Healthy News Daily: Abortion

Buffering out the right to hear - Boston Globe

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>Evidence that misery doesn’t love company is common at pro-life gatherings, where women holding poignant signs — “I Regret My Abortion” — urge others not to make a mistake that haunts them. As the US Supreme Court hears a constitutional challenge to the Massachusetts abortion-clinic “buffer zone” law, the justices are being reminded that the First Amendment protects more than just a speaker’s right to express ideas. It also protects a listener’s freedom to hear those ideas. Stifling that freedom near abortion clinics can mean — as 12 women argue, from personal experience, in a compelling friend-of-the-court brief prepared by Carrie Severino of the Judicial Education Project — that individuals in a crisis pregnancy are denied essential information at the moment they may need it most. There is nothing eccentric about the idea that the Constitution shields the right to receive information. “The dissemination of ideas can accomplish nothing if otherwise willing addressees are not free to receive and consider them,” wrote Justice William Brennan in 1965. “It would be a barren marketplace of ideas that had only sellers and no buyers.” But the practical effect of the Massachusetts law, which forces pro-life protesters, advocates, and counselors to stay at least 35 feet away from the entrance to any abortion clinic, is to make a reasonable exchange of ideas extremely difficult, if not impossible. The law, signed by Governor Deval Patrick in 2007, makes no allowance for peaceful or quiet protest. It doesn’t permit an individual to simply stand in silence, holding a sign or offering pamphlets. It forbids approaching even a willing listener who would like to hear — who might be desperate to hear — about a realistic alternative to abortion. The 35-foot boundary is marked with paint, and anyone who steps over it can be sentenced to as much as 2½ years in prison. Anyone, that is, except for “employees and agents” of the abortion clinic. They’re exempted from the buffer law, and can approach pregnant women or prospective patients at will. Planned Parenthood, for example, deploys official “escorts” at its large Boston facility. They function, in Planned Parenthood’s description, “like ushers in a theater: They help people figure out where to go and keep foot traffic moving.” Meanwhile, pro-life advocates are kept so far away that they have to call out to be heard — they can’t initiate a normal conversation, in a gentle voice with a reassuring smile. Yelling from a distance is rarely a good way to engage in a respectful dialogue about anything with anyone. Even someone deeply ambivalent or anxious about ending her pregnancy is unlikely to respond well to messages shouted from 35 feet away. The result is that sidewalk counselors like Eleanor McCullen, the 76-year-old lead plaintiff challenging the Massachusetts law, are far less successful than they used to be at persuading women to consider alternatives to destroying their unborn baby. That, in turn, means more abortions — and more women who end up regretting them. Women such as Paula Lucas-Langhoff, whose story is one of those recounted in Severino’s amicus brief. Pregnant at 19, she was under pressure by her boyfriend to get an abortion. But the prospect filled her with trepidation. “The night before the abortion, I wandered the neighborhood looking for someone, anyone, that I could talk to who could help,” she recalls. She had been assured by the abortion clinic staff that the procedure would be “easy”; in fact it was physically excruciating and emotionally traumatizing. “I would give anything to change the past,” Lucas-Langhoff tells the court in her sworn statement. “If pro-life counselors had been outside the abortion clinic that evening, my child would be alive today, but I was too young and frightened to know what to do . . . My baby died because I was alone and had no one to help me.” Abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood insist that “most women ultimately feel relief after an abortion.” But there are many women who are left with lifelong regrets, and who assert that they would never have chosen to have an abortion if only, at that last, critical moment, they could have received a different message. The Constitution protects their right to receive that message — whether the Commonwealth of Massachusetts likes it or not. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at jacoby@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @jeff_jacoby.</div>

Buffering out the right to hear - Boston Globe

Evidence that misery doesn’t love company is common at pro-life gatherings, where women holding poignant signs — “I Regret My Abortion” — ...

HCA data: Few women hospitalized after abortions - Charleston Gazette

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- It's unclear how many women are treated for abortion-related complications in West Virginia emergency rooms, but few, if any, are admitted to a hospital, according to the latest data available from the state Health Care Authority. In 2010 and 2011, five women each year were admitted to West Virginia hospitals for complications stemming from abortion and ectopic and molar pregnancies, according to Jim Pitrolo, chairman of the HCA. It is unclear if these complications were from legally induced abortion procedures or if they were miscarriages. None of the complications were specifically labeled to reflect a legally induced abortion. Neither the HCA nor the state Board of Medicine keeps track of emergency room visits. Abortion safety has been the subject of a review by West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who has looked into the state's regulations concerning the procedure. Dr. Byron Calhoun, an anti-abortion advocate and vice chairman of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department at West Virginia University Physicians of Charleston, wrote in a letter to Morrisey that he sees women with complications related to abortions on a weekly basis. "We commonly (I personally probably at least weekly) see patients at Women and Children's Hospital in our emergency room or our ultrasound center with complications from abortions at these centers in Charleston: so much for 'safe and legal,'" Calhoun wrote to Morrisey last summer. "These patients are told to come to our hospital because the abortion clinic providers do not have hospital privileges to care for their patients, so we must treat them as emergency 'drop-ins.'" Margaret Chapman Pomponio, executive director of WV FREE, an abortion-rights organization, said she is heartened but not surprised that few women are admitted to the hospital for abortion-related complications. </div>

HCA data: Few women hospitalized after abortions - Charleston Gazette

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- It's unclear how many women are treated for abortion-related complications in West Virginia emergency rooms, but fe...

Abortion | A pastor's plea to not sit on the sidelines and hope this horrific ... - World Magazine

