Mandatory Obstetric Photography (MOP)

Birth Pangs announces today that it is embarking on a new campaign, Mandatory Obstetric Photography (MOP).

To help pre-pregnant women understand fully the long-term, serious consequences of pregnancy, we propose a law that requires pre-pregnant women to have Mandatory Obstetric Photography. The women would strip naked for a series of full-body, harshly lit photographs. Special attention would be paid to perky breasts, tidy hips, and taut skin. Then the women must look at the photos. Before becoming pregnant, all women would be required to sign an affidavit that they had seen the photos and understand that they will never look like that again.

To give credit where credit is due, we stole this idea from our fetus-fetishizing friends in South Carolina, who this week pressed forward a bill that would require all women seeking abortions to have ultrasounds and then swear they had seen said ultrasounds. From an AP story:

Crisis Pregnancy Centres in Canada: Now with Ultrasound Machines

Doing some research for our ongoing series on public funding of crisis pregnancy centres (Part 1 and Part 2), I ran across some information about ultrasounds in Canadian fake clinics.

First, regular readers know that DJ! has a fascination for the fetus fetishists' um, fetish for ultrasounds used to somehow magically connect abortion-minded women to their blobs and immediately reverse any desire for self-determination.

In the US, the fancy-dress army of the Vatican Taliban, aka the Knights of Columbus, has a huge fundraising project to buy the machines for as many fake clinics as they can. Despite the fact that ultrasounds do NOT dissuade women from abortion, howevermuch the fetus freaks lie about it.

I wondered what the situation on ultrasounds in fake clinics in Canada was. So I looked.

I found a lengthy discussion from 2013 in The Interim, which bills itself as "Canada's Life and Family Newspaper." It details the magical properties of ultrasounds and the efforts to equip USian fake clinics with them. Then it goes into the situation in Canada.

Crisis pregnancy centers in Canada looking to use ultrasounds to convince women to keep their babies face regulatory obstacles that their American counterparts often do not.

Regulations regarding ultrasound facilities differ throughout Canada. In Ontario, diagnostic clinics must acquire an Independent Health Facilities License, which will be granted, according to the 2005 guide, to clinics operating in "under-serviced" areas. The nature and cost of the service will also be considered. Under the Independent Health Facilities Act, each clinic must have a quality advisor and an advisory committee to advise the quality advisor. The Healing Arts Radiation Protection Act of Ontario requires each diagnostic facility to have a radiation protection officer (a role that may be assumed by the quality advisor). British Columbia has a temporary moratorium on diagnostic services and will license private office obstetric/gynecologic ultrasounds with accredited radiologists that have proven there is a need for their services. 

Ultrasound facilities are also monitored by the provincial colleges of physicians and surgeons. In general, ultrasound exams in Manitoba, Ontario, and Alberta must be conducted by certified sonographers and there must be a sonologist or a physician accredited in diagnostic imaging available for consultation, supervision, or review of exams during operating hours. In Alberta, there must be a medical director, who is also a physician, as well as a consult physician. Manitoba has ergonomic standards, requiring "properly designed" scanning chairs, support cushions, as well as adjustable stretchers and footrests.

Canada's CPCs do not have in-house ultrasounds like their counterparts in the U.S. Linda Baartse, director of the Pregnancy Care Centre in Toronto, told The Interim that financing ultrasounds is "not the area of first priority" for her organization. She said that there are better ways for her group to spend the money that would otherwise be involved in the high cost of starting up and running ultrasound services. The PCC prefers, instead, to provide mothers with material support, opening new locations, and raising awareness. Rather, the Pregnancy Care Centre has a referral list of physicians that could help the woman access medical services such as ultrasounds.

Juergen Severloh, executive director of the Crisis Pregnancy Centre of Winnipeg, told The Interim in an email interview that the centre unsuccessfully tried to buy a used ultrasound machine from the hospital in 1997. Currently, CPC of Winnipeg provides clients with cards that entitle them to a free ultrasound and DVD at Babymoon, a third-party ultrasound business. Severloh believes that a "pregnancy centre should become linked to the ultrasound services of local pro-life physician's offices," it may pay for the set up costs and supplies in exchange for medical expertise, avoiding liability, and immediate service for clients.

I found that reassuring. Good old Canada has rules and regulations about gangs of nutters running totally unnecessary diagnostics on people in order to manipulate them.

But then I looked further. It seems The Interim is not quite up to speed.
In April 2012, it was reported that the Edmonton Pregnancy Crisis Centre had scored one of the magic machines.

The Edmonton Pregnancy Crisis Centre has qualified counsellors, informative brochures and educational videos for its clients. Recently the centre introduced its new tool to help prevent abortion.

A total of 33 Knights of Columbus councils from in and around Edmonton donated money for an ultrasound machine. It is a diagnostic method using high frequency sound waves to obtain images internally.
...
A sonographer has volunteered her time to operate the unit at the centre. She comes in according to need.

More looking revealed that the anti-abortion gang in Fredericton also has one.

In addition to your pregnancy test, an ultrasound scan may provide you with precise and helpful information about whether you are pregnant and, if so, how far along you are. Our ultrasounds are performed by a certified nurse-sonographer. We are pleased to offer you this as a complimentary service.

Interesting, no?

We're now wondering if there are more fake clinics in Canada subjecting women to this humiliating and coercive non-medical procedure.

If you know of any, please leave details in the comments.

'Soaring' Fetal Ultrasounds: Fetus Fetishist Wet Dream or Nightmare? (edited to remove childish redirects)

Fetal ultrasounds 'soaring':

The number of pregnant women having four or more ultrasounds during their pregnancies has nearly tripled in a decade, according to a study from McMaster University.

From 1996 to 2006 the number of pregnant women in Ontario who had four or more ultrasounds climbed from 8,500 to 25,000.

In that same period, the number of births dropped.

The study included data from 1.4 million singleton pregnancies that occurred between 1996 and 2006.

In that period, there were 3.57 million ultrasounds conducted, said lead investigator Dr. John You, assistant professor of Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McMaster University. The study was published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

You said the study relied on data from OHIP billing claims, which did not include any confidential information, so investigators do not know the reason for the increase.

But he said some believe there’s an “entertainment value” to ultrasounds, especially in the 3-D format.

Current guidelines recommend only two ultrasounds for uncomplicated pregnancies.

From the above link:

A single ultrasound costs about $65. Nearly 3.6 million scans were done in Ontario over the 10-year study period, totalling an estimated $232 million.

"We're not arguing at all that ultrasounds are being overused in complicated, high-risk situations where there's pretty clear benefit from it," You said. "But, we're seeing lots of people getting four, five, six ultrasounds" for uncomplicated pregnancies.

Some studies have suggested possible links between frequent ultrasounds and smaller birth size, or babies more likely to be left-handed, which isn't in itself a problem but researchers have wondered what effect frequent scans might be having on the fetal brain. But You stressed the links are "soft" and not at all proven.

"As far as we know, ultrasounds really are quite safe," he said. "But since we don't know 100 per cent for sure, there's little reason to do additional ultrasounds if there's not much that can be gained from it."

