Debate Magazine

Is a Transvaginal Ultrasound Really That Intrusive?

Posted on the 08 February 2013 by Eowyn @DrEowyn

unborn baby

Anti-Abortion Pro-Life Michigan Republicans push for transvaginal ultrasound bill

NY Daily News: The transvaginal ultrasound is back. Months after a Virginia measure to make women undergo the intrusive procedure before getting an abortion came to symbolize Democratic claims of a  GOP “war on women,” Michigan Republicans are getting into the act. Legislation being pushed by a Republican state representative, and co-sponsored by 22 of his  colleagues, would mandate women undergo the procedure at least two hours before an abortion.

Republicans elsewhere are also putting abortion back on the political radar  at a time when party elites hope to move beyond divisive social issues. A new  proposed Tennessee law would require a regular ultrasound at least 24 hours  before an abortion, a bill in Alabama would stiffen requirements for abortion  clinics in the state and legislation in Arkansas would make it harder for  in-state insurance companies to cover abortions under the new national health  care law.

But it’s the bill in Michigan, a blue-leaning state that President Obama won in  November, that’s drawing the most attention.

“The performance of a diagnostic ultrasound examination of the fetus further  protects the interests of the woman seeking an abortion by assessing the  viability of the fetus and confirming the approximate gestational age of the  fetus, as this information is necessary in order to determine appropriate  medical care for the woman seeking an abortion,” the bill says.

Democrats have made clear they’re ready to fight the GOP-controlled  statehouse on the issue. “This is an unnecessary and unwarranted intrusion into the health decisions  of women,” a spokeswoman for state House Democratic Leader Tim Greimel told  Talking Points Memo. “This is yet another example of the Republican obsession with overregulating people’s private lives.”

Evil, intrusive medical device

Evil, intrusive medical device

I don’t see the big  deal with this, especially if it’s necessary to determine the appropriate medical treatment to rip the baby out of the womb. I’ve had the procedure done before and it’s no big deal. The big deal for opponents is that a woman might realize she’s actually carrying a baby instead of “cells”.  What opponents fear is that, upon seeing what happens during an abortion and seeing their baby, many women might choose to have their baby rather than go through with the abortion. Much less intrusive than ripping a baby from the womb.


Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog