reproductive choice. I am merely acknowledging my understanding of how society, and some of the particular subcultures and communities of which I am a member, would judge me if I made the same choice—and certainly judges them.

No one, after all, knows better the ways that motherhood can be used to devalue women than a mother.

I have understood, intuitively, from a very early age that, in this culture, in the spaces in which I move, to have children is to dilute one's value as a human, even as it is to enhance one's value as a woman.

To have children, in this culture, in the spaces in which I move, has felt and feels still like a concession to a destiny in which I felt I had no choice, unless I chose childlessness.

This is the thought that the assault on reproductive rights has laid across my consciousness in the past days, weeks: I don't want children, because I so dearly want a choice, because I so ardently want autonomy, because I so desperately want my full humanity. And I have lived a lifetime in spaces—familial spaces, religious spaces, educational spaces, cultural spaces—in which virtually every message I received encouraged me, coaxed me, cajoled me, coerced me into childbearing.

And now it is the endgame: Now they fight to force me.

It should come as no surprise that a movement seeking to limit my choice makes me feel like I don't have one. And still, I am rather astonished to discover that I have simply never felt that having children was ever a choice I believed I could enthusiastically make on my own, without having been compromised by the crushing pressure of procreative, anti-choice rhetoric.

For the first time, I consider the possibility that I don't even really know if I want children or don't want them. All I know with certainty is that I will not have them.

Not like this.

Open Wide...

Shut Up!