Fetal ultrasounds are viewed by the fetus fetishists as a great boon to their cause. (Except when they aren't, of course.) All over the Excited States, incrementalist anti-abortion zealots promote and pass laws to force women who want an abortion to view their own innards in the hopes that they will bond with the murky blob.

But ultrasound technology is advancing. Which is good from the point of view of detecting anomalies and defects, but bad from the point of view of 'entertainment' ultrasounds. The US FDA warned about multiple ultrasounds and the more intensive 3D version years ago. And recently Connecticut banned 'non-medical' or entertainment fetal ultrasounds.

We at DJ! (and previously at Birth Pangs) have pondered the fetus fetishists enthusiasm for ultrasound. Well, OK, yeah, they're fetishists so they want to look at the objects of their (weird) desire. But at the same time, ultrasound is not without risk, and since they're all about the fetus, how can they square the sanctity of the fetus with the risks incurred by their desire to watch it squirming around?

Here is Canada's numero uno fetus fetishist reacting to the McMaster study.

Women want their ultrasounds to see their babies. And while seeing the baby can be entertaining, I find the word "entertainment" trivializes the experience. Isn't there a better word? I'm not keen on "bonding" either-- the fetus isn't fully experiencing your presence.

Something smells about the issue of ultrasounds. Health Canada advises against keepsake ultrasounds, but they're very routine. I had seven in my last pregnancy (many for specific medical reasons).

Seven? Heavens. . .

And here HER commenters take her out the woodshed for her poor research on the issue.

To wit:

A 2006 study found that sustained exposure of mouse embryos to ultrasound waves caused a small but statistically significant number of neurons to fail to acquire their proper position during neuronal migration. It is highly unlikely that this result speaks directly to risks of fetal ultrasound as practiced in competent and responsible medical centers. There is no scientific evidence of an association between prenatal ultrasound exposure and autism, but there are very little data on human fetal exposure during diagnostic ultrasound, and the lack of recent epidemiological research and human data in the field has been called "appalling".

And:

The cause of autism has been pinned on everything from "emotionally remote" mothers (since discredited) to vaccines, genetics, immunological disorders, environmental toxins and maternal infections. Today most researchers theorize that autism is caused by a complex interplay of genetics and environmental triggers. A far simpler possibility worthy of investigation is the pervasive use of prenatal ultrasound, which can cause potentially dangerous thermal effects.

Oh heck, go look at the results of googling 'autism fetal ultrasound' yourself. The query netted over 500,000 hits.

Autism, like fetal ultrasounding, is also 'soaring' with many fingers pointed, none definitively.

Obviously, there needs to be more and better research.

In the meantime, wouldn't prudent pregnant women go with what is medically advised?

Edited March 10, 2010 to remove fetal pr0n redirects.

Lying Is Complicated

The fetus fetishists have a major sub-fetish for ultrasound. They believe that women seeking abortions are magically transformed into willing, nay, eager brood-mares by exposure to an ultrasound image.

Oddly, a rather big study doesn't agree.

Researchers analyzed over 15,575 visits to a large, urban abortion provider in 2011. All of the patients received an ultrasound before continuing with the abortion procedure, and all of them were given the opportunity to look at the image. Most patients chose not to look at it. Women did opt to view the ultrasound about 42 percent of the time — and among those women, about 98 percent of them went on to have an abortion anyway.

So why didn't the magic work?

Part of it is no doubt the fact that women don't book an abortion appointment without being pretty sure that's what they want.

And then there's this:

But about 61 percent of women having an abortion have already given birth to at least one child; they understand the biological realities of pregnancy, and they’ve seen an ultrasound before.

Noooooo! the fetus fetishists shrieeeek. We must refute this.

Here's the actual headline:

Do ultrasounds save lives? New study claims ‘no.’ Pro-life experts says ‘yes…but it’s complicated’

If that doesn't have you laughing your ass off, here is their explanation.

But Brian Fisher, the founder of Online for Life, a pro-life organization that specializes in connecting abortion-bound women with ultrasound-providing crisis pregnancy centers, says that, at best, the study proves only that the ultrasounds provided at abortion clinics have a limited effect, not that sonograms are an inherently weak tool.

“We've always maintained that the key to changing hearts and minds isn't the ultrasound in a vacuum,” Fisher told LifeSiteNews.com  “It is an ultrasound given within a caring, compassionate environment where explanation and counsel can be given.” 

Online for Life prides itself on its data-driven approach to pro-life work, and Fisher says their data shows that about 43 percent of at-risk women who visit one of their partner crisis pregnancy centers, all of which are equipped with ultrasounds, will choose life. The ultrasound plays a large role in convincing these women to keep their babies, he said.

Shorter: When we have vulnerable women in our clutches at our fake clinics and feed them lies and distortions, we can guilt them out of abortion. Because we pride ourselves on our lies data.

Even shorter: Lalalalala, we can't hear you.

It's all about the bay-beeez. Well, unless. . .

While legislatures in backwards US states are merrily passing infuriating picayune little laws to hinder women's access to LEGAL abortion -- mandatory wait times, mandatory ultrasounds, mandatory bullshit lectures on fetal development and pain awareness -- in Connecticut, the grown-ups are in charge. They just passed a law outlawing diagnostic medical tests for -- wait for it -- non-medical reasons. Specifically, ultrasounds done on pregnant women have to be ordered by a physician or done for a valid medical reason.

Why, you ask? Because back in 2004 those sciencey folks at the Food and Drug Administration warned against them, particularly the 'entertainment' variety
offered by commercial studios that can expose a fetus to up to 45 minutes of high energy in a 3D ultrasound.

Prenatal ultrasound videos called “keepsake videos” and taken by commercial studios may affect the fetus, warns the US Food and Drug Administration. The administration shut down such studios 10 years ago and is again considering regulatory action. Ultrasound is a form of energy and can't be considered harmless, even at low levels, it says.

The studios have been springing up in shopping centres in cities and towns across the United States. Typically they use the latest high powered ultrasound equipment, which can cost up to $100 000 (£54 000; €81 000), to produce videos of the moving fetus.

The studios offer expectant parents one or more sessions at different stages of the pregnancy for $125 to $250. The videos show the fetus's fingers and toes, hair, muscles, facial features, and genitals and show it sucking a thumb or moving about. Some of the studios' websites post testimonials from parents who say that they bonded with their forthcoming baby and recognised features, such as the father's nose. The studios say they are an optional service and do not replace prenatal care. The cost of the service is not reimbursed by health insurance.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' April newsletter to its members says that the studios typically offer “a 30- to 45-minute ultrasound session with as many as eight guests welcome; a video to take home, often set to music selected by the parents; a set of photos, both print and digital; gender determination if requested.”

In contrast, doctors use two-dimensional ultrasound at a low power level to check for size, location, number, and age of fetuses and to check for birth defects, breathing, and heartbeat. The result is a grainy black and white picture.

Well, that just makes sense, doesn't it? Willingly pregnant women go to great lengths to protect fetuses from exposure to all kinds of potentially dangerous stuff. If you don't need an ultrasound, why take a chance?

And you'd think the fetus fetishists would agree, wouldn't you?

And you'd be wrong.

The zygote zealots consider forcing women to look at ultrasounds of the contents of their uteruses a powerful tool in their relentless campaign to lie, manipulate and coerce unwillingly pregnant women out of considering abortion.

