Editorial: Abortion bill intrusive
April 29, 2008
Recently passed House Bill Nos. 1831 and 1472 are two of the most offensive, intrusive pieces of legislation we’ve read in a long time — even worse than the midwifery bill about which we’ve editorialized in the past. And that’s a heavy charge.
The part of the bills to which we object the most involves a paragraph requiring physicians to present a woman seeking an abortion with “printed information” or an “informational video” describing the anatomical and physiological characteristics of her fetus in two-week gestational increments from conception to full term. The printed information or video would also describe the possible viability of the child.
All of this information can easily be accessed over the Internet, and it is absolutely disrespectful to women seeking out an abortion to assume they have not taken the initiative to research these things on their own. Abortion is a difficult enough experience for a woman to undergo without a doctor forcibly shoving pamphlets and videos of her “unborn life” in her face.
It’s upsetting and without a doubt a tactic to push a certain brand of morality onto women that is as unnecessary as it is an infringement on reproductive rights. We are 100 percent in favor of this information being available to women in each clinic offering abortion services, but to go so far as to require them to see a video is incredibly intrusive and offensive.
The bills also seek to prevent coerced abortions through penalization of both the coercer and the doctor who knowingly performs an abortion that has been coerced. “Coercion” is defined in the text of the bills to mean a variety of things, most notably any action that could result in harm to the pregnant woman or her societal position (job, scholarships, etc.) if she were to refuse an abortion. Of course, intimidating a woman into getting an abortion is wrong and we agree there should be strict laws in place to penalize those that choose to do so. But there are two fundamental flaws in even this seemingly reasonable (when viewed in context of the other sections) part.
We disagree with the penalization of doctors who perform coerced abortions. They are, after all, not the ones committing the actual crime, and the consequence listed in the bill for the doctor involved is actually a greater penalty — a felony — than the one given to the coercer, which is written into the bill as only a misdemeanor. The hands of doctors are already tied tightly by the fear of being prosecuted for a litany of medical missteps that we wonder just how many doctors would even offer abortions out of fear of the possible consequences. Additionally, coercion goes both ways. We wonder why the bills don’t offer any consequences for people who try to coerce women out of having abortions, which should also be penalized because any decisions regarding a woman’s reproductive rights should be private unless she chooses to ask for advice.
The entire bill reeks of a brand of morality that has no place in any legislation. We sincerely hope that the Missouri Senate has enough sense to shoot this bill down immediately. We care about reproductive rights, but this is not the way to go about it.
More April 29, 2008 Forum Stories
- Abortion bill intrusive — Recently passed House Bill Nos. 1831 and 1472 are two of the most offensive, intrusive pieces of legislation we’ve read ...
- Please, no Mo. voter ID — We’ve heard every argument against the voter identification law in Indiana, which was recently reaffirmed in a positive decision by ...
- Bow out? Encore, Hillary! — In last Friday’s edition of The Maneater, Asim Thakore called for Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., to bow out of the ...
- Some things aren't funny — The thud of soldiers’ footsteps came from behind. Sounds of gunshots battered off the walls. The cries of defeat rang ...
- Friesen: karaoke maestro, drunk — Children, your intrepid columnist had a rare joy this weekend. He experienced the type of thing that one can only ...
Most recent Forum Stories
- Immigration law prompts more problems than it solves — Gov. Matt Blunt has signed an omnibus immigration bill that will dramatically cut down on the results of illegal immigration ...
- MU achieving its goals — These days, it seems that MU administrators and faculty alike have a dim view about the near and mid-term future ...
- Tasers are necessary for officer safety, but with limits — Members of Grass Roots Organizing met before the Columbia City Council to ask the council to revoke their decision to ...
- It's MU's new pasttime, baby — Along with tailgating, beer pong, Shakespeare’s, the Student Recreation Complex and Chipotle, the Chinese buffet is rapidly gaining momentum in ...
- Not quite a 'badass marathoner' — In general, I like to think of myself as a reasonably fit person. I pump some serious iron with my ...