http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/06/us/politics/06sonogram.html?_r=4&partner=rss&emc=rss

Quote :

Texas Passes Bill to Require Sonograms Before Abortions

By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr.
Published: May 5, 2011

HOUSTON — In a victory for anti-abortion advocates, Texas will join the ranks of states that require doctors to perform a sonogram before conducting an abortion.

Gov. Rick Perry, a conservative Republican, made the bill, which the Legislature passed on Thursday, a priority and is expected to sign it. The bill requires a doctor to conduct a sonogram at least 24 hours before an abortion and to give the woman the opportunity to see the results and hear the heartbeat of the fetus. Though the woman can choose not to view the images and hear the heartbeat, the doctor must describe what the sonogram shows, including the existence of legs, arms and internal organs.

“This will be one of the strongest pieces of sonogram legislation in the nation,” the bill’s author, Representative Sid Miller, a Republican from Stephenville, told reporters. Mr. Miller predicted the measure would “save numerous unborn lives.”

Because the measures passed both houses of the Legislature with a two-thirds majority, it will go into effect as soon as the governor signs it.

At least three other states have similar laws, and Oklahoma passed a bill last year requiring a doctor to provide a detailed oral description of the embryo, but a court has temporarily stayed that measure pending a lawsuit. Opponents say the bill is designed to dissuade women from seeking abortions, and they argue that the state should not interfere with the relationship between a doctor and patient.

LOL. Is that supposed to sway her decision or something? She doesn't even have to look at it. How dumb.

I realize there are a lot of dumb women but she knows it's there. That would be why she's seeking the abortion. More drama from the religious right.

I'm not in favor of abortions but this law is silly. Nystyle said it when she pointed out that they can force a sonogram, but they can't force a woman to look at it. Just a waste of insurance money.

If a woman can't look at her sonogram before aborting, than maybe she shouldn't be aborting. The law is no more silly and ridiculous that legalized abortion. It's sad that we even have to have this as a law. But hey, it's something I guess. So while we can't force her to look at it, why the heck wouldn't she is she's so sure about her decision?

And maybe the woman "knows" it's there but often times she forgets what it is that is there. If a sonogram can remind even just a small fraction of women and change their minds, then it's worth it.

Nobody would have any reason to be upset about this if it was as meaningless as they say.

In cases where the mother has already had 4 or 5 abortions you gotta wonder if seeing it would have any impact on her bird brain.

My first thought was the uninsured seeking abortions. Who pays for the required sonogram? I am guessing the abortion procedure fees go up.
And for those who can not afford it, there is plenty of financial help out there for the woman who can not afford it, so it isn't going to keep women from having it done from a financial standpoint.

And as far as insured women, well a sonogram can probably be billed out to insurance as pre natal care even if it is being done pre-abortion. So, all that is good news for the docs who get to bill out a sonogram before they either perform the abortion, or refer the woman out.

I'm really hoping this stupidity gets overturned at some point. At a time of huge budget cuts & when Medicaid won't even cover pregnant women for prenatal care anymore these idiots have a lot of nerve pulling this to advance their own agenda.

Kind of like the entire so-called Pro-Choice movement! lol

God forbid the mother have to have a sonogram before getting her kid ripped out of her. Nobody gives a hoot about the cost of this. We mandate crap in all fields from food to medicine and nobody whines about costs. This is about the chance that it might convince a woman to NOT have an abortion. There'd be NO other reason to get upset.

Forgiveness Man wrote:

Kind of like the entire so-called Pro-Choice movement! lol

God forbid the mother have to have a sonogram before getting her kid ripped out of her. Nobody gives a hoot about the cost of this. We mandate crap in all fields from food to medicine and nobody whines about costs. This is about the chance that it might convince a woman to NOT have an abortion. There'd be NO other reason to get upset.

I do.

Have you seen many sonogram videos or still images? They are not all that clear usually, so if women go into it already feeling detached, a sonogram isn't going to change a lot of minds. Granted, there will be women it does affect and compels them to change their minds. But is the cost of all forced sonograms worth it? To you, probably. To me, no.