Many of the fake pregnancy centres set up adjacent to women's clinics offer such ultrasounds, often performed by poorly trained volunteers.
Here's the whinging at LifeShite:

Pro-life leaders around the country consider ultrasound to be a technological marvel that has saved countless unborn children from abortion. Other states such as New York have considered banning ultrasounds for non-medical reasons.

Weird, innit? They're all for the fetuses, unless exposing fetuses to potential harm furthers their Mission from Gord. They're all A-OK with that.

Republic of Gilead Watch

To continue DJ!'s Republican of Gilead Watch, here are some more details on Vaginia's march towards it from Dahlia Lithwick.

This week, the Virginia state Legislature passed a bill that would require women to have an ultrasound before they may have an abortion. Because the great majority of abortions occur during the first 12 weeks, that means most women will be forced to have a transvaginal procedure, in which a probe is inserted into the vagina, and then moved around until an ultrasound image is produced. Since a proposed amendment to the bill—a provision that would have had the patient consent to this bodily intrusion or allowed the physician to opt not to do the vaginal ultrasound—failed on 64-34 vote, the law provides that women seeking an abortion in Virginia will be forcibly penetrated for no medical reason. I am not the first person to note that under any other set of facts, that would constitute rape under state law.

What’s more, a provision of the law that has received almost no media attention would ensure that a certification by the doctor that the patient either did or didn’t “avail herself of the opportunity” to view the ultrasound or listen to the fetal heartbeat will go into the woman’s medical record. Whether she wants it there or not. I guess they were all out of scarlet letters in Richmond.

An anti-choice commenter at the link points out that the bill doesn't actually stipulate 'vaginal' ultrasound. True, comes the reply, but since gestational age (information required by the bill) can't be reliably determined from a stomach ultrasound until after 12 weeks, women submit to vaginal ultrasound or wait.

Lithwick raises another issue raging in the Excited States: conscience rights. While Tighty Righties are all hot and bothered about the conscience rights of the Fetus Lobby, Lithwick ponders the conscience rights of healthcare providers who perhaps find that being forced to RAPE someone kinda violates their conscience and ethics. What about their conscience fucking rights?

By the way, the fetish fetishizing governor of Vaginia, Bob McDonnell, who is favour of this bill, is being touted as a possible candidate for vice-president under Romney.

Which will just about cement what more and more Merkins are realizing. The Republican Party is completely out of touch.

Image source.

ADDED: Couldn't resist.



Image source.

Another cruel hoop

Back we go to whacky South Carolina for this story of yet another niggling
hoop for abortion-seeking women to hop through.

A bill that would increase the mandatory wait time between a mandatory ultrasound and the desired procedure from one hour to twenty-four hours is advancing again. It had been stalled for a year.

Critics have said requiring two trips creates a burden, especially for poor, rural women who may have to take two days off work. Three clinics in South Carolina provide abortions.

Ah, but the fetus fetishists have come up with a solution and it's a doozy.

The Senate approved a tweaked version on Wednesday that expands where those qualifying ultrasounds can occur to crisis pregnancy centers statewide. . . . Supporters of the Senate change said women can more easily access the anti-abortion, religiously affiliated centers.

Because I'm betting there are waaaay more than three fake pregnancy centres in SC.

So, let's imagine a woman in rural South Carolina. She's had the 'oh shit' moment, thinks about it, and decides to terminate. She makes an appointment at one of the state's three clinics and is told she has to have an ultrasound 24 hours in advance. Before she can get into full rant mode about how stupid this is, the trained counsellor on the phone informs her that she can go to her handy Christo-Taliban-run fake clinic for it. If the counsellor is really well-trained, she or he will whip out a prepared list of fake clinics and direct her to the nearest one.

And now we direct you to an older post about the training of fake pregnancy clinic manipulators/counsellors.

Our task in greeting new clients was to determine, on a scale from 1-10, how "abortion vulnerable" the woman is. That is, is she considering abortion, or did she come here because she's already chosen life and wants help with the new baby?

Easy-peasy with this new law. An angry woman stomping in demanding: 'Is this the goddamn place where I can get a goddamn ultrasound before I get a goddamn abortion?' is probably a 10 on that scale.

Let's consider what happens next:

If a woman was deemed not abortion vulnerable at all, they were often given nothing more than an opportunity to volunteer at the CPC itself, on top of whatever real job they actually had. They were paid in diapers, wet wipes, formula, some second-hand clothing. Nothing substantial. Certainly no prenatal care or anything like that. The abortion vulnerable women, however, they were offered the lot. High chairs, cribs, brand new clothing, even financial assistance for prenatal and pediatric care in rare cases!

Remember, this woman must must endure whatever the fetus fetishists fling at her in order to get the ultrasound she needs. Gory fetus pr0n, glurgey sermons, unending gord-talk. And, of course, all the usual lies about abortion causing breast cancer, insanity, and a permanent rift with Gord.

Loads of fun!!!! For the fetus fetishists.

For the unwillingly pregnant woman? Not so much.

I continue to marvel at the creative cruelty of fetus fetishists.

BONUS TRACK: In checking to make sure the story hadn't changed from when I copied the link this morning, I found another report. I think the writer is a little confused.

The legislation, according to CBS, would have stretched the the wait time between an ultrasound and an abortion from one hour to one day. However, a compromise in the Senate will allow women to have an abortion at any crisis pregnancy center in the South Carolina the day after receiving an ultrasound.

Desperate Crisis Pregnancy Centres: Healthcare or Counselling?

These are trying times for fake abortion centres.

First, the old styling -- "crisis pregnancy centre (CPC)" -- has become so indelibly associated with lies, manipulation, and slut-shaming, they've taken to rebranding themselves as Options/Choice/Life/WhatHaveYou Centres.

Then they were getting dinged by false advertising claims and lawsuits.

According to an analysis by NARAL [US pro-choice organization], 79 percent of the crisis pregnancy centers that advertised on Google indicated that they provided medical services such as abortions, when, in fact, they are focused on counseling services and on providing information about alternatives to abortion.

In response, they began vociferously denying they were medical facilities.

"We aren’t a medical facility,” explains [Lambton Crisis Pregnancy Centre's executive director Kim] LeBlanc.  “We don’t refer people to pediatricians and we don’t refer them to abortion clinics. We aren’t qualified.”

So what then to make of fake clinics acquiring medical equipment and advertising "healthcare services"? Here we reported that we'd found only one such ultrasound-enhanced CPC in Canada.

Now, spurred by a virtual brown envelope over the transom, we report on another, Crossroads Clinic in Brooks, Alberta.

From its Services page:

More than just a pregnancy care center, Crossroads Clinic is a medical facility focusing on all aspects of sexual [!] health.

It lists the usual "Pregnancy Options Counselling," "Abortion Recovery," "Pregnancy Testing" (drugstore pee-on-a-stick type), but also includes "Sexual Abuse or Trauma Recovery" and "STI or STD Testing."

(Anyone ever heard of a CPC offering sexual abuse counselling? Let us know.)

We accessed its charitable status to check on its funding. It reports government funding running at 4-5% of total revenue for the past four years. (No specific sources given.)

