Thursday, 10 January 2013

Not One Inch

New year, new load of nutty emanating from the US. What do the sane people expect from their zygote zealots? Super-sized abortion restrictions.
[Elizabeth Nash, State Issues Manager for the Guttmacher Institute] admitted that bills in the past have become so extreme, she wouldn't be surprised if something new came out of the woodwork. But perhaps the bills we should be prepared for aren't going to be "new," but instead super-sized versions of the ones that are already in place.

Passing more extreme versions of current legislation may be the easiest way for anti-choice politicians to continue restricting abortion without incurring wrath from an electorate that has grown tired of their anti-women bills. After all, if the state already has agreed to one version of a law as being necessary to protect women, why not a more dramatic version of the same bill?

Most likely to be turned into a super-sized restriction in 2013? The forced waiting period.
Twenty-six states already have forced waiting periods, usually 24 hours. But Utah has a 72-hour forced wait, and that's the one pro-choicers fear will be the model.
With 87 percent of counties lacking an abortion provider, the spread of 72-hour waits could be a devastating blow to access, especially for women in rural areas. Abortion will inevitably become more expensive, occur later in pregnancy where it can increase complications, and force some women to give birth against their wishes.
The piece cites the Turnaway Study, a longitudinal project by Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health at University of California, San Francisco.

Researchers have been collecting stories of women who have carried unwanted pregnancies to term. Results are being released now. (I've been meaning to write about this.)

One of the researchers, Dr Tracy Weitz, is quoted.
Weitz recounted some interviews with women who have had difficulty accessing abortion even without a forced waiting period because of travel issues, cost and other circumstances. They eventually obtained a termination, but only because they only had to make one trip to the clinic. "When we've asked them before a waiting period went into effect if the waiting period would have stopped them from getting an abortion, there are some women who say, 'Yes, I would not have been able to get an abortion if I needed to come more than once,'" said Weitz.
Canadians cannot let this kind of crazy take root. Give 'em an inch and they'll take your right to autonomy.

Here is fetus fetishist Mark Penninga, of the Association for Reformed Political Action, backer of the faux-grassroots organization, We Need A Law, on the anti-choice mission.
And if we are blessed with restrictions, we must press on and keep working for more.
No law. No restrictions. None.

Not One Inch.


Sixth Estate said...

And if we are blessed with restrictions,

So nice to see that Mr. Mark Penninga feels "blessed" by restrictions on his ability to get an abortion on demand.

Pseudz said...

The phrase 'Not One Inch' could be very good as a T-shirt, poster, button, chant . . . well suited as a response to the incrementalist worms.

Post a Comment