Plus, what kind of clinics do women go to when they want an abortion? They look it up in a phone book or online and see what clinics in their area offer abortions. So, we have pro choice doctors and pro choice ultrasound techs giving these sonograms. Do you really think that they are going to take a lot of time to show the baby's features and try to promote carrying to full term in that moment? They will just go through the motions because if they felt passionate about the pro life stance as you do, they probably wouldn't offer abortions in the first place.


You must live in a very tolerant area to think that people don't whine about costs associated with things that are mandated in all fields from food to medicine. Because that is not a reality where I live.

RedBedroom wrote:

I do.

Have you seen many sonogram videos or still images? They are not all that clear usually, so if women go into it already feeling detached, a sonogram isn't going to change a lot of minds. Granted, there will be women it does affect and compels them to change their minds. But is the cost of all forced sonograms worth it? To you, probably. To me, no.

Plus, what kind of clinics do women go to when they want an abortion? They look it up in a phone book or online and see what clinics in their area offer abortions. So, we have pro choice doctors and pro choice ultrasound techs giving these sonograms. Do you really think that they are going to take a lot of time to show the baby's features and try to promote carrying to full term in that moment? They will just go through the motions because if they felt passionate about the pro life stance as you do, they probably wouldn't offer abortions in the first place.


You must live in a very tolerant area to think that people don't whine about costs associated with things that are mandated in all fields from food to medicine. Because that is not a reality where I live.

I've seen quite a few. Some are clearer than others. But they're getting better. The cost of forced sonograms? I don't foresee that as a real issue. And I don't think it's at all a real factor. The cost of metal detectors might not be worth it either. They might miss a weapon you know.

You're probably right. But all that proves is that this doesn't go far enough. We need to do MORE! We need to outlaw abortions outright.

People don't whine about it like they're whining about this. I live in the same world as you do. I just don't really believe most people are upset because of the COST of this. My point is that we mandate ineffective crap on a regular basis and people typically aren't worried about the cost of it. My theory is that even the potential of humanizing the child is just igniting a fire in people. You're right, it probably won't work but apparently potential is threatening enough to the Pro-Death ideology.

RedBedroom wrote:

I do.

Have you seen many sonogram videos or still images? They are not all that clear usually, so if women go into it already feeling detached, a sonogram isn't going to change a lot of minds. Granted, there will be women it does affect and compels them to change their minds. But is the cost of all forced sonograms worth it? To you, probably. To me, no.

Plus, what kind of clinics do women go to when they want an abortion? They look it up in a phone book or online and see what clinics in their area offer abortions. So, we have pro choice doctors and pro choice ultrasound techs giving these sonograms. Do you really think that they are going to take a lot of time to show the baby's features and try to promote carrying to full term in that moment? They will just go through the motions because if they felt passionate about the pro life stance as you do, they probably wouldn't offer abortions in the first place.


You must live in a very tolerant area to think that people don't whine about costs associated with things that are mandated in all fields from food to medicine. Because that is not a reality where I live.

I've had several sonograms & about all that can be said is "Look! It's a blur!" These women already know they're pregnant. It's just another obstacle to prevent them from having a completely legal procedure that is their choice to make without government interference. (Small government, please. You know, the rights favorite topic?) This is a huge waste of money that will be passed to the people paying premiums that are already too high or more taxes to cover the uninsured or unemployed. As for the people who don't mind those extra costs, there should be a special volunteer tax set up for them to be deducted from their paycheck. Of course they should also shoulder the financial burden of raising this child too so they might want to put in for overtime.

I'm pro-choice and this sure as hell wouldn't dissuade me from having an abortion.

CeCe wrote:

As for the people who don't mind those extra costs, there should be a special volunteer tax set up for them to be deducted from their paycheck. Of course they should also shoulder the financial burden of raising this child too so they might want to put in for overtime.