Canada Revenue Agency asks its lucky participants to inform them of "new services" and in 2013, Crossroads reported one such.

HEALTH CARE SERVICES ==> Medical professionals provide pregnancy test and sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and treatment.

Okey-dokey, now they provide healthcare services and indeed ask that "patients" bring their Alberta Health Care number and a photo ID. (Maybe a DJ! reader would like to undertake a query to Alberta Health over that oddity.)

So, beyond aiding patients' peeing on a stick, what do these services entail?

A magic ultrasound machine!

Women come to Crossroads Clinic both to confirm pregnancy and review their options. Having an ultrasound scan by trained medical professionals gives a client the accurate and timely information she needs to make educated decisions about her pregnancy and her future.

We are so blessed to have ultrasound technology on-site.

Blessed, indeed. While its website is all very secular and professional, its Facebook page is way more jesus-y.

As of course it should be since Crossroads is a member of Canadian [formerly Christian] Association of Pregnancy Support Services (CAPSS), whose "core documents" (well worth the read for the Bible verses alone) can be downloaded here.

Regular DJ! readers might remember that it was the affiliation with CAPSS that got the above-mentioned Lambton Crisis Pregnancy Centre stripped of the second part of its Trillium Foundation grant, according to the Sarnia Observer.

Upshot: no matter how they style themselves, what services they try to offer, who they associate with, CPCs in Canada are on the ropes.

And here ends, for now, DJ!'s survey of fake clinics in Alberta.

But we're on a mission here at DAMMIT JANET! We want to see the closure of all fake clinics in Canada.

And we'll do whatever we can to effect that.

Up next, British Columbia, and perhaps more surprisingly, Quebec.

UPDATE: From Jaden Fitzherbert on Twitter: the fake clinic in Fredericton offers ultrasound.

I Can't Keep Up, continued

My apologies for the silence from this corner of DAMMIT JANET!, but again I can't keep up with the orgy of fetus fetishizing in USian state legislatures.

I mean, don't they have a recession down there? A couple of wars? Widespread unemployment? Massive budget shortfalls?

Ah, but that stuff's not as interesting or gratifying as fucking with women's rights.

By the end of March, 825 measures had been introduced in the 44 legislatures that have convened so far in 2010.

From the Guttmacher Institute here's an index of fascinating topics under the general heading of 'Laws for Ladies':

Abortion

Abortion Bans to Replace Roe

Crisis Pregnancy Centers: 'Choose Life' License Plates and State Funding

Crisis Pregnancy Centers

Fetal Pain

Health Reform

Later Term and Second Trimester Abortion

Mandatory Counseling and Waiting Periods

Medical Emergency Exception in Abortion Law

Medication Abortion

Minors Reporting

Parental Involvement

'Partial-Birth' Abortion

Physician Liability

Physician-Only Requirements

Postviability Abortion

Private Insurance Coverage of Abortion

Prohibiting Forcing a Woman to Have an Abortion

Protecting Access to Abortion

Protecting Access to Clinics

Public Funding of Abortion

Requiring Abortion Providers to Have Hospital Privileges

Reporting Statistical Information to State Agencies

Self-Induced Abortion

Sex and Race Selection

State Participation in Abortion

Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers

Ultrasound Requirements

With so many intrusive, paternalistic, authoritarian, slut-shaming laws to choose from, it's hard to say which is the winner of the coveted Maurice Vellacott Award, but Oklahoma is certainly a top contender.

Oklahoma's new anti-choice laws, one requiring all women to have a mandatory ultrasound before an abortion, and one allowing doctors to lie to their patients if the fetus has an abnormality, are stirring up a lot of anger (not to mention a looming court battle). But the anger isn't just in Oklahoma, but across the country, too.

From California:

Anti-abortion lawmakers in Oklahoma stooped to a new low this week by passing two bills that constitute a reprehensible intrusion of government into women's lives.

It's hard to tell which of the bills is the most repugnant.

The first requires doctors to force women to watch an ultrasound and listen to a detailed description of the fetus within an hour before an abortion is performed. The requirement holds even for women who are victims of incest or rape. It will add gratuitous pain to a procedure that for the vast majority of women is already an anguished choice.

The second bill prevents a wrongful life or wrongful death lawsuit against doctors who withhold information about a pregnancy, even when a fetus has severe disabilities.

In other words, Oklahoma doctors are free to impose their beliefs on women and even to flat-out lie to them. Would a law making the same provision for an exclusively male condition ever get through Oklahoma's or any other legislature? Not a chance.

Lying to a patient would be clearly unethical. Fortunately, it's almost certainly unconstitutional as well. The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit two hours after the Oklahoma House and Senate overrode Gov. Brad Henry's veto of the bill. The suit will argue that the laws invade a patient's right to privacy and fail to respect patient autonomy.

No kidding.

WARNING: Do not read the next paragraph if you are prone to head-explosions.

The justification for the mandatory ultrasound is 'informed consent' -- you know, we wimmin don't really know what we're doing when we make abortion appointments. Yet the wrongful life/death one enables (encourages?) fetus fetishizing doctors or technicians to withhold information on potential fetal deformities or other problems. Because we wimmin can't be trusted with knowing what's growing in our uteruses.

So, how's it working out? Well, the emotional torture part works good, but the preventing abortion part? Not so well.

Women became emotional and some cried after being shown fetal ultrasound images at a Tulsa abortion clinic Wednesday, a day after Oklahoma enacted what has been called the nation’s most restrictive abortion law.

None of the women, however, decided against terminating their pregnancies, said Linda Meek, the executive director of Reproductive Services in Tulsa.

Now go read Rape Me All Over Again at Those Emergency Blues, which is where I got this photo. And yup, it works just like it looks like it would. (I've had one of these dealies and 'horribly invasive' doesn't begin to describe it.)

Oops! (updated)

That MASSIVE tinkling sound you're hearing is Blob Blogging Wingnut wetting HERself in excitement over a tactic that the anti-abortion group Faith2Action will exploit when it appears before the Ohio House Health Committee.

From here:

According to the AP [...] a pregnant woman will be "brought before the committee and an ultrasound image of her uterus will be projected onto a screen" with the heartbeat shown in color. Faith2Action president Janet Folger Porter says the intent is to show legislators who will be affected by the bill. If that's the case, aren't there sentient beings, like, say, the people that will have to raise it for the next eighteen years that could use actual words to testify?

What's next? Sperm testifying about how sad they are never to have made it to an egg?

The source for the above is New York Magazine, not The Onion.

If The Fetus©™ fetishists and catholic zealots BBW and John 'Sperm Holocaust' Pacheco had their way, all menstruating females would be forced to collect every single drop of their monthly flow and bring it to a government inspection station. No woman would escape the ideologically-motivated scrutiny of her reproductive apparatus, also known as the ovaries + the uterus.

Oh. Wait.

Update: my virtual roomie provided a link to pharyngula's post about those rightwingnutjobs and something jumped out at me.

Early ultrasound examinations will primarily detect the presence of the extraembryonic sac, not the embryo itself. It's too small. Around 5 weeks, you might be able to see a fuzzy small blob with a flutter that is the beating heart, but that's about it, and you do have to use transvaginal ultrasound to pick it up — that is, you have to insert the ultrasound probe deep into the vagina.

Got that? In order to get the maximum blobby F/X, the ultrasound probes would have to be inserted deep in the pregnant women's respective vaginas. No sacrifice too great for BABEEZ! it would seem. Betcha most of those male RepubliCon Ohio legislators will get their rocks off on that. In fact, that's probably why they've allowed this histrionic display.

More Ultrasounds = More Abortions (Revised)

I wonder how SUZY ('I'd have as many ultrasounds as I could') ALLCAPS is going to feel about this.

Since ultrasounds have been offered to every pregnant woman in the Netherlands at 20 weeks, late abortions have doubled.

The Dutch branch of Fetus Fetishists International, predictably, is SHRIEEEEEKING.

The Dutch orthodox Christian party ChristenUnie however, is now saying it wants to postpone the official ultrasound to week 24, the legal limit for abortion in the Netherlands. The government introduced the 20-week ultrasound for all women in 2007. If a major defect is found at that stage, parents have four weeks to decide whether they want their baby to be born.

(snip)

Esmé Wiegman, a member of parliament for the ChristenUnie, said Tuesday: "The life ofa person with disabilities is a valuable life. We should be able to count on a careful approach when the life of an unborn child with a disability is involved." She announced she wants to move the regular echo to week 24, when abortion is illegal, to turn the tide. If that proposal fails to get support, she to cap legal abortion at 18 weeks, before the defects become visible.

The orthodox Christian party has always opposed abortion, claiming only God should decide whether a baby is born or not. When it entered into a coalition with the Christian democrats, CDA, and Labour in 2006 however, it signed a government agreement that said the laws on abortion would not be changed.

But there's some good news too:

Another possible consequence is that doctors reported not a single euthanasia of a newborn in 2008. They are obligated to disclose if babies with a condition deemed "incompatible with life", such as certain very serious cases of spina bifida, are euthanised. Experts say fewer such babies are born now because their condition can be determined at the 20 week ultrasound.

Not a single euthanasia. Well, that's good, isn't it?

We'll give the last word to a sciency-facty type:

Gynaecologist Wildschut finds it odd that politicians act surprised about the higher number of abortions. "The whole idea of the 20 week ultrasound was to detect these defects," he said.

UPDATED: To remove fetal pr0n redirect by SUZY. But that's the intellectually crippled fetus fetishist reaction to sciency facty stuff. RUN!

Ultra-Cruelty

Because we at Birth Pangs think women are studip want to help women fully understand the consequences of their decisions, we have proposed that women seeking a pregnancy undergo Mandatory Obstetric Photography or MOP.

We confess outright that we stole the idea from the fetus fetishizers who, under the rubric of 'informed consent', force women to undergo ultrasound before terminating a pregnancy.

There's a good round-up of the state of play of this incrementalist attack on women's rights in the US here.

In all, 17 states considered more than 30 ultrasound bills this year, a record level of legislative activity on any abortion issue, according to the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion-rights research group. In two states, Florida and Missouri, Oklahoma-style bills were narrowly defeated, and experts on both sides of the issue say they expect many more ultrasound bills next year.

In most cases, while the woman may be forced to pay for this completely unnecessary and invasive assault, she is not forced to look at the ultrasound. In a grand concession to the fact that women might just be regular human beans capable of rational thought, a woman may sign a statement affirming that she had been given the opportunity to view it.

Except in Oklahoma.

The Ultrasound Circus Comes to Canada

The convo with MP and point-man for the Vatican Taliban, Stephen Woodworth, continues.

To recap, I asked what witnesses he would propose if Motion 312, aka Woodworth's Wank, passes. I also asked what 'modern' science persuaded him that the motion was necessary.

His reply:

As mentioned, it will be for the Committee to determine the witnesses.  You are getting ahead of matters.

Let`s stay with first things first.  As to important advances in the last 400 years, I will mention one for you, 21st century ultrasonagraphy [sic] permits imaging of the organs and limbs of a child before birth in a manner impossible 400 years ago.

Still weaselling on the experts and a misspelled example of an imaging technology. (His punctuation isn't too hot either.)

How unsurprising that he cites ultrasound as the convincer. We've done a fair bit of reporting here at DJ! on the fetus fetishists's fetish for ultrasound.

Here is my response (with link embedded).

You refuse to give examples of credible experts from your no-doubt extensive research. Fine. Canadians will draw their own conclusions on your silence.

But you cite (and unfortunately misspell) ultrasonography. Perhaps the committee will be treated to the circus presented to Ohio legislators when two fetuses 'testified' by means of ultrasound.

That, by the way, was in aid of passing an anti-abortion 'heartbeat' bill.

Well, why not? This government has already made Canada a laughing stock on the international scene for its treatment of real science. If M312 passes, we can add to that reputation by accepting only junk science.

Your strategy of deliberately conflating biology with law is well-known and -documented in the various 'personhood' initiatives in the US. Such initiatives consistently fail spectacularly even in the most conservative US states like Mississippi.

Canadians are at least as smart as Mississippians. You insult each one of us with this transparent ploy.

Thank you for replying. I'm done now.

Beyond one robo response, there has been nothing from the two online backers of M312, whenamihuman and weneedalaw to my simple question. And I don't expect any from them.

You Want a Scrip for Viagra? Mandatory Rectal Exam!

Pay back!

The state Senate this afternoon gave preliminary approval for legislation that would require pregnant women to undergo ultrasound imaging before an abortion, but not before rejecting a Democratic senator’s attempt to add what she described as “ a little gender equity” to the bill.

Democrat Janet Howell of Fairfax County proposed requiring men to undergo a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before getting prescriptions for erectile dysfunction drugs such as Viagra.

“This is a matter of basic fairness,” Howell said.

Senate Bill 484 would require a pregnant woman to undergo ultrasound imaging to determine the gestational age of the fetus, and be given an opportunity to view the ultrasound image, before having an abortion. The proposed law also requires the abortion provider to keep a printed copy of the ultrasound image in the patient’s file.

. . .
She said she was watching television in her hotel room that evening and saw an ad for an erectile dysfunction drug that included a recitation of “all the serious things that could happen to a man who was going to take this medication.”

“So, I said, it’s only fair, that if we’re going to subject women to unnecessary procedures, and we’re going to subject doctors to having to do things that they don’t think is medically advisory, well, Mr. President, I think we should just have a little gender equity here,” Howell said, explaining her amendment.

Every time another bullshit pre-abortion mandatory procedure law comes up, women in whatever legislature should propose this.



h/t I Am Dr. Tiller

USA creeps closer to 'A Handmaid's Tale'

Democrats tore into House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R) for preventing women from testifying before a hearing examining the Obama administration’s new regulation requiring employers and insurers to provide contraception coverage to their employees. Republicans oppose the administration’s rule and have sponsored legislation that would allow employers to limit the availability of birth control to women.

Ranking committee member Elijah Cummings (D) had asked Issa to include a female witness at the hearing, but the Chairman refused, arguing that “[...] the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience [the] congressman insisted that the hearing should focus on the rules’ alleged infringement on “religious liberty,” not contraception coverage, and denied the request. Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Eleanor Holmes Norton walked out of the hearing in protest of his decision, citing frustration over the fact that the first panel of witnesses consisted only of male religious leaders [...]

