Virginia’s House Gearing Up to ‘Probe’ Women Who Want Abortions

“Probe”? Without consent? I think the word we’re all searching for is “rape.”

Has anyone noticed that it appears to be mostly (all) men that are mandating and passing these laws?  How many of the 63 were women?  And why would they vote away their rights to something that is a legal procedure that is not forced on anyone?

It can’t be said often enough that the Republican Party is deeply hostile to women.

No. I live in Virginia and have heard a lot about this. The woman is absolutely not required to look. 

You are right, but may I suggest a slight improvement to your phrasing? It’s government-MANDATED rape.

“We’re talking about inside a woman’s body,” Yes, and we’re talking potentially taking a baby apart. It is a serious procedure, all should be done to make sure the woman knows exactly what she’s engaging in. Would be silly to play ignorant or hide the truth.

Because it makes about as much sense as forcing women to have a transvaginal ultrasound.

Think goose and gander 🙂

A digital exam or a PSA (don’t know if that would count under you proposal) seems like it wouldn’t do enough to protect men.  I would recommend a colonoscopy  before a 30 day supply of ED medication is given or renewed.  Sex can be strenuous so we must assure that men are up to it you know  in the vast majority of these cases, these are matters of lifestyle convenience.

They aren’t even trying to pretend that there is some medical validity to this procedure.  These are sick, sick people.

Does the bill propose who will pay for this unnecessary, invasive procedure? 

This was passed in conjunction with a “personhood” bill that no one found out about–even Planned Parenthood–until the day it passed the House of Delegates. It went to the Senate almost immediately, and was passed there in short order. All it lacks is the Governor’s signature. Those of us opposed had literally no time to effectively make our voices heard, though we certainly tried (my husband started a quite a noise on his campus, myself and many friends spent hours on the phone and on social media, etc.). Polls show a majority of Virginians oppose both of these measures, but we have no say in the matter. If the Gov signs them, and he’s already said he’ll sign the ultrasound bill, the best we can do is wait for the next election and hope to vote them out.

Regardless of someone’s stance on abortion, I don’t see how they can think it’s fine to allow personal (and largely religious) doctrine to dictate a woman have unnecessary, invasive medical procedures in order to obtain a legal medical procedure. Or to limit FDA approved medications of any kind. If nothing else, because of the “slippery slope” argument.  Despite the conservatives assurances that this wouldn’t disallow birth control in the state, they shot down an amendment to assure exactly that.

I have no idea what is going to happen in the net days, weeks, and months; but, as a woman, and as a secularist, I am pretty sure it’s going to violate my rights and those of other women in the state. It’s terrifying. That isn’t an overstatement for me. We can’t move for at least a year–will I be a criminal in that time, because some religious person thinks they,and their skydaddy, have more rights over my body than I do?

Took me a second to figure our what you were saying.  You’re failing a trolling

Absolutely agree. Want to know what’s being said about it here, in the state? They’re saying it’s not, because it’s the woman’s choice to have an abortion, therefore she’s consenting to the “medically relevant” procedures required. Hence, not rape. A local radio show (disclosure: I live near Liberty U, so I realize I may be hearing the worst of it) said there was no difference in that and a woman agreeing to her pap smear.

It’s abominable.

As far as I know, doctors would be legally required to perform the intra-vaginal ultrasound, even in cases of rape. Because a woman who’s been brutally raped clearly needs to have yet another violation of her vagina before she can make an “informed decision” about her life.

These people are so desperate to make the real world just like Leave it to Beaver that they’re willing to take medical decisions away from doctors and patients and put them in the hands of politicians, but they still claim to be supporters of “liberty”. I’m ashamed to live in a country where such men can hold high elective office.

As an aside, I looked up the two men (always men, damn it) running for the Democratic nomination for the my local House seat, and one is anti-abortion, while the other holds some bizarre strict constructionist view of the Constitution under which the government does not have the right to prevent school prayer. Neither one should be nominated to call themselves a Democrat.