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><div readability='114.318471338' class='page copy editor_content'> Jan. 22 will be the 41st anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. Our Saturday Series this month will have sermons and articles related to abortion. To start the month off, here is an excerpt from a sermon preached by Matt Chandler last year on the day before Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Chandler is the lead pastor of teaching at The Village Church in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex and president of the Acts 29 Network of churches. —Marvin Olasky If you’re a young woman in here, or maybe an older woman—I didn’t say old; I said older woman—and you were pregnant in your first or second trimester, and you were driving toward the abortion clinic to have an abortion, and on the way to the abortion clinic you were hit by a drunk driver, that person is charged with involuntary manslaughter of your baby. But if you make it to the clinic, the doctor in the clinic is legally allowed to take a vacuum pump and rip that baby to shreds in your womb. This is a seared conscience. This is madness, and this is the air we breathe as a society and a culture. So what are we to do? I think looking back on history there are these moments in time that I’m so baffled by why more people weren’t in the fight. Several years ago I was preaching out of the book of Colossians. We got to that part near the end of Colossians—Chapter 3, I believe—where he begins to say, “Slaves, be obedient to your masters.” <div readability='8' class='pad4 pad_v center eFormulate_frontend bg_gryF clrfx c19' id='paywall'> <div readability='13' class='lft two_thirds pad2'> We see you’ve been enjoying the content on our exclusive member website. Ready to get unlimited access to all of WORLD’s member content? Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now. (Don’t worry. It only takes a sec—and you don’t have to give us payment information right now.) <div readability='9' class='clrfx pad2 pad_v'> <button onclick='window.location='/trial'' class='button font serif size-1-5 mar0 c17'>Absolutely! Sign Me Up!</button> <button onclick='window.location='/member/signup.php'' class='button font serif size-1-5 mar0 c17'>Forget the Trial … Make Me a Member!</button> <button onclick='window.location='/account/'' class='button font serif size-1-5 mar0 c17'>Already a Member? Login Now</button> </div> </div> <div class='lft third pad2 pad_h'><img alt="Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now." class="mar0" src="http://www.worldmag.com/images/promos/member_trial_9-24-13.png"/> </div> </div> That’s a problem text for me, so I just began to research slavery as much as I could in the first century, and then throughout the centuries, and then began to look at what really occurred in the African slave trade and what drove that. It was honestly sugar for tea and biscuits in England that drove it. Then what the English learned in the Caribbean, the guys in the 13 colonies took advantage of to do tobacco and cotton in our industry on the East Coast during those days. As I began to look around at how Africans were dehumanized. … They were not brought here as slaves. … We went and stole people and dragged them here, dehumanized them, which led to hundreds of years of oppression that in some places is still going on. So studying that and then that leading me up to the civil rights movement, one of the things I wonder as I read about the dehumanization that was occurring all over the South and then even into the North just 30 and 40 years ago is where in the world was the church? … Where were my grandparents? What were they thinking? What were they doing? When I begin to have conversations with some of my aunts and uncles and how they wish they would have marched with King but they were just indifferent, they just thought it would work itself out. How they wish they could get back into time and fight the noble fight. Instead, they were quiet. … I think [abortion] is going to be one of those issues for us. Science is already pushing the ball forward rapidly. In 1973, when Roe v. Wade occurred, there was no sonogram. We can see our babies in the womb now. There are studies now showing the baby is dreaming in the womb. Science will eventually, I believe, turn over Roe v. Wade. It will only be a matter of time. I think really the opportunity you and I have is to “march with King,” if you’re tracking with me, rather than sit on the sideline and hope this works out. “Oh, Chandler says science will eventually turn it over. Whew! Good.” Instead of being those on the sideline, we might actually actively engage really what is the most horrific oppression, horrific injustice, horrific genocide the world has ever seen. So how do we do that? That becomes the question I want to answer in just the next few minutes. Ephesians 5:11 says, “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.” What I want to try to do is just lay before you true things today. I’m trying to expose darkness. Then you find in Matthew 25, verse 40, this story of God speaking to his people at Judgment Day. Matthew 25:40 says, “And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’” </div> <div readability='118' class='page print_only copy editor_content'> Who is more vulnerable, who is more the least of these than the unborn? Who is more fragile, who is in need of more protection, who is in need of more help than the unborn? So what are we to do as the people of God? The first thing we need to do is repent. Some of us need to repent for actively being involved in this. There’s grace and mercy for you. I started the way I started on purpose. There’s forgiveness and mercy for all. In fact, God has been drawn biblically and historically through those who have been involved in some of the most heinous things ever. … [John Newton] was a slave trader who Christ radically transformed who spent the rest of his life opposing the slave trade … in the UK. So it’s oftentimes God draws out of heinous sin those who will be used powerfully by God to overcome that heinous sin. So please do not walk in shame, but rather seek the forgiveness of God who readily makes it available to you. Not all of us have been involved actively. Most of us have been involved by simply being laissez-faire about this issue of just thinking it will work itself out, of thinking it doesn’t have much to do with us, of—God help us—wanting to be seen as cool and hip Christians. You understand that’s never going to happen, right? You do understand there’s a growing hostility toward the things of God, and that’s not going to change anytime soon. In fact, I think you’re already beginning to see a rapid progression of how we’re viewed in the public sphere. It’s not overly positive. Some of us need to just repent about being unconcerned about this issue. The second thing we can do is we can pray, guys. This is a spiritual issue. You don’t have the science in front of us that we have in front of us and not be moved to do anything about it unless your eyes are blinded, your conscience is seared. So we can pray. We can pray for judges. We can pray for those working with women. We can pray for advocacy and pregnancy centers. We can pray. In fact, we’re going to gather on Wednesday night across our campuses, and this is what we’re going to pray around. Third thing. You can vote for those who are pro-life and not vote for those who are pro-choice. Now let’s chat, because some of you are like, “Oh, you’re a one-issue voter?” A couple of things. I think you can be pro-life and be a miserable political leader. I think you can be a pro-life moron. I just absolutely believe it, but here’s the thing. We’re all one-issue voters. There are hundreds of “one issues” that could disqualify a guy from political office. Would this not be one of them? So if a man were to stand up and say, “I do not believe black men and black women should be able to hold political office,” would that not be a singular issue that in almost everybody’s mind—outside of some buffoons in the sticks—would disqualify him from public office? Would it not? Are you telling me in general our culture would tolerate that ridiculousness? Oh man, that dude would get torched. Why would this issue not be an issue that really matters if what we’re saying is the people of God, that both the Word of God and even secular science, support that what’s growing in a woman is a human being, and they’re advocating the murder of that human being? The next thing we could do is we can support with money, time, and energy those who are in this fight, whether that’s giving time, energy, effort, money to advocacy and pregnancy centers, or, if you’re able—this is a huge one—looking into and considering adoption. So here’s the thing I know about The Village Church. There are hundreds and hundreds of couples struggling with infertility who get all bogged down in the bureaucracy of adopting children. The church can do some things here that are beautiful for women. My favorite story coming out of The Village is there was a 17-year-old girl who became pregnant here. One of our couples actually had that young woman move in with them, and they helped her through all that. She had a bit of a train wreck in regard to home life, so she moved in with them. Then when her little daughter was born, another covenant member of the church actually adopted that little girl. This is how we engage the brokenness around us, not with judgment, not with drive-by “guiltings,” not with hostility, but with love and mercy and solutions. </div> <div readability='70' class='page print_only copy editor_content'> Let us help. Let us walk with you. How can we serve you? How can we encourage you? Oh that we wouldn’t be unmoved around this issue. Oh that we’d feel the weight of the fight we’ve been called to. If not us, who? Even in the amount of time I’ve spent with you today, there have been dozens and dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, of baby girls and baby boys murdered for the sake of convenience. We walk with enough people here at The Village Church to know if a pregnancy even becomes endangered, they’re encouraged that way. In fact, I was just talking to a young man in our church. They gave birth prematurely to twins. The water broke at 24 weeks. It looked like the first baby was in a lot of distress. The doctor said, “Hey, the best thing for you guys, the best thing for your wife, the best thing for this baby is to abort the first one so the second one might live.” They scoffed at that. Little Titus was born. He didn’t make it long before he died, but we held in our hands in that hospital room a fully shaped, fully formed little boy with a little nose and a little mouth and little ears. He only lived about 25-30 minutes, but he lived. His little brother made it full on and is alive and well and growing. This is the fight we’re caught up in. To be indifferent is to make us complicit with this travesty. So across all of our campuses, we have set up tables in the foyer with either advocacy and pregnancy centers or adoption agencies or ways you can connect, ways you can get involved, ways you can begin to engage. I pray you’d be moved to write your governors, to write your senators and your congressmen and congresswomen, that we might put up a good fight in our day so 20 years from now, we can go, “I marched with King. I marched with King. I didn’t just sit at home and hope. I marched with King.” That would be my hope for us as the people of God. Roe v. Wade started here in Dallas. It would be awesome to see it crushed here in Dallas. Let’s pray. </div> </div>

Abortion | A pastor's plea to not sit on the sidelines and hope this horrific ... - World Magazine

Jan. 22 will be the 41st anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. Our Saturday Series this month will have sermons and...

Women Losing Access to Abortion as Opponents Gain Ground in State ... - New York Times

States have passed unprecedented number of abortion restrictions since 2011 - Washington Post (blog)

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><img alt="more-restrictions-2011-2013_sm" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-5096" height="515" src="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/files/2014/01/more-restrictions-2011-2013_sm.png" width="493"/>State legislatures have passed more laws restricting access to abortions in the last three years than they did in the decade beforehand, according to a new study. Our colleague Sarah Kliff explains: <blockquote> What made 2010 such a boom year for abortion restrictions? It’s hard to pinpoint a particular reason, but a few factors do stand out. First, Republicans took control of lots of state legislatures in the 2010 midterm elections, allowing them to pass more restrictions than was politically feasible in the past. The Affordable Care Act also ignited a fight over abortion policy, particularly whether federal funds would help pay for abortions (when Americans used their tax subsidies to purchase health insurance coverage). That fight spilled over to state legislatures – the ones that Republicans had recently come to control – and many passed laws restricting insurance coverage of abortion. Lastly, the focus on late-term abortion, with the 20-week abortion bans, likely played a role, too. As the Guttmacher Institute reports, those bans proliferated quickly, after Nebraska passed the first such law back in 2010. While the majority of Americans do support legal abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy, support for abortion rights falls significantly when you get into second and third trimester terminations. That drop-off in public support could have laid the groundwork for the success of the late-term restrictions. </blockquote> </div>

States have passed unprecedented number of abortion restrictions since 2011 - Washington Post (blog)

State legislatures have passed more laws restricting access to abortions in the last three years than they did in the decade beforehand, acc...

