Saturday, October 30, 2010

40 Days, and regulation

A new law is set to go into effect in Arizona. Oh, wait--it's a law that was passed a decade ago--it has just never been enforced until now:
It's been a decade since the state mandated new regulation on abortion clinics. And unless there is another legal fight, those laws are about to take effect Monday.

They include a mandate that only a doctor can perform a surgical abortion, the doctor must check if the woman is healthy enough for the procedure, and the doctor must estimate the gestational age of the baby. [...]

The law was passed after a woman died following a botched abortion.
Planned Parenthood, which claims to be all about "safe" legal abortion, has been fighting this law for ten years:
A Superior Court judge denied Planned Parenthood’s motion to block a law from taking effect. The law, containing regulations on abortion businesses, was passed by the state legislature 10 years ago after Lou Anne Herron’s tragic death in an Arizona abortion center.
The rules ensure, among other things, that non-doctors may not perform surgical abortions, but Planned Parenthood has held up the health and safety standards ever since.
Judge Donald Daughton denied Planned Parenthood’s emergency motion to amend their complaint late Wednesday, opening the door for the pro-life law to take effect.
“Women’s health and safety is best protected by having a licensed physician involved from the moment they are admitted to a clinic to when they are discharged,” said Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod. “Arizona has witnessed the dangers women face when they are operated on and treated by under-qualified medical personnel.”
You would think that people who really believe that every woman has the right to choose to pay someone to kill her baby for her would also believe that the person responsible for the evaluation of the woman, the surgical death of her unborn child, and any postoperative care should be a doctor; you would be wrong. Planned Parenthood apparently thinks that nurse-practitioners should be able to assist materially at or even perform abortions under little or no supervision from a doctor. And despite the death of Lou Ann Herron from a "safe, legal" abortion, Planned Parenthood has continued to fight against the law that would simply make it mandatory to have a doctor present at all times when a woman is being evaluated to determine the age of her unborn child, when the unborn child is actually being killed, and for the follow-up period to check for heavy bleeding or other complications or to ensure that pieces of bone and other fragments of the unborn child are not still present in her uterus.

I think that the kind of regulation that is standard for other medical facilities and procedures could shut down more abortion clinics than any number of protests, as valuable as these are. This is because I am convinced that people who kill unborn humans for a living don't tend to expend a great deal of care or concern on their accomplices, those mothers who don't want their children to see the light of day. Forcing abortion clinics to offer minimally standard patient care would probably force a lot of them to go out of business altogether.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

So what has happened in the political climate that PP is losing grip on their propaganda?

Siarlys Jenkins said...

Since when can ANY surgical procedure be performed by anyone other than a doctor? That is simple common sense.

Planned Parenthood has no business suggesting that this is an "infringement" on women's health, PARTICULARLY since Roe v. Wade is premised on a medical decision made by a woman in consultation with her physician, not an assembly line in a clinic.

On the other hand, I must ask again whether medical safe abortions is REALLY what anyone who is sincerely "pro-life" wants? There is a cynical tactical maneuvering on both sides, to the extent that this IS a pro-choice vs. pro-life issue, which in my opinion, it isn't.

L. said...

Actually, Siaryls J., NP's in some countries do perform minor surgery:
http://www.nursingtimes.net/nursing-practice-clinical-research/developing-the-nurse-practitioners-role-in-minor-surgery/206424.article

I'm not sure I would consider that having a doctor perform an abortion would be "minimally standard patient care." I hope I can avoid ever getting pregnant again, but if I am, I would certainly think nothing of letting a trained, certified NP abort my baby.

Siarlys Jenkins said...

L., you said "abort my baby." If you truly believe that it is "my baby," then your case for your right to "control my own body" is significantly weakened.

I can follow the logic that "even if it is a baby, as long as it needs to be in my body to stay alive, I can choose to abort it." But its a different level of argument.

It remains my position that until around week 20-23, its not a baby at all, and after that, it is, therefore, after that number of weeks, abortion should indeed be prohibited unless the mother's life is truly in danger. A woman ought to make up her mind in 3-5 months.

You may be right about NPs, but that would at most be a modest amendment to the law... if it is accepted medical procedure in the state for NPs to perform minor surgery, and if certain abortion meets the standard definition of minor surgery, and if the same level of physician supervision is provided as would be for any other minor surgery... then, and only then, an NP could perform an abortion.