Yep. Her or her insurance. The procedure runs, roughly, about $400-600, I am told by a physician friend.

A similar law passed in Texas however, there was no need for a vaginal ultrasound. The doctor is to perform an ultrasound and describe what he sees and a monitor to listen to the baby’s heartbeat.  It passed a constitutional challenge and was found not to violate the constitution by the 5th circuit court of appeals. 

Also note that the Virginia House passed HB1, the “personhood” bill

And let’s not forget that Virginia is also the state that not only doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage OR civil unions, but also passed an amendment that “establishes a section that explicitly prevents the government from recognizing the legal status of any relationships outside of heterosexual marriage. Though paragraph one of the amendment specifically bans same-sex marriage, paragraph two prevents the government from recognizing the legal status of any relationship of unmarried individuals that would in anyway approximate marriage.

Lovely place.

I had a hunch that they wouldn’t. It’s the kind of law that just begs for another layer of absurdity to be added to it.

It’s worth nothing that they rejected an amendment that would have given the alternative of an external ultrasound if it could provide the same kind of information.  That means that the Republicans explicitly wanted women and girls requiring an abortion to be vaginally penetrated, even if there was no medical reason for doing so and less invasive alternatives.

Now, I’ve been thinking about the word “rape”. It is an extreme word, to be sure. It’s true that sometimes these procedures are a part of getting an abortion because of medical requirements. However it’s one thing to have this done because it’s a medically neccesary step and quite another to have this done knowing that it’s only happening because lawmakers whose religion tells them you are a murderer want you to feel shame and fear at it. Sort of the difference between being cut open in an apendicitis and being randomly stabbed in the leg during the same operation because some jackass thinks the appendix is sacred. One is a medical procedure, the other is assault. Women forced to submit to vaginal penetration purely as an expression of disapproval of their choices are being assaulted.

So I assume the woman would be paying out of pocket.  Even if abortions are covered on a woman’s health insurance, insurance companies could easily deny coverage of this added procedure  since there is no medical reason for it. 

I’m ready to scream…

Pretty much, yes. Meaning that, once again, poor women are likely to be the most affected. Those without the least means to fight for their rights, to have access to good medical care anyway, now have one more obstacle the rich don’t face.

You hit the nail on the head. The decision to undergo a medical procedure should be made by doctors and patients on a case by case basis, not by politicians who simply want to make it as unpleasant as they possibly can to have a perfectly legal procedure.

“otherwise it is a pointless excercise” What do you mean ‘otherwise’?

Ha ha.  “Otherwise” it’s a pointless exercise.  I see what you did there.

*toadies

Government mandated sexual abuse…disgusting…what further sickens  me is the fact that this is stemming from the Christian Right—you know, the people who claim the moral high ground…Enough is enough, we need to separate religion from politics in a serious way in this country.

I’m a lifelong Virginian, and I was horrified when I found out about this, and the “personhood” bill. The “personhood” bill is even more disturbing, as it is probably intended to  ban the use of the Pill.

I am not feeling very proud about being a Virginian right now *sighs*.

I just wrote to my state Senator about this.  Not that it will affect anything, because he is already strongly on our side.   

I wrote my delegate and senator both, as well. Like you, it’s not going to make a difference. Unfortunately, in my case it’s because they’re both staunchly anti-choice, conservative, fundamentalist and evangelical Christian Republicans. I did write Gov. McDonnel, though he’s already pledged to sign the ultrasound bill. He’s remained quiet on what he’ll do about the personhood bill, but I suspect the only reason he’d considering veto would be concern that it may harm his chances at his well-known ambition to be a VP candidate either this Presidential election or next. Though, with the way this country feels like it’s being dragged back into the Middle Ages, by next election it might be points in his favor if he does sign it, I suppose.