Women Losing Access to Abortion as Opponents Gain Ground in State ... - New York Times

More state abortion restrictions passed in last three years than in previous ... - RT (blog)

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><div readability='7.42222222222' class='cont-wp-mid max_width'> <div class='acticle_clock'>Published time: January 03, 2014 03:48 </div> <div readability='36' class='article_img c2'><img alt="Protesters hold signs during an anti-abortion rally at the State Capitol in Austin, Texas, July 8, 2013. (Reuters / Mike Stone)" class="c1" src="http://cdn.rt.com/files/news/21/b7/c0/00/rtx11h9m.si.jpg" title=""/> Protesters hold signs during an anti-abortion rally at the State Capitol in Austin, Texas, July 8, 2013. (Reuters / Mike Stone) </div> </div> The amount of legislation passed by states across the country that make it more difficult to have an abortion has increased dramatically in the last three years, overtaking those passed a decade prior, according to new analysis. A new report released Thursday by the Guttmacher Institute indicates that the 205 abortion restrictions passed from 2011 through 2013 overtook the 189 passed from 2001 to 2010. With 70 abortion restrictions enacted across 22 US states, 2013 falls behind only 2011 in most anti-abortion laws passed in a single year. Forty-five percent of abortion limitations approved since 2011 consist of four categories, the Guttmacher Institute reports: targeted restrictions on abortion providers (TRAP), restraints on insurance coverage of abortion, bans on abortions at 20 weeks post fertilization (or 22 weeks following a woman’s last menstrual period) and curbs on abortion medication. From 2011 to 2013, states passed 93 laws that fall into one of those four classes. Only 22 such measures were approved in the previous decade. The rise in new legislation from 2012 to 2013 is explained, in part, by circumstances in four states. Both North Dakota and Texas did not have legislative sessions in 2012. They accounted for 13 new restrictions in 2013. In addition, the 2012 elections brought new political power brokers sympathetic to anti-choice legislation in Arkansas and North Carolina. The two combined for 13 new restrictive measures in 2013 after passing none in 2012. Women seeking an abortion nationwide now often see highly different political landscapes as opposed to those found in 2000. In that year, only two states - Mississippi and Utah - had five of 10 major types of abortion limitations in action. In 2013, 22 states have five or more restrictions. Louisiana now has 10 of its own. The number of states supportive of abortion rights - having 0 to 1 major restriction, according to Guttmacher - has fallen from 17 to 13 since 2000. California actually expanded the types of providers allowed to perform surgical abortions or prescribe medication. So-called middle-ground states - 2 to 3 major restriction - went from 20 to 10. The proportion of American women living in states Guttmacher calls restrictive - 4 or more major restrictions to abortion access - jumped to 56 percent as opposed to 31 percent in 2000. In addition to the four main categories of restrictions, states also passed measures pertaining to parental involvement in approving abortions, public funding for the procedure, waiting periods and counseling and ultrasound mandates. Twenty states targeted access to family planning services in 2013. Of the 17 states with budget line items related to funding of family planning programs, Maine was the only one to drastically cut financial aid. Though family planning remained stable nationwide, bids to limit family planning providers’ eligibility for state and federal funds continued. Ten states had abortion-related restrictions on family planning providers by the end of 2013. Texas actually traded its “longstanding and successful federal-state family planning expansion … for a much smaller and entirely state-funded program” once the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid told the state it could not exclude providers who were associated with abortion. Since 2005, the Texas health department has taken US$30 million from family planning to fund so-called ‘crisis pregnancy centers’ that often attempt to persuade pregnant women against an abortion. The centers do not have to follow state or federal safety regulations, nor are they required to employ a licensed medical director. Hawaii became the 18th state to offer protections to sexually-assaulted women, mandating that they receive complete, medically accurate information on emergency contraception from a hospital. Yet Oklahoma and Missouri put up blocks to emergency contraception access. Meanwhile, Colorado and Illinois became the eighth and ninth states to require medically accurate sexual education that includes information on contraception. North Carolina and Kansas passed new laws to limit comprehensive and scientifically correct sex education. </div>

More state abortion restrictions passed in last three years than in previous ... - RT (blog)

Published time: January 03, 2014 03:48 Protesters hold signs during an anti-abortion rally at the State Capitol in Austin, Texas, July 8, 2...

Wow: More Abortion Restrictions Passed the Last Two Years than in the Past ... - Town Hall

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>A new analysis from the Guttmacher Institute reveals some encouraging news for the country’s pro-life advocates. Incredibly, from 2011-2013, more restrictions were placed on abortion than in the past decade. <img alt=" photo abortionrestrictions_zpse8bb8a22.jpg" border="0" src="http://i1331.photobucket.com/albums/w593/cortneyobrien10/abortionrestrictions_zpse8bb8a22.jpg"/> <blockquote readability='10'> Twenty-two states enacted 70 abortion restrictions during 2013. This makes 2013 second only to 2011 in the number of new abortion restrictions enacted in a single year. To put recent trends in even sharper relief, 205 abortion restrictions were enacted over the past three years (2011–2013), but just 189 were enacted during the entire previous decade (2001–2010). </blockquote> Perhaps the most notable state to restrict abortion services this past year was Texas, which passed a sweeping pro-life bill in July to ban the procedure after 20 weeks, despite State Senator Wendy Davis’s attempt to filibuster the bill. In contrast to these incredible statistics, only a handful of states passed legislation to expand reproductive services. For example, California was the first state in more than seven years to pass a law to expand access to abortion. Based on these statistics, abortion clinic workers should start looking for new jobs in 2014. </div>

Wow: More Abortion Restrictions Passed the Last Two Years than in the Past ... - Town Hall

A new analysis from the Guttmacher Institute reveals some encouraging news for the country’s pro-life advocates. Incredibly, from 2011-2013,...

Kenneth C. Edelin, physician in noted abortion case, dies at 74 - Washington Post

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><div class='article_body entry-content classic'> Kenneth C. Edelin, a Boston gynecologist who was found guilty of manslaughter after performing a lawful abortion in 1973, a conviction later overturned in a high-profile case that embodied the legal and emotional complexity of an enduring national debate, died Dec. 30 in Sarasota, Fla. He was 74. He had cancer, his wife, Barbara Edelin, told the Associated Press. </div> <div class='article_body entry-content classic'> Dr. Edelin rose from a modest background in segregated Washington to a prominent medical career in Massachusetts, where, in 1973, he became the first African American to serve as chief resident in Boston City Hospital’s obstetrics and gynecology department. His mother’s death from breast cancer had helped inspire his commitment to serving the health needs of women. That service extended to providing abortions, which were effectively legalized in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade. On Oct. 3, 1973, less than nine months after the high court handed down its decision, Dr. Edelin performed the abortion that would thrust him into the media spotlight. Vilified by opponents of abortion rights and lionized by supporters, he found himself at the center of an intense debate over when life begins. The patient in question was 17 or 18 years old, according to news accounts, and was in Dr. Edelin’s estimation at most 22 weeks along in her pregnancy. The age of the aborted fetus, a male, would became a central issue in the manslaughter trial. Roe v. Wade protected a woman’s right to obtain an abortion before “viability” — the unspecified point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb. Dr. Edelin began the procedure with the standard practice of injecting a saline solution into the uterus. When that method proved ineffective, he performed a hysterotomy, an operation similar to a Caesarean section in which the physician removes the fetus through an abdominal incision. Six months later, in April 1974, Dr. Edelin was charged. “I was scared,” he told the Boston Globe years later. “I was very law-abiding, very careful about image. That’s how I was brought up. Then somebody indicts you for manslaughter.” The prosecution did not dispute the legality of the abortion, but rather charged that in performing the hysterotomy, Dr. Edelin had deprived the fetus of oxygen within the womb at a time when it could have survived outside. The prosecution contended that the fetus was older than Dr. Edelin had estimated. A doctor who witnessed the operation testified that Dr. Edelin had watched a clock for at least three minutes while holding the fetus inside the womb in order to ensure that the fetus had died before it was removed. Dr. Edelin and two nurses cast doubt on that account by testifying that the operating room’s clocks had been removed for repairs. He testified that he had previously refused to abort fetuses that could have lived outside the womb and said that if the fetus in question had been born alive, “I would have taken steps to get it to the nursery. That has always been my philosophy.” On Feb. 15, 1975, after seven hours of deliberation, a jury convicted Dr. Edelin of manslaughter. Newspapers noted at the time that the jury was all-white and predominantly Catholic and that it included nine men. The prosecutor denied that politics or race entered into his handling of the matter, but Dr. Edelin charged otherwise, calling it a “witch hunt.” “A lot came together for them in my case,” he said after his conviction. “They got a black physician and they got a woman more than 20 weeks pregnant and they got a fetus in the mortuary.” At the time, The Washington Post published an editorial declaring that the state of Massachusetts had “brought disgrace to itself and to the whole judicial system.” In particular, the editorial decried the fact that Dr. Edelin had never been warned by authorities that “what he and other doctors have been doing for years is now to be considered murder.” Dr. Edelin was sentenced to a year’s probation. But in December 1976, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court unanimously overturned the verdict. Among other findings, the court wrote that “only when a fetus had been born alive outside its mother could it become a ‘person’ within the meaning of the statute.” Kenneth Carlton Edelin, the son of a postal worker, was born in the District on March 31, 1939. As an adult, he learned that his grandmother had once needed to terminate a pregnancy, and that she had obtained the abortion “somewhere in the woods of Washington, D.C., lying on the ground,” he told The Post. He received a scholarship to attend the private Stockbridge School in Massachusetts, later receiving a bachelor’s degree from Columbia University in 1961 and a medical degree from the historically black Meharry Medical College in Nashville in 1967. Dr. Edelin served in the Air Force before being hired by Boston City Hospital. After his court case, he continued his medical practice and held high-ranking positions at the Boston University medical school and hospital, according to the Globe. Dr. Edelin also served as board chairman of Planned Parenthood and on the board of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. A complete list of survivors could not immediately be confirmed. His relatives reportedly include Jeh C. Johnson, the secretary of homeland security. Dr. Edelin published a memoir, “Broken Justice: A True Story of Race, Sex and Revenge in a Boston Courtroom” (2007). He said that the effects of the case never entirely subsided. “Angry? Sure I’m still angry,” he told the Globe in 1991. “The anger is about the pursuit of an indictment and a trial that was clearly politically motivated . . . politically in the sense it was an attempt to intimidate physicians and health care providers from performing legal abortions.” </div> </div>

Kenneth C. Edelin, physician in noted abortion case, dies at 74 - Washington Post

Kenneth C. Edelin, a Boston gynecologist who was found guilty of manslaughter after performing a lawful abortion in 1973, a conviction later...

Controversial Irish abortion law comes into effect - RT

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><div readability='6.01988636364' class='cont-wp-mid max_width'> <div class='acticle_clock'>Published time: January 01, 2014 18:23 </div> <div readability='33' class='article_img c2'><img alt="Lucinda Creagon holds an anti-abortion placard in front of the gates of the Irish Parliament building in Dublin (AFP Photo)" class="c1" src="http://cdn.rt.com/files/news/21/b4/c0/00/ireland-abortion-law-religion.si.jpg" title=""/> Lucinda Creagon holds an anti-abortion placard in front of the gates of the Irish Parliament building in Dublin (AFP Photo) </div> </div> A law allowing abortion in some circumstances when a woman’s life is considered to be in danger has come into force in the strongly Roman Catholic country of Ireland, despite clinical guidelines for doctors to follow not yet being in place. The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act allows abortions where doctors believe there is a threat to the life of the mother. The controversial law was passed in July after the death of Savita Halappanavar who was refused an abortion while miscarrying in October 2012. The 31-year old Indian dentist was denied a termination because her life was not thought to be at risk but died a week later of septicemia. Irish Health Minister James Reilly said that the Coalition government would not be taking any more measures and that the abortion issue is now dealt with. He added that the precise guidelines on the legislation will be worked out by the Medical Council. “The one outstanding issue is the clinical guidelines, which are a matter for clinicians and totally out of our control.There will be clinical guidelines for obstetricians from the Institute of Obstetricians and for psychiatrists from the Royal College of Psychiatrists,” he told the Irish Independent. Reilly insisted that abortions can be carried out without the guidelines being in place. If a woman’s life is thought to be at risk, then one doctor can make the decision to allow her to have an abortion. However, if there is deemed to be a substantial risk to a woman’s life from suicide then the assessment involves three specialists including a gynecologist and two psychiatrists. <img alt="Pro-Choice supporters hold placards in front of the gates of the Irish Parliament building in Dublin (AFP Photo / Peter Muhly)" class="c4" src="http://rt.com/files/news/21/b4/c0/00/1.jpg"/> The abortion issue was a divisive one in Ireland, which is a staunchly Roman Catholic country. “This is a hugely emotive issue that has divided Irish society and has been avoided by several governments. And I did undertake in the Dail (parliament) early on that we wouldn’t be the seventh government to leave it behind us,” he said. The government has said that the new law does not weaken the general prohibition on abortion in the country, which sees many Irish women travel to the UK to terminate pregnancies. Abortion will still not be allowed when a woman has been raped or when the fetus has serious deformities. Caroline Simons from the Pro Life Campaign said in July that the law will now make it possible to target the life of an innocent human being. “Despite what the Taoiseach and others claim, the new law is life-ending, not life-saving. The government brought forward this law in the full knowledge that abortion is not a treatment for suicidal feelings and ignored all the peer reviewed evidence showing that abortion has adverse mental health consequences for women," she said. Mara Clarke, director of the London-based Abortion Support Network, which raises money to help Irish woman pay the costs of having an abortion in Britain told the Guardian in July that the law will only enable a tiny minority of women to have abortions and the vast majority will be in exactly the same position they were before the legislation was passed. “I'm not an expert on Irish abortion law. I am an expert in what happens to women when access to abortion is restricted. Even if this law is enacted, only a very, very small percentage of women who need abortions will be able to access them in Ireland,” she said. </div>

Controversial Irish abortion law comes into effect - RT

Published time: January 01, 2014 18:23 Lucinda Creagon holds an anti-abortion placard in front of the gates of the Irish Parliament buildin...

Reality TV Star Reveals How an Abortion Is Part of Her 'Biggest Regret' in Life - TheBlaze.com

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>Reality TV star and professional matchmaker Patti Stanger has enjoyed fame and a successful career, but that doesn’t mean she’s devoid of regrets. She recently shared her biggest disappointment during a Twitter Q&A with OK! Magazine. <div readability='33' class='wp-caption alignleft' id='attachment_733676'><img alt="Reality TV Patti Stanger Shares Personal Abortion Experience and Details Her Biggest Regret" class=" wp-image-733676" height="302" itemprop="associatedMedia" itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" src="http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/patti-stanger-502x620.jpg" title="patti stanger" width="244"/> “Millionaire Matchmaker” star Patti Stanger called having an abortion part of her “biggest regret” in life. (Getty Images/Valerie Macon) </div> “My biggest regret is I didn’t have children and I had an abortion in my 20s,” Stanger, the star of Bravo’s “Millionaire Matchmaker,” said in response to a question. “I was pregnant and I didn’t have enough money and I didn’t think it was OK to have a child and be a single parent. Now, look, everyone’s doing that.” She said she didn’t find the right person at the time, reiterating that her biggest personal blunder was “not having kids.” “I didn’t find the right guy at the right time to have one with, I guess. But I don’t think I would adopt and be single,” she said. “I think I would have eventually found a guy, settled down, got the picket fence and I just didn’t meet the person at the right time. I wasn’t that lucky, like a lot of other people.” Stanger first shared her abortion experience in an interview with Fox411 back in 2012. While she told the outlet she’s staunchly pro-choice, she also expressed unease over the abortion she had at the age of 26. “I remember this sense of paranoia and I was always wondering whether this would be the last time, would this be my last shot at having a child,” Stanger told Fox411. “I am all for pro-choice, but it really did make me stop and think.” The television star took to Twitter in recent days to defend herself, saying that despite her experience, “pro-choice is a woman’s right.” You can watch her discuss her biggest regret here. – </div>

Reality TV Star Reveals How an Abortion Is Part of Her 'Biggest Regret' in Life - TheBlaze.com

Reality TV star and professional matchmaker Patti Stanger has enjoyed fame and a successful career, but that doesn’t mean she’s devoid of re...

Dr. Kenneth Edelin, 74, dies; physician at center of landmark abortion case - Boston Globe

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>Dr. Kenneth C. Edelin, a Boston physician whose 1975 manslaughter conviction for performing a legal abortion was overturned on appeal in a landmark test of medical, legal, religious and political questions surrounding abortion in the United States, died Monday in Sarasota, Fla. He was 74. The cause was cancer, his family said. Two years after the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion in 1973, Edelin, a 35-year-old resident in obstetrics and gynecology at Boston City Hospital, became the focus of a roiling national debate over crucial issues that had been left unresolved by the justices: When does life begin? Does an aborted fetus have rights? And what are a doctor’s often contradictory duties to the fetus and its mother? Edelin was charged with causing the death of the fetus of an unwed 17-year-old during an elective abortion in her sixth month of pregnancy. In a six-week trial in Boston that explored uncharted legal ground and made headlines across the country, Edelin, who was black, was vilified as a baby-killer and defended as a victim of racial and religious prejudice being tried for an action that had never been defined as a crime: killing a fetus that may or may not have been a “person,” and whose rights had never been specified by law. The abortion, which took place in 1973, began as a routine procedure: the injection of a saline solution that usually causes uterine contractions and the expulsion of the fetus. But several tries were unsuccessful, and Edelin completed the abortion by a surgical procedure known as a hysterotomy — making a small incision in the uterus, like a cesarean section, and detaching the fetus from the placental wall by hand. Prosecutors did not contest the legality of the abortion — Roe v. Wade had struck down anti-abortion laws in most states, including Massachusetts — but argued that Edelin, after ending the pregnancy, had deprived “a baby boy” of life-sustaining oxygen while it was still in the womb “being born.” A photo of the dead fetus preserved in formaldehyde was shown to the jurors, and some said they were “shaken” by it. The defense called the photo inflammatory and objected repeatedly to the prosecution’s use of “fetus” and “baby” as interchangeable terms in a case it said was being politicized. Medical experts testified for the defense that the fetus, estimated to be 24 weeks old, was not viable enough to have survived outside the womb. Edelin’s lawyers contended that no “person” had even existed, let alone died. But the all-white 12-member jury, which included nine men and 10 Roman Catholics, convicted Edelin of manslaughter. Some jurors said later that the photo of the dead fetus, whose face, they said, looked distorted as if in pain, had been decisive in their decision to vote guilty. An alternate juror also said after the verdict that jurors had made racial slurs against Edelin “more than once” before closing arguments. The presiding judge, who had instructed the jury that it could convict only if it believed that the fetus was a viable person and that the doctor had acted recklessly, sentenced Edelin to one year of probation, although he could have imposed a maximum of 20 years in prison. Edelin kept his medical license and continued to practice at Boston City Hospital. The verdict was hailed as a victory by anti-abortion groups and the Catholic hierarchy, which had long contended that life was sacred and began at conception. But it shocked and dismayed advocates of women’s rights, who called the case a precedent that could make doctors wary of performing abortions in the second trimester. Edelin called the prosecution a “witch hunt” in a city where a huge Catholic population believed that fetuses were human beings with the rights of citizens, and that abortions were sacrilegious. The chief prosecutor, Assistant District Attorney Newman A. Flanagan, was a Catholic who hoped to run for Suffolk County district attorney, and was widely admired for pursuing a case that might tighten restrictions and intimidate doctors who performed abortions. Edelin appealed the verdict, and in 1976 the state’s highest judicial body, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, unanimously overturned the conviction and formally acquitted him. The appellate court held that a doctor could commit manslaughter only by ending the life of a fetus that was definitely alive outside the woman’s body. It rejected the prosecution theory that the fetus might have been alive in the uterus after being separated from the uterine wall, and was thus a “person” for purposes of the manslaughter law. The ruling also clarified the definition of “life,” saying that it meant having heartbeats and respiration — more than “several transient cardiac transactions” and more than “fleeting respiratory efforts or gasps.” Besides giving doctors protection by defining when a fetus is a live person, the ruling also protected them from criminal liability for failing to take “heroic measures” to save a fetus once it was outside a woman’s body. Propelled to fame by the case, Edelin became a hero of the women’s movement, was named to prestigious posts in national health and human rights organizations, and went on to a successful medical and teaching career. He became known for his concern for indigent patients, and spoke often of the need for legal and safe abortions as a necessary alternative to the dangerous back-alley practices of the past. “Nobody likes to do abortions,” Edelin told The New York Times in 1975, “but the least we can do is make it safe and humane.” Kenneth Carlton Edelin was born in Washington, D.C., on March 31, 1939, one of four children of Benedict Edelin, a postal worker, and the former Ruby Goodwin. Kenneth attended racially segregated Washington elementary schools and graduated from Stockbridge School in western Massachusetts in 1957. After receiving a bachelor’s degree from Columbia College in 1961, he taught math and science for two years at the Stockbridge School and then attended Meharry Medical College in Nashville, Tenn., where he earned his medical degree in 1967. In 1967, he married Ramona Hoage. They had two children, Kenneth Jr. and Kimberley, and later divorced. In 1978, he married Barbara Evans. They had two children, Joseph and Corrine. Besides his wife and four children, Edelin is survived by eight grandchildren; a brother, Milton; and a sister, Norma Edelin Johnson. Another brother, Robert, died in 1982. Edelin was the uncle of Jeh C. Johnson, the secretary of homeland security. Edelin was in the Air Force from 1968 to 1971, rising to captain and serving a hospital internship at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. After his discharge, he held a medical residency at Boston City Hospital from 1971 to 1974. He became the hospital’s first black chief resident in obstetrics and gynecology in 1973, and that October — nine months after Roe v. Wade — performed the abortion that led to his arrest. After his acquittal, Edelin became a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston University and was chairman of the department for a decade until 1989. For years he was also director of OB-GYN at Boston City Hospital and managing director of the Roxbury Comprehensive Community Health Center, the largest provider of primary health services for Boston’s African-American community. He was chairman of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America from 1989 to 1992, and a director of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and of the Guttmacher Institute, which promotes reproductive health. His case was the subject of a 1978 book, “The Baby in the Bottle,” by William A. Nolen, and a play, “As to the Meaning of Words,” by Mark Eichman, that was staged in New York in 1981. Edelin, who lived in Sarasota and in Oak Bluffs, Mass., discontinued his medical practice some years ago and retired from teaching in 2006. He was the author of many articles on the prevention of teenage pregnancy and the perils of substance abuse during pregnancy. In 2007 he published a memoir, “Broken Justice: A True Story of Race, Sex and Revenge in a Boston Courtroom.” </div>

Dr. Kenneth Edelin, 74, dies; physician at center of landmark abortion case - Boston Globe

Dr. Kenneth C. Edelin, a Boston physician whose 1975 manslaughter conviction for performing a legal abortion was overturned on appeal in a l...

Proposed Abortion Law: Both Parents Must Be Notified If Child Seeks Procedure - KMOX.com

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><div readability='31.5'><img alt="A Missouri lawmaker filed a bill on Monday that would make it law to notify both parents of a minor before their child could receive an abortion. (Photo by David McNew/Getty Images)" class="article-headline-image wp-post-image" height="349" src="http://cbsstlouis.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/79162520.jpg?w=594&h=349&crop=1" width="594"/> <div readability='8' class='wp-caption'> A Missouri lawmaker filed a bill on Monday that would make it law to notify both parents of a minor before their child could receive an abortion. (Photo by David McNew/Getty Images) </div> </div> <div readability='86.6374668184'> Jefferson City, Mo. (CBS ST. LOUIS) – A Missouri lawmaker filed a bill on Monday that would make it law to notify both parents of a minor before their child could receive an abortion. Rep. Rocky Miller of District 124 said that the bill touches on part of his personal pro-life beliefs, but is meant to aid divorced parents in the same situation that affected his family eight years ago. Miller explained to Lake Expo that his own daughter became pregnant as a minor eight years before. Although divorced, he had joint custody of his daughter and discussed the difficult decision with her at the time, saying “Go search it on the Internet,” when she admitted not understanding the full scope of the procedure. “When she came back downstairs, her face was gray,” he said. Ultimately, Miller and his wife offered to raise the child themselves and allow their daughter to live a more normal life as a teenager. He expressed that things could have gone quite differently for the now-grandchild if agreements had failed under the current abortion laws. Under current Missouri state law, minors with separated parents – or parents simply not communicating well – can receive a major medical procedure, including abortions, with the knowledge and consent of just one parent. Miller stated that the bill is not a measure meant to draw on the controversy that often surrounds pro-life, pro-choice arguments regarding abortion and contraception. He acknowledged that the hot-button topic is often difficult to touch with government legislation, but that his personal parenting experience has shown that something needs to be done by legislators on both sides of the issue. “[This bill] does not restrict anything,” he told Lake Expo. “It just makes sure the right people are informed of the welfare of their children.” Another bill on the 2014 Missouri legislation schedule is House Bill 1148, which would require a woman seeking an abortion to receive an ultrasound and review it within the 24-hour mandatory waiting period for an abortion. Legislation in the state also currently specifies that life begins at fertilization, bans gender-based abortion decisions and bars Planned Parenthood sex education classes in Missouri schools. Miller said that although he is proposing this abortion legislation, it is often not the role of government to interfere with similar medical procedures. “I don’t believe the government should legislate some medical procedures and research, including non-fetal stem cell research.” </div> </div>

Proposed Abortion Law: Both Parents Must Be Notified If Child Seeks Procedure - KMOX.com

A Missouri lawmaker filed a bill on Monday that would make it law to notify both parents of a minor before their child could receive an abor...

State Senate unlikely to vote on abortion bills - La Crosse Tribune

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>MADISON — The leader of the Wisconsin Senate said votes are unlikely next year on two anti-abortion bills that were originally scheduled to be taken up in November but hastily pulled after a Democratic senator promised “all out hell” if they were debated. Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said he didn’t know if there was enough support among Republicans to bring the bills back. “I know there’s some concern that some of the bills are passing and are tied up in court and never take effect and we’re just spinning our wheels,” Fitzgerald told The Associated Press. “I want to make sure we do it right.” One of the pending bills would prohibit public workers’ health insurance plans from covering abortions and exempt religious organizations from providing insurance coverage for contraceptives. The other would ban abortions based on whether the fetus is male or female, also known as sex selection. Democrats say the measure is unnecessary because few, if any, abortions are done for that reason. The Assembly passed both bills in June, but they’ve run into difficulty in the Senate, where Republicans have an 18-15 majority. They must pass the Senate and be signed by Gov. Scott Walker before becoming law. Walker also showed reluctance last month to have the abortion bills taken up, saying he wanted lawmakers focused on the economy and creating jobs. In an interview with AP earlier this month, he did not mention the abortion bills as a priority for 2014. At a public hearing in November, Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach promised “all out hell” if the bills were scheduled for debate. Fitzgerald then decided against bringing them up, saying he wanted to end the year on a “noncontroversial note.” The Legislature is scheduled to reconvene in January for a short session that will likely end in March. “I don’t know where the support is to bring those bills back at this time,” Fitzgerald told the AP Friday. He said he wanted to talk individually with lawmakers to see where they stand on them. Republicans can only lose one vote and still have enough to pass a bill. Erpenbach said Monday he wasn’t surprised Fitzgerald was backing off the bills because moderate Republican might perceive them as being too extreme. “For some in their caucus it would be a difficult vote,” Erpenbach said. Fitzgerald also voiced concerns about the bills moving too quickly. “I think there’s some real concerns about the drafting of some of these pieces of legislation,” he said. “Things being rushed, they’re not air tight once they come out of the Legislature. There’s a little bit different tone among the members coming out of the caucus related to those bills than in the past.” The anti-abortion group Wisconsin Family Action lobbied for both bills. Its president, Julaine Appling, said in November that she “fully expected” the bills to be back in 2014. Appling did not immediately return a message seeking comment Monday. Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, sponsored the insurance bill. He did not immediately return a message Monday seeking comment. The sponsor of the sex-selection bill, Sen. Joe Leibham, R-Sheboygan, also did not immediately return messages. Fitzgerald, in explaining his hesitation on these abortion bills, referenced another anti-abortion proposal passed by the Legislature that is tied up in court. That law, supported by Republicans and signed by Walker in July, requires abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The law was challenged by Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and Affiliated Medical Services. Earlier this month a federal appeals court panel upheld an injunction delaying implementation of the admitting privileges portion of the law. Lester Pines, the attorney representing Planned Parenthood in that lawsuit, said Republicans don’t want to pass any more controversial abortion legislation in an election year. “At a certain point the Republicans are going to have to recognize that extremist view on contraception is so far out of the mainstream that if they continue to attack contraception and access to it, they’re going to pay a huge price at the ballot box,” Pines said. “There’s already a huge gender gap and that’s going to grow.” </div>

State Senate unlikely to vote on abortion bills - La Crosse Tribune

MADISON — The leader of the Wisconsin Senate said votes are unlikely next year on two anti-abortion bills that were originally scheduled to ...

2013 Isn't Over Yet, But Next Year's Attacks On Abortion Rights Are Already ... - ThinkProgress

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>By Tara Culp-Ressler<img class="twitter-bird" src="http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/themes/tp4/images/bird_blue_16.png"/> on December 30, 2013 at 12:30 pm <div id='slidedown'> "2013 Isn’t Over Yet, But Next Year’s Attacks On Abortion Rights Are Already Underway" </div> <div class='wide-photo-box'><img alt="abortion" src="http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/abortion1-638x478.jpg"/> CREDIT: AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta </div> 2013 hasn’t yet drawn to a close, but abortion opponents across the country are already laying the groundwork for the next fights in the new year. The past several years have seen record-breaking numbers of state-level restrictions on women’s right to choose. If the anti-choice community has its way, that trend will continue into 2014. Although most state legislatures reconvene in the middle of January, some lawmakers aren’t waiting until then — they’re pre-filing anti-abortion bills, preparing ballot initiatives, and ensuring the issue will be at the top of the agenda once their colleagues return. Here’s where the next abortion battles are already getting underway: <h3>Missouri</h3> This week, state Sen. David Sater (R) pre-filed a measure that would extend Missouri’s abortion waiting period to 72 hours. Although mandatory waiting periods are a popular anti-choice attack, they’re typically 24 hours long. Just two states, South Dakota and Utah, impose three-day waiting periods — and Sater hopes Missouri will join them. Sater believes it’s important to extend the waiting period to make sure that women don’t regret their decision to end a pregnancy. “We’re talking about just two more days, and it should just give maybe some more time for reflection on making the right decision,” the lawmaker explained. In reality, however, the vast majority of women are confident about their decision to end a pregnancy before they approach an abortion doctor, and condescending anti-choice policies don’t change their minds. Waiting periods simply place an additional burden on the low-income women who struggle to take time off work and secure transportation to make the trip to a clinic. Indeed, according to Missouri’s Planned Parenthood affiliate, the only provider currently performing elective abortions in the state is located in St. Louis, and one fifth of its patients travel more than 100 miles to get to the clinic. <h3>Tennessee</h3> The anti-choice community in Tennessee has been preparing for 2014 for months. Abortion opponents are hoping to rally support for Amendment 1, a ballot initiative that will be up for popular vote next year. If Amendment 1 is approved, lawmakers in the state will have the power to instate the additional abortion restrictions, like mandatory waiting periods and forced counseling sessions, that the Tennessee Supreme Court blocked back in 2000. The state’s highest court determined that those type of anti-choice laws go too far to restrict a woman’s right to choose, but the ballot initiative seeks to reverse that decision. Abortion opponents are pulling out all the stops. This past fall, the Duggar family — famous for starring in a reality show about their life with 19 children — made public appearances in the state to drum up support for Amendment 1. At the time, the Duggars explained that even though the measure isn’t up for a vote until next November, it was important to start mobilizing immediately. “Tennessee is the only state in the Southeast that does not have a waiting period for a woman before she has an abortion, and it does not have informed consent,” Jim Bob Duggar noted. “Many women are having a lifetime of regret.” <h3>South Carolina</h3> Earlier this month, state Sen. Larry Grooms (R) pre-filed a measure that would require abortion doctors to obtain admitting privileges from a local hospital in order to continue practicing. Anti-choice lawmakers typically claim that policy is will help ensure that doctors are providing safe care; but in reality, these laws are specifically intended to force abortion clinics to shut down. Medical professionals agree that admitting privileges are an unnecessary requirement — nonetheless, 14 states currently impose it anyway. It’s not hard to see the dangerous effects of regulating abortion doctors out of business. In a high-profile battle this past summer, Texas enacted exactly this type of requirement. It took effect at the beginning of November, and at least one-third of the abortion doctors in the state were immediately forced to stop practicing. The clinics that have managed to remain open now have huge patient loads and are struggling to keep up with the demand. <h3>Maryland</h3> State Sen. Edward Reilly (R) has already pre-filed a 20-week abortion ban for the 2014 session. This type of restriction on later abortion procedures is an increasingly popular method of attacking reproductive rights; nine states currently have 20-week bans on the books. The Maryland legislature tends to reject anti-choice measures. Reilly’s new bill is the same legislation that failed to advance after he introduced it this past March. If Reilly ends up being successful this time, however, the law will put one of the last late-term abortion providers out of business. Dr. Leroy Carhart, one of just four doctors who offers later abortions in the aftermath of Dr. George Tiller’s murder, currently practices in Maryland. Carhart relocated there after his former state, Nebraska, passed its own 20-week ban intended specifically to drive him out. <h3>Alabama</h3> This fall, state Rep. Becky Nordgren (R) pre-filed the “Health Care Rights of Conscience Act,” which would allow medical professionals to refuse to perform any services that violate their conscience. That overly broad interpretation of religious protections typically results in limited access to reproductive health care, since it allows doctors to refuse to perform abortions or pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraception. These measures also give medical professionals the right to deny care from LGBT individuals. Indeed, abortion access is being threatened not simply by state laws that ban the procedure, but also by a health care system that increasingly allows religious beliefs to trump women’s right to reproductive services. The proliferation of the Catholic Hospital Association has resulted in a world in which many women can’t access abortion care at their nearest hospital, even in cases of emergency, and many doctors aren’t being trained to provide these services in the first place. </div>

2013 Isn't Over Yet, But Next Year's Attacks On Abortion Rights Are Already ... - ThinkProgress

By Tara Culp-Ressler on December 30, 2013 at 12:30 pm " 2013 Isn’t Over Yet, But Next Year’s Attacks On Abortion Rights Are Already U...

Mo. Lawmakers to Consider Extending Abortion Wait Period - KMOX.com

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP)- Women seeking an abortion in Missouri would need to wait an additional two days under legislation proposed in the state Senate. Republican Sen. David Sater says it would offer more time to consider the decision and could reduce the number of abortions. He said he thinks some people have too hastily decided to have an abortion and ultimately regretted the decision. “We’re talking about just two more days, and it should just give maybe some more time for reflection on making the right decision,” said Sater, of Cassville. The legislation has been proposed for the 2014 legislative session starting Jan. 8. Missouri is among many states with a 24-hour informed consent law, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights. Extending the period to 72 hours would put Missouri in line with South Dakota and Utah. The 72-hour wait was enacted in Utah in 2012 and passed in South Dakota in 2011. The South Dakota law took effect this year after Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota dropped a legal challenge to that provision. South Dakota legislation signed into law this year means weekends and holidays do not count toward the waiting period. Opponents of lengthening the waiting time in Missouri contend it would not decrease the number of abortions but simply cause them to be performed later in pregnancy, which can increase risks. “This is an affront to women who can make good, informed decisions without politicians telling them what they should do and how long they need to wait and how many hoops they need to jump through,” said Paula Gianino, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri. The only facility currently performing elective abortions in Missouri is in St. Louis, and Gianino said one-fifth of patients travel more than 100 miles to the clinic. She said Planned Parenthood will fight the legislation and that its top legislative priority for the upcoming session is expanding eligibility for the Medicaid program. A provisional figure from the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services shows there were 9,027 abortions performed on Missouri residents in 2012. State figures show the number of abortions for Missourians has declined each year since 2008. Sam Lee, of Campaign Life Missouri, said requiring additional time would make it easier to digest information provided before an abortion. He said Missouri consumer protection laws allow three business days to cancel a contract with a travel club and five days to reverse a time-share plan. Lee said 72 hours is reasonable. “If she is going to be given this informed consent information be offered the ultrasound, be offered a chance to hear the heartbeat of her baby, which is already in the law, plus all this information on alternatives to abortion agencies she should have the opportunity to go there, not be rushed,” he said. © Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. </div>

Mo. Lawmakers to Consider Extending Abortion Wait Period - KMOX.com

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP)- Women seeking an abortion in Missouri would need to wait an additional two days under legislation proposed in the...

Abortion Rights Groups Say It's Time To Stop Playing Defense - WUNC

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>Abortion rights activists are working on a counterattack to the 200 bills that have passed in states across the U.S. since 2010. In the past three years, Republican-led legislatures have backed bills to regulate abortions and the doctors and clinics that perform them. Bills to ban abortions at 20 weeks are among the laws that cropped up three years ago and have now passed in about a dozen states. This year, North Dakota pushed to end abortions at around six weeks of pregnancy. "It really has been a wave of abortion restrictions moving across the country and it has affected providers and women and their families," says Elizabeth Nash, who tracks the laws for the Guttmacher Institute. About a dozen clinics in Texas stopped providing abortions after a new law passed last summer. At least a dozen other clinics have closed across the country because of laws that say doctors must have admitting privileges at local hospitals, or because of another regulation requiring clinics to become mini surgical centers. New York Takes A Stand So abortion rights activists say they're pushing a new legislative strategy. In New York, lawmakers introduced the Women's Equality Act in 2013, backed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo. "Why the state of New York?" asked Cuomo. "Because the state of New York has had a long and proud history of being the first one to stand up on issues like this, on issues of inequality." It includes pay equity for women and strengthens domestic violence laws. Andrea Miller, president of NARAL Pro-Choice New York, says it also codifies Roe vs. Wade, the decision that legalized abortion. "It says you have this right to make these decisions prior to the 24th week of pregnancy or thereafter if your life or health is at risk," Miller says. "It's quite simply, Roe vs. Wade put in state law to make sure that it's always there." The bill didn't pass this year, but it will come up again in 2014. Those who oppose abortion, including the New York State Catholic Conference, oppose the measure. Kathleen Gallagher, the conference's director of pro-life activities, says it's too broadly written. "In our review, it's an expansion of late-term abortions here in New York, which we don't believe New York needs," Gallagher says. Abortion rights activists dispute that, and say they'll work hard to get the package through. Efforts In Other States On the other side of the country, an abortion rights-friendly bill in California did pass. It expands the group of medical professionals that can provide abortions, allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and nurse midwives to perform first-trimester procedures. Dr. Joseph Speidel, a professor at the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health in San Francisco, says the law sets a precedent for other states. "The basis of the law change was a careful study that showed that the advance practice clinicians could do abortions as safely as physicians," Speidel says. Activists point to what they say is another success, the Pennsylvania Agenda for Women's Health, a package of bills spearheaded by the Women's Health Caucus in the legislature. A portion of the agenda was recently introduced by state Rep. Dan Frankel, a Democrat. "We want to change the conversation," Frankel says. "We want to talk about really, how do we enhance women's health?" Frankel says women who are poor have limited access to health care, including abortions. He says the agenda, including workplace accommodations for pregnant women and creating buffer zones around clinics where abortion protests take place, would help. "Those who are sincere in wanting to promote women's health in Pennsylvania ought to be able to endorse and help us pass this package of bills," he said. In Texas, Rallying Against New Rules The Pennsylvania bills may face an uphill battle, as legislators there have passed stricter laws — especially since an illegal abortion clinic was discovered in Philadelphia. It's operator, Kermit Gosnell, was convicted of murder in the death of one woman and several viable infants who were born alive and then killed. Abortion rights activists call Gosnell an outlier, but those who oppose the procedures have used the case to lobby for more restrictions across the country, including in Texas, where Republican Gov. Rick Perry signed a new bill into law last summer. The Texas measure bans abortion at 20 weeks and requires nearby hospital admitting privileges for doctors performing abortions. Abortion rights groups say they're mobilizing in opposition to the Texas law, and around state Sen. Wendy Davis, now a Democratic candidate for governor, who conducted an 11-hour filibuster on the issue. Activists say her decision to speak up inspired new supporters. "We've had a lot of increased interest in volunteering with our work," says Merritt Tierce, executive director of the Texas Equal Access Fund, a group that helps low-income women pay for abortions. "The most important thing that has come out of this is [a] conversation about abortion that needs to continue, that needs to intensify and that needs to stay focused on the complexities." Nash calls the effort a starting point. "What we have been missing has been a bill to rally around and to express the values of those who support reproductive health and rights," she says. <div readability='8' class='fullattribution'>Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.<img src="http://www.google-analytics.com/__utm.gif?utmac=UA-5828686-4&utmdt=Abortion+Rights+Groups+Say+It%27s+Time+To+Stop+Playing+Defense&utme=8(APIKey)9(MDA2NDA4NzY1MDEyODkzMjYyNTkxZjFiZQ004)"/> </div> </div>