From here:

I can see why the Republicans would bar female religious leaders from the hearing; they would bring their wombs, whose dangerous *humours* they fear.

ADDED: And. Also. This.

On February 14th the Virginia State House passed an anti-abortion measure that would mandate that a woman seeking an abortion be required to undergo what is called a trans-vaginal ultrasound. This is a type of pelvic ultrasound that is used to look at a woman’s reproductive organs. Unlike a normal ultrasound, this type of ultrasound is an invasive procedure. A woman lies on her back with her feet in stirrups, as the health care provider places a probe covered with a condom and lubrication into her vagina.

State-sanctioned rape for women needing an abortion.

Paying for It

Back here, we reported on the authoritarian and paternalistic practice in BC of withholding info on a fetus's gender.

The clever meddlers have come up with a new twist.

They're going to make parents pay to find out.

Expectant parents curious to know the sex of their fetus during ultrasound examinations are now being asked to pay $50 at some hospitals, but the charge could eventually expand across regions.

The "gender determination" fee has been newly implemented at Lions Gate and Richmond General hospitals following a pilot project at the latter.

The knicker-twisty 'problem' is that members of 'some communities' may be aborting fetuses of the wrong (i.e. female) gender and the Big Daddies don't approve of this.

But how would a smallish fee deter someone from abortion?

Trick question. It doesn't. Because even when the fee is paid, the information is still withheld!

"The ultrasound staff will not disclose this information to the patient. Rather, [the pregnant patient] will obtain it from the referring physician after 20 weeks gestation [when abortion is no longer an available option]."

The time period after which such information is disclosed is important to prevent women from aborting if they are disappointed by the news of the gender of their fetus. In some countries, such as India and China, millions of female fetuses are aborted each year.

Anna Marie D'Angelo, spokeswoman for Vancouver Coastal Health, said patients must sign a disclaimer before the ultrasound acknowledging that the ultrasound technician may make a mistake in gender determination.

"Right or wrong, no one gets their money back. But they will get a refund if the sonographer can't make a determination, based on the way the baby is positioned."

Simple cash grab? More shaming for women who even consider abortion? Feeble-minded faux do-goodery?

Hmm. Maybe the hospital administrators want to horn in on a source of extra cash that may now be going to sonographers with particularly expressive faces. Because we all know that when information is valuable, someone will put a price on it, and someone else will pay it.

Not that I have any knowledge of such carryings on. . . just sayin'.

On Those 'Missing Girls'

Joe Biden has stepped in it. Again. (What a dork that guy is.)

Under fire from angry Republicans, US Vice President Joe Biden's office has said that he firmly opposes "repugnant" Chinese population control practices like "forced abortion and sterilization."

"The Obama administration strongly opposes all aspects of China's coercive birth limitation policies, including forced abortion and sterilization," Biden spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff told AFP by email.

"The vice president believes such practices are repugnant," she said after Republican White House candidates blasted Biden for recent comments he made about Beijing's "one-child" population control policy during a visit to China.

Biden told an audience at Sichuan University in Chengdu, China, Sunday that "your policy has been one which I fully understand -- I'm not second-guessing -- of one child per family."

(Go to the link to read the hyperventilations of the ReThugs.)

Fetus fetishists were already stoked about one of their perennial faves because a couple of months ago a book by Mara Hvistendahl called 'Unnatural Selection' was published. Which got further ramped up by the release of census stats from India.

In the world's largest democracy a massive crisis of missing girls is unfolding, according to India's 2011 census. The latest census shows that the gap between the number of girls per 1,000 boys up to the age of six has widened to 914, a decrease from 927 a decade ago, at the 2001 census.

With the SHRIEEEEKfest came, of course, the mandatory 'Where are the feminists?!!?' jab lament. Because, you see, we feminists should be outraged because half of all abortions are done on 'pre-born women' (that's their phrase), and with sex-selective abortion, 'pre-born women' are actively targeted. Their (idiotic) question is: 'If you claim to be about women's rights, what about pre-born women's rights?'

Sigh. So I thought about writing about it. We at DJ! have taken on the subject at least twice. Once when wingnuts in BC proposed that if the gender of a fetus is known through an ultrasound, the results should not be revealed. (You know, to put an end to that rampant Canadian practice of sex-selective abortion.) And once when Ujjal Dosanjh stepped in it from the reverse direction as Biden. First, he was against sex-selective abortion, then he hadda walk it back by adding: 'But I am totally absolutely pro-choice'.

DJ! argued and argues that this is not a problem in Canada. The communities that prefer boys to girls are small, and besides, they'll get their comeuppance when their sons can't find partners of the 'right' sort and maybe bring home sweeties of the 'wrong' sort. Or 'wrong' gender. Or both. *evilgrin*

But, yes. Sex-selective abortion has created a ginormous problem in the benighted countries where it is practised.

I was going to argue this time that back in the 1960s overpopulation was the big bugaboo. We hadn't yet realized that that was too simplistic. It's not sheer overpopulation, we now know, it's overconsumption plus growing population that's going to kill the planet.

But that's when China and India began to try to grapple with their poverty problems by trying to slow population growth. China, because it could, instituted the infamous One Child Policy. India, being a democracy, couldn't be quite so draconian and tried kinder, more innovative policies.

Besides, both countries were fucking sick of being poor.

And I was going to argue that the best way to lower population growth is to promote women's rights and in particular to educate women.

Ultimately, though, this shouldn't be seen as a medical dilemma, but as a social one. The way to prevent sex-selective abortion isn't to legislate against it or attack the women who seek it – it's to create cultural changes that transform the place of women. By offering girls education, training and opportunities for employment, femicidal traditions can be uprooted, and a world that values women and fully recognises their right to exist created instead. To get there, though, we must first accept that women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, on their own terms. Because if no one gives them autonomy in their own skin, why should they believe that their potential daughters deserve it either?

Aside: I really liked one of the comments there by hillbillyzombie:

Q: In what language is religion an anagram of misogyny?
A: All of them.

What Joe Biden stepped in is the relatively new contention that the developed West promoted the practice in China and India.

Much of the literature on sex selection has suggested that cultural patterns explain the phenomenon. But Hvistendahl lays the blame squarely on western governments and businesses that have exported technology and pro-abortion practices without considering the consequences. Amniocentesis and ultrasound scans have had largely positive applications in the west, where they have been used to detect foetal abnormalities. But exported to Asia and eastern Europe they have been intricately linked to an explosion of sex selection and a mushrooming of female abortions.

Hvistendahl claims western governments actively promoted abortion and sex selection in the developing world, encouraging the liberalisation of abortion laws and subsidising sales of ultrasounds as a form of population control.

"It took millions of dollars in funding from US organisations for sex determination and abortion to catch on in the developing world," she writes."

Roll out that whole 'feminist secularist Culture of Death' meme thingy!!!!!!

But again, it's a bit more subtle than your average fetus fetishist can cope with.

While it's true that the West did promote contraception and abortion, the purpose was ^NOT women's rights but population control. If they'd promoted women's rights with the same enthusiasm and money way back then, perhaps the problem of devalued and now missing women wouldn't have happened.