 Still not a bad idea. Contacting your reps and senators is useful even if you already approve of their position. Constituent correspondence is a way politicians judge just how passionate their voters are about a given issue. If they get all the emails/letters from one side (say, the side angry you are opposing vaginally assaulting women for wanting an abortion) they may assume that the other side is indifferent or at least not as passionate about it. If voters make sure their representative knows that they are VERY passionate about an issue, their rep will make sure that he or she is also very passionate about the issue.

I agree. Also, it’s worth calling, too. It’s harder to ignore someone on the phone than it is an email. You’ll likely need to call your rep’s Richmond offices right now (assuming you’re somewhere not Richmond).

Thank you for beating me to it — I was hoping I wouldn’t be the only one frothing at the mouth over that. Right. The majority of abortions are due to women who just can’t be arsed to have a filthy brat underfoot. You know, I have to wonder why we continue to have representatives who IN NO FUCKING WAY represent anything relevant to the everyday life of the average citizen. These are people who are so far removed from our reality that it’s a wonder that they stay tethered to the planet itself.

I foresee a lot of women taking it into their own hands to have an abortion, injuring or killing themselves in the process. 
I’d certainly be upset by this if I were a woman in Virginia. 

So if I get raped, I have to go through a “government-mandated rape” process (good analogy, above comments) in order to have a DESIRED operation to get rid of the “child” in me?  What bullshit. It’s MY body. If the doctors aren’t willing to help me, hell, I’d do it myself. I don’t want a god-given rape-baby. And that’s the mentality some women are going to take. 

You mean Government-mandated god-given gifts, right?  That’s how we are supposed to refer to non-consensual contact brought about by the woman’s hussy dress and sinful actions.   If she didn’t want to be probed, she shouldn’t have worn that flimsy hospital gown.  I mean her butt was just hang out of it.  

If anyone is interested in how a swing state like Virginia which voted for Obama in 2008 can do such a thing, here  is the story: Virginia Democrats made a deal with Virginia Republicans. They would allow gerrymandering to give the Republicans control of the House of Delegates if the Republicans would allow gerrymandering to give the Democrats control of the State Senate. This plan was agreed upon and passed. Unfortunately this past November, things did not go as planned. The Virginia Democrats did not do a good job finding serious candidates to run for office and focused on too few races. This meant that the Republicans picked up two seats which split the senate equally between the two parties. This gave the Republican Lieutenant

Governor the tie breaking vote. Since the Virginia state senate does not have filibuster ability, this means that, except for the budget, the Republicans now control the entire state government. It will stay that way at least until the 2013 Governor’s race. So despite being a moderate state, Virginia will be the center of many hard core right wing votes for the next two years. Let’s hope that we can at least use this to motivate the people to come out and vote this November and next.

There is no other way to state this than what it is.

Virginia has mandated state-sponsored rape by medical proxy.

“What a sad way to view life.”

You might have a point …. perhaps we should require a full sinus flush before buying tissues.

I’m going to ask my gynecologist to refuse to conduct such exams.  If she refuses, I’ll find a new gynecologist.

If you live in Virginia, please join me in encouraging physicians to stand up for the rights of their patients. 

Any support for any restrictions on abortion, is viewing women as group property, period.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  Why are clumps of cells more important than constitutionally protected citizens?

I say:  Jam Baseball Bats into the asses of all the men who voted for this!!!!

I am a woman, I do not view myself or any others of my gender as property. However, a fetus is a bit more than a clump of cells by the time clinical abortion becomes an option. Therefore the womans rights to her body do not extend to having complete control over another human being, i.e. the one in her uterus. I’m sure you would agree if a woman is 9 months pregnant and could give birth any day it would be wrong for her to abort the baby. Thus, at least that restriction on abortion is warranted, right? Restrictions on abortion are not necessarily an assault on woman’s rights.

I think he means “if the already-troubled patient isn’t arm-twisted into another christian-invented guilt-trip by being forced to look at THE POOR INNOCENT BABY!  OHHHHH NOOOOOO! that she’s going to *gasp* MURRRRRRDURRRRRRRR with this horrible evil satanist atheist scientist gay-ist liberalist medical procedure!”