Nah, women who want an abortion should pay for it since they are the ones who want the procedure. Nobody's signing up to pay for any other mandates. And no, they should not pay for the child's upkeep anymore than we should be for the upkeep of children whose mothers want to drown them in bathtubs and lakes. The "pay for their wellbeing or we'll kill them" mentality doesn't really work. It'd be like saying that you have to be willing to buy a slave from somebody in order to justify freeing said slave. It's just a smokescreen and everyone knows it.

And the fact is that if you want an abortion, a little extra cost is not unfair. Everything is going up. Deal with it like the rest of us. I don't argue that this will be effective. But I also think those complaining about it being such a cost burden are blowing smoke. An added sonogram won't make abortions unaffordable. Government regulates everything else unnecessarily and adds added burdens to perfectly legal things. About time the abortion industry got some fair share of added fees. Not really concerned that people seeking to kill their child will have to pay more to do so. It'd be like crying cause the price of hitmen's gone up.

The problem is that insurance will cover a prenatal sonogram. So, it will be a largely ineffective mandate that will cost you and me indirectly because of insurance rates.

Trust me, people, such as me, complaining about this from a financial aspect are legit. We buy our health insurance privately, and it is insane how much it has gone up and just keeps doing so.

I am not a negative person when it comes to more being done to educate women prior to the procedure. Because the small percentage of women a pre-abortion sonogram would convince to change course, are the small percentage that are one day going to regret their choice. So, I am all for women, young women especially, making a better choice. So when I bring up cost as an argument, I have no hidden agenda.

RedBedroom wrote:

The problem is that insurance will cover a prenatal sonogram. So, it will be a largely ineffective mandate that will cost you and me indirectly because of insurance rates.

Trust me, people, such as me, complaining about this from a financial aspect are legit. We buy our health insurance privately, and it is insane how much it has gone up and just keeps doing so.

We got costly ineffective mandates all the time that can affect insurance rates. If it makes you feel better, we can solve the problem and outlaw abortion.

People such as you seem to be the minority. It's the fact that it's even the remotest restriction on abortion that has them angered, the cost is merely an excuse.

And I wouldn't say a small percentage of women regret their choice. I would say a small percentage of women have abortions for reasons other than simple convenience. So again, the cost doesn't really seem an issue to me. Especially cause it is only one state anyway.

I fully understand that we have mandates all the time that can affect insurance rates. The topic of mandated ultrasounds just happens to be the one we are talking about right now. I could go on for quite a while about all the things I have read about since I started buying private health insurance that have made me outraged, but that would be a bore for both of us.

RedBedroom wrote:

I fully understand that we have mandates all the time that can affect insurance rates. The topic of mandated ultrasounds just happens to be the one we are talking about right now. I could go on for quite a while about all the things I have read about since I started buying private health insurance that have made me outraged, but that would be a bore for both of us.

Maybe so. But I never see anybody really think about costs any other time. It's always "necessary" but not it's a "cost" issue. I think you are one of very few not upset solely because it's a restriction on abortion.

So a 14 year old rape victim can't abort her attackers child now w/o being made to have a sonogram of it, and probably preached to about how "wrong" her choice is. This is emotional blackmail and legalized harassment.

I feel like this is manipulating the mother's emotions. Women do not search for eggs lost following the luteal phase of their menstrual cycles, so why make them do this?

Jason B. wrote:

So a 14 year old rape victim can't abort her attackers child now w/o being made to have a sonogram of it, and probably preached to about how "wrong" her choice is. This is emotional blackmail and legalized harassment.

Pretty much sums it up. I'm surprised there aren't required bible verses to go with it. Nothing more than a religious right agenda.

Rainmaker wrote:

I feel like this is manipulating the mother's emotions. Women do not search for eggs lost following the luteal phase of their menstrual cycles, so why make them do this?

Don't give them any ideas. That might be next. Remember the dumbasses that wanted every miscarriage "investigated"? Next they will expect her to prove it was a real cycle.

A flagrantly transparent attempt to manipulate the mother's emotions, which is sleazy and underhanded. Few women probably make the decision to terminate their pregnancy lightly....so a sonogram more than likely won't cause her to consider anything she hadn't already.