It never ends:
The Oklahoma Senate approved several bills Monday that opponents say would make it more difficult or uncomfortable for women to get abortions, including one that would require women seeking the procedures early in their pregnancies to undergo an invasive form of ultrasound…. One of the laws headed to the governor would require doctors to use a vaginal probe in cases where it would provide a clearer picture of the fetus than a regular ultrasound. Doctors have said this is usually the case early in pregnancies, when most abortions are done.
“You’re going to force someone to undergo an invasive medical procedure,” objected state Sen. Andrew Rice, D-Oklahoma City, who voted against the bill. “You have to invasively put an instrument inside the woman. This could be your 15-year-old daughter who was raped.”
Anti-choice activists spent most of the last decade railing against late-term abortions. No one could’ve predicted that they would have a problem with early-term abortions too.
What most anti-choice activists have a problem with—almost all of them motivated by our sex-hating, woman-hating religious “traditions”—is sexually active women, period, whether they’re using birth control or not, whether some seek to terminate their pregnancies early or late. They want to punish sexually active women. They want to deny women access to the life-saving HPV vaccine, they want to deny women access to birth control, they want to deny women access to abortion services. And when they can’t outright deny women access to abortion—and for now they can’t—they will do all they can to make sure obtaining an abortion is a humiliating and traumatizing ordeal.
Because they hate women.
More in NEWS
Local (and not-so-local) news from your favorite writers.
Oh, surprise — it’s not like that’s been written into their traditional religious texts for centuries.
Next they’ll require the woman buy a stroller and cart it around for a while.
so go do something about it
lol posting on the internet
Crazy, theotarded Christians.
Their bible says ZERO about abortion. ZERO! Fucking zealots.
Hey, they’re just trying to hold off the impending earthquake – give them a break.
Proof positive that a religious wingnut is a religious wingnut the world over.
@5: actually it does.
Exodus 21:22-25
And if men struggle and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.”
in other words, a fetus is not a human life.
Not only is their misogynistic agenda wrong, it’s contrary to what they say they believe is god’s word.
Yanno, there’s a word for forcible insertion of a foreign object into a woman’s vagina…just sayin’.
Transvaginal ultrasound is already the norm for gestation dating, or at least it is around here. While I don’t think it’s a judge’s job to decide best clinical practices, you *do* kind of need a clear and accurate idea of the age and size of the embryo/fetus before an abortion.
Well, when we are all dead and gone, they can feel free and clear to explore other avenues for meeting their sexual needs, guilt free.
The American Taliban strikes again!
Maybe we can trick them into denying all women access to Oklahoma. After a generation we’ll just make it a nice national park or something.
Danger,
I’m from Oklahoma, it wouldn’t make a nice national park.
ok
when I had an abortion in NY, they used this same procedure to determine that it was 8wks in. It is no more invasive than a speculum, and actually a lot more comfortable than that particular instrument.
On the other hand, I’m not clear on why they’re trying to *require* it, just pointing out that
a) pretty much any gynecological procedure is invasive and uncomfortable
b) the abortion itself is invasive and painful, if you thought this procedure was hand-holding and pretty flowers you’re insane
really when you decide to have sex you’re signing up for invasive and uncomfortable and potentially painful, from pap smears to abortions to pregnancies
I’m assuming they think that a woman seeing a speck on an ultrasound that may become a baby will make her become emotionally attached. I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS DECISION, *but* I think it’s a messaging problem to call it medically invasive. Personally invasive, emotionally invasive, yes, it is. But not medically invasive. I’ve had this done twice, and I would get 20 transvaginal ultrasounds before I’d want a simple pap smear. It’s really nothing as far as medical procedures go. It’s not painful, and when I’ve had it done, the doctor had me insert the probe. No worse than using a tampon, really.
“Much ado about nothing.”
–Willie S!
Danger, you’ve obviously never been to Oklahoma.
“the abortion itself is invasive and painful, if you thought this procedure was hand-holding and pretty flowers you’re insane”
Oh give me a break. No reasonable adult thinks that way (maybe some teenaged girl) but give us some credit.
The other piece of subtext here is that these guys do think abortions are all hand holding and pretty flowers. They think slutty women blithely go around having unprotected sex and whenever they get knocked up they want to stop in at a drive-thru Planned Parenthood for a no questions asked quickie abortion, and head off for a fun day at the beach afterward, probably with more anonymous sex.
They think women have abortions because abortions are so much more convenient than any other option. And so they think they can reign in all this promiscuity or make women carry the fetus to term by adding inconveniences.
Not that enlightening them would change anything. They would just come up with some other justification.
I’ll throw my two cents in with the other chicks here who have had the probe ultrasound – it’s not bad (especially compared to standard gyno exam stuff).