It feels really twisted to say, but I think I’d like to see some really, really spiteful abortion patients jerk the rug out from under this whole charade by willingly acquiescing to this, staring dead-on at the ultrasound monitor, pointing out and commenting on visible anatomical components of the developing embryo/fetus, and then saying “Okay, doc, we done here?  Let’s make with the abortin’.”

It sounds like something out of one of those stupid “scare ’em back to Jeezus” videos, one of those “if atheists ruled the world” strawman tracts, but boy would it kill the belief that guilt trips work on abortion-seeking women.

It’s shit like this that makes me want not just federally-legalized abortions, but federally-legalized LATE TERM abortions.  Just as a slap in the face to fundie-fascist sexist motherfuckers like this who would see 1/2 the population of humanity oppressed and subjugated for kicks.  See how they like federally-legalized day-before-the-due-date abortions.  Oh, no, am I making the baby Jesus cry?  Maybe you assholes shouldn’t have played body-nazi with pregnant women then.

FYI-A digital exam is not a Prostate Specific Antigen test.  That’s a blood test.

 Don’t give them any ideas.  I wouldn’t put it past them.

 Thank you for such an excellent take-down of that view!

No stats on hand, but I recall reading somewhere that even in places where it is legal to abort for any reason up to the last day of pregnancy women still choose late-term abortion only for medical reasons and abortions for unwanted pregnancies still get done in the early term.  Women, contrary to popular mostly right-wing christian opinion, are not stupid chunks of warm meat intended solely for incubating the poor wee widdle iddy-biddy babies.  They are fully capable of making their own decisions, and you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who, given the opportunity to freely choose without delaying tactics, would choose to abort in the last term just for “kicks”.  I understand late-term has more significant risks too, so can any of these people explain to me why a woman would choose a more invasive, more expensive, and more risky abortion nine months later for an unwanted pregnancy if they can have a less expensive, less invasive, and less risky abortion right now?  They never can, which is why they resort to the emotionally-charged lies and strawmen.

 Kind of like “look, Brisol Palin didn’t have an abortion, and she’s just fine!”  Well, there’s kind of a world of difference between the daughter of a rich white republican politician and a poor girl living in the ghetto, isn’t there?  Or even the former and an average girl?  Or “look at how Sarah Palin didn’t abort a pregnancy when she found out it would be [I don’t know the PC term, so feel free to help me out, but retarded?]”  Well, I’m pretty sure that kids with those issues cost quite a bit of money, due to the special education and the increased health risks, all of which are lifelong as the child will never be able to be fully autonomous, which can bankrupt an ordinary family.  Let’s not pretend little Bristol or Ms. Sarah have any idea what those situations mean for the average, non-rich and in many cases non-white citizens of the country.

Oh, wait, I forgot.  They’ll just fall back on “well, the slut should have thought about it.”

Words cannot describe how much I hate these people.  I’m starting to come around to Neil’s way of thinking.  Once a tyrant has taken too much ground, there may not be a nice peaceful way to deal with them.  And you can’t negotiate with someone who has invaded your country by force and is declaring some special right to dictate what goes on in it–which is what these people are  doing to millions of women’s private bodies, turning their flesh into public property over which they have absolutely no power, which is even worse.  When you’re being invaded by authoritarians who come to conquer and control  you absolutely, it’s futile to just sit there going  “um, hi, if it’s not too much trouble could you maybe not do that, please?”  Get real, they’re not interested in negotiation, and these people have no interest in making  sure women get “informed” (otherwise, there would be an equal mandate to inform women that pregnancy carried to term has a higher rate of mortality and risk than abortion).  They want to force women into the roles they feel Jesus has delineated for them, nothing more.

 Me too!  Thanks!

 Problem is that “dead sluts” are a feature and not a bug to these monsters.

 Done.

“The vast majority of abortions happen before the embryo has a brain, and
later abortions generally happen because of undetected pregnancy, fatal
fetal anomalies, maternal health needs, etc., etc.”