No one combating sex selection in China or India now argues that the appropriate reaction to decades of violating women's rights is to swing in the other direction and violate them further. Just as a woman should not be forced to abort a wanted pregnancy, she should not be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

Yet more subtlety. Yes, it's a cultural thing, but more than that it's a 'rising expectations' thing.

In the mid-1970s, amniocentesis, which reveals the sex of a baby in utero, became available in developing countries. Originally meant to test for fetal abnormalities, by the 1980s it was known as the "sex test" in India and other places where parents put a premium on sons. When amnio was replaced by the cheaper and less invasive ultrasound, it meant that most couples who wanted a baby boy could know ahead of time if they were going to have one and, if they were not, do something about it. "Better 500 rupees now than 5,000 later," reads one ad put out by an Indian clinic, a reference to the price of a sex test versus the cost of a dowry.

But oddly enough, Ms. Hvistendahl notes, it is usually a country's rich, not its poor, who lead the way in choosing against girls. "Sex selection typically starts with the urban, well-educated stratum of society," she writes. "Elites are the first to gain access to a new technology, whether MRI scanners, smart phones—or ultrasound machines." The behavior of elites then filters down until it becomes part of the broader culture. Even more unexpectedly, the decision to abort baby girls is usually made by women—either by the mother or, sometimes, the mother-in-law.

They don't want girls, yes. But more than that they want to live like us in the West. Simply put: girls cost money, boys make money. (And just as importantly, operating an ultrasound clinic is a nice little earner too.)

Yes, the developed West deserves some blame for the missing girls. But it is the capitalist West and its values that provided the technology and the profit for its operators that deserves the much bigger blame.

Feminism is not to blame for this. If feminists had been in charge of the Club of Rome, I daresay the outcome would have been quite different.

Commenter Ngoho at the MoJo link sums it up nicely.

It's possible that, since men steered culture into valuing their sex above females, perhaps a generation of lonely men will change that culture into one which values women.

Payback is a bitch, isn't she?

Stories from the NB abortion clinic

At DAMMIT JANET! we have posted much about choice and abortion rights.  FH and I started off at _Birth Pangs_ over 7 years ago, writing about the erosion of women's reproductive choices and our human right to control every aspect of our sexualities and procreation potential.

Since founding DJ! we have expanded our feminist scrutiny to other current concerns, while offering our criticism, our support and our activism. 

But like salmon swimming against the current we are compelled to return to violence against women and reproductive choices; wife battering (as we called it then), rape, contraception and abortion were the hot-button issues in the 1970s and it would seem Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose...

There are two pieces that I posted that are fundamental to understanding - at the very least - abortion access as harm reduction.

Why a coat-hanger as a pro-choice meme?

No-choice Vulture Culture: Let women die or go to prison.

The one that I have yet to write would be a recollection of miscarriage, pregnancy and abortion.  Inspired by the courage of the New Brunswick woman who generously shared with DJ! the account below, I might do that soon.

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

"I found out that I was pregnant the day after Boxing Day. I was 5 days late for my period. I was NEVER late. I was also in the throes of parenting a 3-­year-­old boy. This coupled with the fact that I had been suffering from a terrible bout of depression and anxiety—a mental challenge that resulted from juggling my intensive role as a full-­time stay-­at-­home mom, while working remotely for a feminist maternal academic organization and publishing. It seems that not only had the bitter loneliness of being a stay-­at-­home mom and remote worker had gotten to me, but I had also started to ignore the strategies and activities that I had previously used to combat stress, such as running, weight lifting and yoga, started drinking more, and literally succumbed to the very notion of intensive mothering practices—the practices that I had been critiquing through graduate school and beyond.

When I peed on that stick, I instantly knew that I would have an abortion. Although I loved my son, the post-­partum period was less than ideal. You know that old saying, ‘It takes a village to raise a child’? Well, I was still searching for that village. The experience of motherhood had felt less like a village and more like a stranded island—where I had no hope of being of rescued from. I often felt very alone and had very little support (if any at all) from my family and my husband’s family lived too far away. My husband and I had decided very early on that we only wanted one child. We could deal with one. Anything above that might send me over the edge. 

I can clearly recall the sound that I made when I saw that plus sign. It was the sound of complete disappointment and sadness. My son was in the bathroom at that time. I remember my husband quickly scurrying him away as I wept on the toilet for what seemed like hours. How could I let this happen? We weren’t using birth control at the time. We were not being safe for a really long time. 

When I called the clinic, I was 6 weeks pregnant. The woman on the other end of the phone scheduled my appointment for the following Tuesday. She told me that the procedure would cost about $800. Ouch! Knowing what I knew about the public system (I spent my final year of my undergraduate degree studying public and private abortion systems in NB), I could not go through the hoops that were required for a publicly[-­funded] abortion. I was not in the mood to be possibly judged by my family doctor and being forced to endure horrendously long wait times while I continued to experience excruciating morning sickness. 

I was extremely lucky that one of my closest friends worked as a nurse at the abortion clinic. On the morning of my appointment, she picked me up in her car. I distinctly recall bursting into tears as soon as I closed the car door. I was utterly terrified. Although I knew that I needed to do this for my own mental health, I did not do well with medical situations in general. For years, I avoided medical professionals because of a debilitating case of White Coat Syndrome. I delivered my son with the assistance of midwives, so I had not seen a doctor in over 4 years! 

When we entered the clinic, I was very nervous. As I filled out the forms, I remember feeling slightly giddy and recall joking quite frequently about some of the questions on the form—perhaps a stage of denial? This stage ended promptly though, as one woman sitting across from me stood up and ran to the bathroom to vomit loudly. I had not eaten anything that morning and that was the last thing I wanted to hear as I covered my ears and hummed to myself. Sorry woman. I remember hearing an office staff member ask her if she had made arrangements for a bus ride home with Maritime Bus Service. This was not the city bus, but rather an inter-­provincial bus system. That did not sound like fun at all. I was thankful that my house was a mere 3-­minute drive away. 

When I went in for my ultrasound, the ‘vomit woman’ was getting counseled, but had to rush past us to vomit again. This is where I definitely lost it a bit. When I finally calmed down, my nurse friend continued with the ultrasound and told me that I had actually measured at 7 weeks, rather than 6. She was a little surprised that I wanted to see my fetus in the ultrasound. It was important though that I see him or her so that I knew that it was real and that my decision was real. I couldn’t think of it as just mere a mass of cells or tissue. There was a real live person growing inside of me. This could’ve been my son’s little brother or sister. This was my decision to end a life and I needed this for closure. 

After my ultrasound and counseling session (which included a dose of pain reliever and Ativan, an envelope of antibiotics, and the decision to have a copper IUD inserted immediately following the procedure), I sat and waited for the number 4 to be called, the number that was written down on a tiny yellow sticky note that was handed to me when I arrived at the clinic. As I waited, a woman with 2 children arrived and was quickly escorted to a quiet room downstairs. The fact that this woman did not have the childcare and support available during such a stressful time was profoundly sad to me. I will never ever forget the look of despair on her face. 