That said – I totally disagree with this ruling. The necessity of the ultrasound needs to be a decision made by a doctor familiar with the patient’s situation – not a government mandate.
@14 “really when you decide to have sex you’re signing up for invasive and uncomfortable and potentially painful, from pap smears to abortions to pregnancies” yeah, but not everyone who wants an abortion has DECIDED to have sex. (That said – I appreciate the rest of your comment).
@18:
I dunno… Lots o’ men that I know think an abortion is “…hand holding & pretty flowers…”
A kind of “wha’s the big deal?” type thang.
elenchos:
Right minds think alike, or something like that…
Amirightorwhat?????
Come on, Dan, as chilling as I find this legislation– and the motives behind it– these people are primarily acting out of the belief that life begins at conception– not several weeks or months later. That is why most of them are so black and white on the issue. Sure, there’s a lot of other issues at play, but mainly, on abortion, it’s that life starts at conception according to them.
If they aren’t going to be reasonable in this ongoing debate, at least you can be.
Taking such a hard and misleading line makes you just as bad as the ones who say abortions cause breast cancer.
I think the root of the problem here is misogyny. The right doesn’t care about sexually active women exactly, they do end up opposing general women’s sexuality however. What they want is women to have sex under their terms. Under the rules outlined by men who wish to keep tight control of their female possession’s bodies. This is why the catholic church cares so much, if women think for themselves about their body instead of thinking through church doctrine (100% outlined by men of course) then it really opened the door to thinking independently about other things.
@23 if the Oklahoma senate and anti-abortion activists were only motivated by their belief that life begins at the moment of conception, and not that women should not have sex and women who do have sex should be punished, then they would be pouring their money and support into sex ed programs and free contraceptives for all.
@18 well obviously OK seems to think that it needs to be more painful and more invasive. And, after once being a teenaged girl, the idea of an abortion was always the scariest thing I could ever think of.
@9–I was going to say the same thing. This is a Planned Parenthood standard (or at least it used to be). It’s kind of funny that they’re legislating a procedure that already happens, and disturbing that they’re doing it for reasons that are more about politics than sound medical practice, but it is nonetheless sound medical practice. And having had a couple of transvaginal ultrasounds for diagnostic purposes, I can join @14 in reporting that it’s not awesome-feeling, but really isn’t all that bad.
They also don’t seem to be able to distinguish between sexually active women who are active by choice and those who have been acted upon without their consent. Apparently, any woman who wants an abortion is a slut whether it’s a result of rape or self-directed sexual activity, inside or outside of marriage. A fine Christian attitude, indeed.
When I saw the title of the post, I thought this would be about the NBA playoffs.
A state legislature should not dictate the details of ANY medical procedure. Period. Isn’t that why doctors go to med school?
@ 9, 14, & 15: It’s surprising how personal subjective experiences become applicable to everyone else. I don’t presume to tell or to know how another woman handles her gynecological procedures. What’s painless for one could be painful for another.
That said, I find it disturbing that they want to “require” this procedure, regardless of whether or not it’s par for the course re:gestation confirmation.
@ 8, you’re on to something. That they want the ultrasound to spark in the woman their essentialist idea that all women are meant to be nurturing mother-Marys is old news. This seems to highlight their women-hating in that they want to (metaphorically) rape a woman with an instrument because she has the audacity to fuck and then to want not to be pregnant. That the exceptions of rape, incest and life of the woman(ha!) are one big straw argument, thanks to the fact that you would need to PROVE each of those before being allowed to get an abortion, is rarely brought into the debate.
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2…
“How ridiculously incapable of self-reflection can one be that one is able to acknowledge that rape (forcing a woman to do something with her body she doesn’t want to do) is a Terrible Thing, but the denial of abortion (forcing a woman to do something with her body she doesn’t want to do) is a Moral Imperative?” Answer? One hates women.
I don’t understand how the necessity of this is justified. In Canada and presumably some other places, abortion is usually done surgically under general anesthesia. It is possible to tell gestational age fairly accurately through hormone levels and measurements, and here abotrtion is difficult to get after 12 weeks, except with very compelling medical reasons, so as long as your doctor is sure you’re within that window, any ultrasound is unnecessary, nevermind an invasive procedure.
I believe the thrust behind this law is to make getting an abortion into a humiliating experience, which can only backfire, scaring off the most vulnerable (read: young) women and causing more hidden pregnancies and dumpster babies.
@31–my point in mentioning my experience was not to suggest that my anecdotal reflections should be the basis for legal decisions, but that before we all spiral into outrage about invasive and horrible medical procedures, we should take a moment to reflect on how invasive and horrible they actually are. My own experiences were neither invasive nor horrible, so I’m throwing my voice into the mix–but not claiming to be the final authority on the matter.