That is simply not true.  Over 80% of abortions occur within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy with 60% occurring around 9 weeks. The baby has a functioning heart with its own blood type within 20 days and brain activity within 40 days.

So if the lack of brain activity is a sign of death, logically the presence of brain activity should be seen as a sign of life.  

I too have had the internal probe ultra-sound, many times, while pregnant with my twins and you are 100% right! It is painful, it’s pushing directly and bloody firmly against the cervix. It’s not at all like a pap smear, think cervix check in labour, the ones you have to pant through.
 It’s embarrassing to boot. Is it not enough that you’ve already had your doctor perform an internal, and in order to actually get the abortion yet another doctor will be at work up there, along with his whole team of assistants? Must we really expose ourselves to another complete stranger for no particular reason too? Add in the ultra-sound assistant and you might as well sell tickets and pop it up on the big screen.
This is an intensely personal time, making the choice, it’s not like a woman is unaware of what she is choosing.
Why do conservative, predominately christian men so often believe that women are incapable of making desicions without their “guidance” or permission?

Thank you so much for sharing your story.

*one immoral act on top of another immoral act.

Sorry, I hate disqus–It’s hard to edit when it gets this small.

 It is not true that brain activity begins at 40 days, and I can tell you the exact origins of this myth.  In the 1960s, a Dr. Hamlin wrote an OPINION paper arguing that we should define death based on brain activity instead of cardiac activity.  In this opinion paper, he cited research done in Japan, and he got the major facts of it wrong.  (PS: The fact that pro-life sites get their information from opinion papers instead of going directly to the research is telling about their concern for truth.)

The research in Japan was conducted on aborted 90 day old fetuses, and basically stated that if you jab an EEG probe through the skull of an aborted fetus, you get a reading.  It never determined if the reading was brain activity, or if it was artifactal.  (Fun fact: EEGs are so sensitive to interference that if you hook a person up to an EEG and an IV at the same time, you will see an EEG spike every time the IV drips.)

Dr. Hamlin misquoted research done on 90 day old fetuses as being done on 40 day old fetuses, and misinterpreted the results as brain activity.  Modern studies have found that the very earliest you can get the sleep spindles and other patterns that indicate actual brain activity don’t occur until after 120 days gestation, and even then they have to be drug-induced.

IT IS NOT TRUE that brain activity starts at 40 days gestation. 

Since crap like this is getting slammed into law so quickly with little to no public debate or even the remotest nod to the personal liberty it destroys I hope that just as swiftly those in those states who are opposed, organize and appeal it by every legal means available.  This is an outrage and it is human rights violation sanctioned by the state.  This is not constitutional. 

 Please understand that with this question I am not judging you in any way but I am curious about one comment you made in your post and was curious.  You mention that the abortion was the best thing for the child.  How is ending its life the best thing for the child? I understand the hardships you were facing but, if everyone was healthy, why would not adoption be the better choice for the child?

I believe that you are, quite simply, fundamentally wrong on every level.  A woman does not owe society or the fetus (or the father, or the government) any more consideration in her reproductive choices than she is freely willing to give.  If society and the father are treating the woman as a free human being and not asking unreasonable things of the woman, the vast majority of women will give their views some merit, but force is never justified.   That you claim to not view yourself as property when you are treated as such, is simply due to the fact that you have been conditioned to not see the glaring inequities in society which are badly justified by the happenstance of sexual biology, but which also serve to take away your freedom and hand it to those who think they know better than you and should be allowed to control the most intimate, personal aspects of your life.

Feel free explain to me why the only person deeply, personally involved with the pregancy should not have absolute control over that pregnancy, when any other option requires a serious reduction in her freedom and the involvement of people with no personal stake or responsibility in the pregnancy .  The woman is the only person taking a substantial risk with a pregnancy.  She is the only one whose time and energy are required.  She is the only one whom can be hurt or killed by a pregnancy.  She is the only one who will ever really be  responsible for the well-being of the fetus and the consequences of the pregnancy.  She is the only one with a real interest in whether or not she reproduces.  Why should this choice EVER be given to anybody else?  There is no compelling government interest in forcing childbirth, as the human race is not dying out.  Men have the ability to reproduce literally hundreds of times in their lives, why should they get any measure of legal control over every woman they happen to conceive with?   And who the hell are you to tell another woman when she must reproduce?  The only sane place to leave that choice is exactly where it is and has always truly  been- with the mother.         