Abortion Rights Groups Say It's Time To Stop Playing Defense - WUNC

Abortion rights activists are working on a counterattack to the 200 bills that have passed in states across the U.S. since 2010. In the past...

Mass held in Spain backs new abortion law - U-T San Diego

Abortion Rights Groups Say It's Time To Stop Playing Defense - WUWM

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>Abortion rights activists are working on a counterattack to the 200 bills that have passed in states across the U.S. since 2010. In the past three years, Republican-led legislatures have backed bills to regulate abortions and the doctors and clinics that perform them. Bills to ban abortions at 20 weeks are among the laws that cropped up three years ago and have now passed in about a dozen states. This year, North Dakota pushed to end abortions at around six weeks of pregnancy. "It really has been a wave of abortion restrictions moving across the country and it has affected providers and women and their families," says Elizabeth Nash, who tracks the laws for the Guttmacher Institute. About a dozen clinics in Texas stopped providing abortions after a new law passed last summer. At least a dozen other clinics have closed across the country because of laws that say doctors must have admitting privileges at local hospitals, or because of another regulation requiring clinics to become mini surgical centers. New York Takes A Stand So abortion rights activists say they're pushing a new legislative strategy. In New York, lawmakers introduced the Women's Equality Act in 2013, backed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo. "Why the state of New York?" asked Cuomo. "Because the state of New York has had a long and proud history of being the first one to stand up on issues like this, on issues of inequality." It includes pay equity for women and strengthens domestic violence laws. Andrea Miller, president of NARAL Pro-Choice New York, says it also codifies Roe vs. Wade, the decision that legalized abortion. "It says you have this right to make these decisions prior to the 24th week of pregnancy or thereafter if your life or health is at risk," Miller says. "It's quite simply, Roe vs. Wade put in state law to make sure that it's always there." The bill didn't pass this year, but it will come up again in 2014. Those who oppose abortion, including the New York State Catholic Conference, oppose the measure. Kathleen Gallagher, the conference's director of pro-life activities, says it's too broadly written. "In our review, it's an expansion of late-term abortions here in New York, which we don't believe New York needs," Gallagher says. Abortion rights activists dispute that, and say they'll work hard to get the package through. Efforts In Other States On the other side of the country, an abortion rights-friendly bill in California did pass. It expands the group of medical professionals that can provide abortions, allowing nurse practitioners, physician assistants and nurse midwives to perform first-trimester procedures. Dr. Joseph Speidel, a professor at the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health in San Francisco, says the law sets a precedent for other states. "The basis of the law change was a careful study that showed that the advance practice clinicians could do abortions as safely as physicians," Speidel says. Activists point to what they say is another success, the Pennsylvania Agenda for Women's Health, a package of bills spearheaded by the Women's Health Caucus in the legislature. A portion of the agenda was recently introduced by state Rep. Dan Frankel, a Democrat. "We want to change the conversation," Frankel says. "We want to talk about really, how do we enhance women's health?" Frankel says women who are poor have limited access to health care, including abortions. He says the agenda, including workplace accommodations for pregnant women and creating buffer zones around clinics where abortion protests take place, would help. "Those who are sincere in wanting to promote women's health in Pennsylvania ought to be able to endorse and help us pass this package of bills," he said. In Texas, Rallying Against New Rules The Pennsylvania bills may face an uphill battle, as legislators there have passed stricter laws — especially since an illegal abortion clinic was discovered in Philadelphia. It's operator, Kermit Gosnell, was convicted of murder in the death of one woman and several viable infants who were born alive and then killed. Abortion rights activists call Gosnell an outlier, but those who oppose the procedures have used the case to lobby for more restrictions across the country, including in Texas, where Republican Gov. Rick Perry signed a new bill into law last summer. The Texas measure bans abortion at 20 weeks and requires nearby hospital admitting privileges for doctors performing abortions. Abortion rights groups say they're mobilizing in opposition to the Texas law, and around state Sen. Wendy Davis, now a Democratic candidate for governor, who conducted an 11-hour filibuster on the issue. Activists say her decision to speak up inspired new supporters. "We've had a lot of increased interest in volunteering with our work," says Merritt Tierce, executive director of the Texas Equal Access Fund, a group that helps low-income women pay for abortions. "The most important thing that has come out of this is [a] conversation about abortion that needs to continue, that needs to intensify and that needs to stay focused on the complexities." Nash calls the effort a starting point. "What we have been missing has been a bill to rally around and to express the values of those who support reproductive health and rights," she says. <div readability='8' class='fullattribution'>Copyright 2013 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.<img src="http://www.google-analytics.com/__utm.gif?utmac=UA-5828686-4&utmdt=Abortion+Rights+Groups+Say+It%27s+Time+To+Stop+Playing+Defense&utme=8(APIKey)9(MDEwNzk2ODM0MDEzNTkxMjU2MDA2YzI0Nw004)"/> </div> </div>

Abortion Rights Groups Say It's Time To Stop Playing Defense - WUWM

Abortion rights activists are working on a counterattack to the 200 bills that have passed in states across the U.S. since 2010. In the past...

Mass Held in Spain Backs New Abortion Law - ABC News

<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><div class='media_empty'> </div> <div class='partnerlogo' id='wirelogo'><img alt="Associated Press" border="0" src="http://a.abcnews.com/assets/images/logo/AP_logo_update_20130709.gif"/> </div> Thousands of people have attended a Mass in Madrid to honor family values and support government moves aimed at tightening restrictions on abortion in Spain. Archbishop Antonio Rouco Varela led Sunday's outdoor service in Colon square and said "the gift of life" should be considered sacred and not tampered with. The conservative government of Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy on Dec. 20 gave his Cabinet approval for a new abortion law that would allow terminations only in the case of rape or when there is a serious health risk to the mother or fetus. Such a law would need to be approved by Parliament, where the government has a large majority. Pope Francis gave his blessing for Sunday's Mass via a video link from the Vatican. <div class='clearboth'> </div> </div>

Mass Held in Spain Backs New Abortion Law - ABC News

Thousands of people have attended a Mass in Madrid to honor family values and support government moves aimed at tightening restrictions o...