Transvaginal ultrasound is a useful procedure prior to an abortion, because fetal aqe is an important factor in determining what method to use. If, in fact, a woman is early enough in her pregnancy, this moderately invasive ultrasound can help avoid a more invasive MVA procedure in favor of a simpler medical abortion. In saying this, I in NO way mean to suggest that the Senate’s actions are appropriate–as a rule I don’t think that legislative bodies have legitimate reason to be so involved in the specifics of which medical screening tests are performed and which aren’t, and I think their reasons here do have everything to do with making abortion difficult. But I also don’t think that the cause of promoting reproductive rights is served by trying to scare women about transvaginal ultrasound, which is not that scary.
Of course it’s better for a woman to have unlimited children out of wedlock on a state-supported welfare system instead of abortion.
This drives me insane. For some folks, abortion IS a viable option.
The only result of this I can see is women going to other states to get abortions… When I had to get one, I talked to some people in the waiting room who traveled from out-of-state because their own residence wasn’t the peachiest place to get the procedure done. Politically, this is bad, but personally, I’d never step foot in Oklahoma if I could help it. Liberal states and cities are the only places I want to be…
You would think, based on their seeming hatred of women, that they would be ok with aborting GIRL babies.
gosh, Dan, the linked article didn’t have a word about religious traditions or woman hating.
In fact, two of the five Democratic women in the Ok. Senate voted for the bill.
Are they Woman-Haters?
Do you know them?
How many Pro-Life activists do you actually know?
What sample size are you working from when you assert that MOST of them have a problem with ‘sexually active women’?
Do you know what percentage of Pro-Life Americans are sexually active women?
What sample size are you working from when you assert that ALMOST ALL OF THEM are motivated by Your sex-hating, woman-hating religious “traditions”?
When you make broad negative generalizations about people you’ve never met you sound like an Ignorant Bigot. It’s as if Meathead grew up to be Archie Bunker.
Perhaps your hatred of religion clouds your reasoning on this matter.
@30 said exactly what I was thinking. Legislators are not equipped to make medical decisions. This kind of decision should ALWAYS be between a woman and her physician, never mandated by committee. Legislators do not have sufficient medical training to select and mandate the appropriate diagnostic tools. That’s why they aren’t administering the tests.
Kim in Portland, that seems a little harsh to me. Let me propose a different solution.
As I’m sure you know, it’s all the fault of us women. We lure men into wanting us, fucking us, or raping us if we’re cockteases. But it’s still our fault because men can’t control themselves around us. Because they can’t control themselves, they must control us, so they won’t lose control. See? It all makes sense to me now.
So here’s what should be done. Build massive space stations to which all females will be confined and leave Earth to the males. Or move the males to the space stations, doesn’t matter to me. No more abortions. Problem solved.
My first reaction to reading this is not that it’s because they hate women and women’s rights, but that they’re confirming pregnancy to begin with.
My GF had to have an abortion a few months back, and before they got started, they performed a vaginal probe ultrasound to first confirm she actually was pregnant. And yes, I’m sure checking hormone levels would be telling as well, but I’m no doctor so I wasn’t about to second-guess the people who were doing their (very difficult) jobs. I thought it was quite kind to make damn sure she was pregnant first, because after seeing how her medical abortion affected her, I wouldn’t want anyone to go through that unnecessarily.
How can you require a woman to undergo a medical procedure against her consent? I hope PP fights this hard.
41
Abort her when she’s just a few months old.
@42: An embryo is not a person, Anonymous. There’s a reason that strict vegetarians will happily eat eggs.
Heck, the Old Testament says that an embryo does not count as a person. Look at #7.
*Alleged
D’OH!
This is creepy. What’s to stop them now from legislating mandatory clitorectomies?
two points from a girl who’s been there:
1) transvaginal ultrasound = no biggie.
2) you do not need ultrasound to have an abortion! you really don’t, only if there are complications.
@31, what 33 said
she said it better than I probably would but I wrote in with my experience because Dan has no way of knowing, and from my perspective his outrage over how invasive the procedure is was a bit much
I don’t agree that the ultrasound should be REQUIRED, I just wanted to point out that the procedure itself, and its invasiveness, shouldn’t be the cause of our outrage, the excess and unnecessary legislation should be
Well I hate them back.
This kind of ultrasound is standard for early pregnancy. I’m chalking this up as not a big deal. Also an abortion itself will involve putting things in the vagina (dilating cervix, vacuuming contents) so if someone has an issue with that, conceptually, it’s not just this law that will be a trigger.
There are worse attacks on freedom out there (such as — was it Kansas? — the state that was going to make it illegal to do things that might harm a fetus outside a doctor’s office).
stuff like this makes me want to get preg just so i can have an abortion and smear it in some rabid hate-filled wackjob’s face…