Your nine-month-fetus example is ridiculous in any part of the abortion debate.  You say you are trying to find some common ground, but you fail  miserably for several reasons. 

 First, it’s simply dishonest…9th month abortions are incredibly rare, and I have never once heard of somebody having one as birth control, because of a last-minute change of mind, or out of spite.  Restrictions on late-term abortions don’t  save a single fetus, and  only serve to restrict and harm women making a difficult medical choice.   Such regulations do more to kill women than save fetuses.  You are simply trying to look at this issue in terms of a sliding scale of rights, where in fact there is none.  There may be a sliding scale of inconvenience, risk, or pain to the woman, but any restriction is still just a completely unnecessary intrusion that serves only to disempower women and hand their choices to others. 

Second, I still disagree anyway, even if I accept your idea of a “reasonable” restriction.  Even if there were large numbers of crazy women having 9th month abortions to spite their husbands(which there never will be), I would rather let a few fetuses of such people die than introduce intrusion in to all women’s choices.  Cry about it all you want, but I would not value a few fetuses over the health and  freedom of tens of millions of women, even if it were a real issue, which it isn’t.   While I might think it was irrational and even morally wrong to abort a healthy 9th month fetus(depending on many different circumstances which you and I have no way to know about), I am not willing to pretend that I have the authority or the interest in placing hurdles that could easily hurt real women, just to save some hypothetical fetuses.   It’s simply not my decision to make in any way, and as a rational adult, I accept that.  

If you were to get over your irrational fears and your irrational sense of entitlement to other people’s bodies, you might be able to accept it as well.

Well, I was discussing this with my mother (an OBGYN surgeon), and whilst she does not agree with their REASONS behind this, she says normally they have to ultrasound before they do an abortion to date the foetus/thing/it, so that they can use the most suitable method. But just my two cents, I think the reasons why they are enforcing this on women is wrong.

Oh, dear dog. I just had an anti-choicer (who, of course, calls herself “pro-life, despite  being fine with abortion in cases of rape, incest, or molestation–because apparently she alone gets to determine when life is important, but another women can’t do the same) tell me that if just half of the 47 million abortions in the US had been carried to term, we wouldn’t be in debt to China, because those people would be good, working citizens.

She wasn’t kidding. This wasn’t a joke. Neither was her “abortions give people breast cancer!” remark, though it’s been soundly put to rest that no, they don’t (just as a spontaneous abortion doesn’t increase the risk; but, somehow these people cling to the idea that  it’s only “God” aborting the fetus that it doesn’t result in breast cancer). They believe Roe v Wade was liberal legalizing abortion (instead of about medical privacy and making sure you get to decide what medical procedures to have, as opposed to your husband, for example).

Judging from the rhetoric here, these beliefs are pretty main-stream here in VA, and no one really sees a problem with mandating unecessary medical procedures as long as they feel that a legal procedure is “immoral.” They just can’t seem to work out the logical extension that makes it a hugely bad precedent. They cling to “but it will save teh bayyybeez!”, even when it’s proven over and over that ultrasounds do not diminish abortion rates. They still insist on abstinence as the only education, even that what is proven to work is easy and inexpensive access to good contraception and quality education (of all types, not just sex ed). They Will. Not. See. It. I can’t even go into the rest of the crazy here, the misinformation, the it-has-to-be-intentional misunderstanding of law.

You cannot reason someone out of something they weren’t reasoned into. I am exhausted, I am headed to a protest tomorrow, and I hope many, many others will join me. Because dealing with crazy takes a lot of energy, and those of us in this fight could really use the help.