When my number was called, I was escorted inside to another waiting room where I was told to change into my pajamas and a robe brought from home. After I changed, I sat and waited with 2 other women—both of which were mothers themselves. One woman wasn’t ready for a second child and another woman had just suffered from a string of debilitating miscarriages and just couldn’t go through that awful experience again. We were all terrified. I recall continuously shaking my head, thinking how the heck did I get myself into this situation. I’m an educated woman. I was supposed to ‘know better’, right? 

When my time came to enter the operating room, my heart started beating a mile a minute. I remember being very light headed as I lay down on the table and placed my legs in the stirrups. When my doctor told me to scoot my bum down to the end of the table, I tried practicing my ‘yoga breathing’…breathe in through the nose, breathe out through the nose. This worked well considering I was having nitrous oxide (ahem, laughing gas) during my procedure. When I started to breathe the laughing gas in, I don’t really recall much physical discomfort or pain, I just remember the wave of emotions that I was experiencing. I don’t remember the sounds or the smells of the room, I just remember holding my friend’s hand as the tears poured down my face. I felt great despair and disappointment in myself. I felt extreme sadness for the vomiting woman who had to take the bus, for the woman with the 2 kids, and the other 2 mothers that I spoke to in the inside waiting room. But I also remember feeling extreme gratitude and love—not only for my friend who was able be there for me to hold my hand during the procedure, but for the doctor who was performing the procedure and the women that worked at the clinic. A life may have been ending on this table, but these women were saving MY life. The procedure seemed to take forever, although I know it only lasted about 5 or 10 minutes. Once completed, they performed an ultrasound to make sure that they had taken out all of the ‘tissue’ and then inserted my IUD. I remember asking if I could see that tissue, but it was already gone. 

Immediately following the procedure, I was escorted into a recovery room, where I was given juice and toast. Once the effects of the drugs wore off, I was able to go home. After picking up supplies on my way home, I arrived home to the comforting and loving faces of my husband and child. The rest of the day was spent sleeping and recovering. Although the literature given to me stated that some women often felt well enough to return to work immediately following this procedure, I did not. I needed the time to decompress and digest the experience. 

The days, weeks and months following the procedure were tremendously challenging for me. I felt that I went through a very serious and emotionally painful experience and that many people just didn’t understand. I was just supposed to ‘go back to my normal life’ and act like nothing happened. I was supposed to take care of my son and get back to work, but I found this particularly hard. The mere sound of my son crying often sent me over the edge and I often felt incompetent as a mother and scared to be alone with him. I found great comfort though in speaking with various women friends and having them confide in me that they went through the experience of abortion—many of them living in complete silence because they feared that they would be ostracized for their decision. My depression and anxiety peaked around month two, likely caused by an imbalance of hormones. I also began the initial stages of co-­editing a collection of stories on reproductive loss at this time. Reading through the research, I learned a great deal about the culture of silence that permeates society, not only with abortion, but with miscarriage and stillbirth as well. 

It has now been 6 months since my abortion. I would’ve been approximately 7 months pregnant right now. Although I don’t regret my decision, there will always be a ‘what if’ in the back of my head. Honestly though, I think that the ‘what if’ is less of me romanticizing the notion of having another child, and more of me imagining my life and emotions spiraling even further out of control. Following the peak of my anxiety and depression, I decided to begin antidepressants and talk therapy. This, coupled with the decision to put my son in full-­time childcare and to completely give up drinking, has allowed me to come to a point of recovery, acceptance and self-­forgiveness. No one will really know the complete and utter darkness that lived inside of me at that 2-­month mark or even in the years prior to that. And no one ever will. But one thing I can say for certain is that I am serious about the fact that the women at that clinic saved my life. And for that, I am eternally grateful. 

Since I started my journey of recovery, I started a daily yoga practice, which included participation in an energy exchange program where I volunteer my services in exchange for free yoga. I recently watched a documentary on yoga and one of the speakers talked about the whole notion of karma. They discussed how karma wasn’t merely just this traditional idea that you do good things and good things come back to you. But it was more of finding and working through your weaknesses and using those experiences to give back—it’s an action of selfless service. For example, if you are a drug addict, once you recover, you should use that experience of recovery to help others in the same situation. This really resonated with me. And this is why I have decided to tell this story. Not only do I want to tell my story because I feel that it is an important one to tell, but I want to be able to help other women that may be going through a similar experience. I want them to know that it is okay to grieve or not. It is okay to be disappointed in yourself or be depressed, just the same as it’s okay to think that it was merely a mistake and move on with life. Your experience is YOUR experience and it’s OKAY! 

What’s not okay? This culture of silence! I realize that a woman’s abortion experience is purely her own and it is her decision to share it as she wishes. But if she decides to share that experience and needs to do so, she should have the full support required and not feel judged for her decision. And she also needs full and free access to abortion services, both from the point of entry and beyond. 

The fact that the Morgentaler Clinic is closing next month is a tremendous shame for our province. It’s tremendously disgraceful that New Brunswick does not cover the cost of private abortions, while completely ignoring the basic human rights of its citizens. I fear that following the closure of our private clinic; we will not only see a rise in maternal mental health issues, but also rates of suicide. That is why it is important that we break the silence of abortion experience. Not only will this allow us to analyze and deconstruct traditional discourses of pregnancy loss, but it might help us to crush the barriers to access by normalizing the experience and informing the general public that, statistically speaking, the 1 in 3 women who require an abortion at some point in their lives might just be their sister, their neighbor, their mother, their friend, or their coworker. The woman might need that abortion because she didn’t use birth control or perhaps her birth control failed? She might be poor or rich. She might be a teenager or in their 30s (like me). She might experience mental or physical health issues, or she might be the happiest and healthiest person around. The fact though that she WANTS and NEEDS an abortion should be the ONLY reason she needs to justify having an abortion. Let’s normalize this reason. It is really the only way that we can ultimately move forward and push for much-­needed changes within our health-­care system. I’ll go first: my name is Angela Deveau and I HAVE HAD AN ABORTION! If you need to talk about it, please feel free to do so. I am available to listen—unabashedly and with loving and judgment-­free support! 

*Note: I am forever grateful for those friends and family in my life that provided the greatest support when I sought treatment for my depression last spring. I don’t need to name names, you know who you are! xoxox

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

FH has recently done much heavy lifting with regard to healthcare-provided reproductive choices for women in New Brunswick. Here are those blog posts:

Not-so-gentle news from the East.
Kansas? Louisiana? Nope. New Brunswick refers patients to religious counsellors.

Feminism: This is how it's done now. 

Healthcare: Unequal Access is UnCanadian.

More fun with headlines

Further to deBeauxOs's post on headlines and spin, I found a case of spin-doctoring in religious reporting on the partial failure of a new law throwing up more barriers to abortion in Oklahoma.

First, the Baptists. Under the headline 'Judge nixes Okla. ultrasound law', the piece laments:

An Oklahoma judge has invalidated on procedural grounds a state ultrasound law described by a national pro-life organization as the best in the country.
. . .
Sonogram machines have been important tools in pro-life pregnancy care centers' attempts to educate pregnant women about their unborn children. Such centers have reported dramatic upswings in clients choosing to give birth after viewing ultrasound images of their babies.

Yabbut, the Catlicks are celebrating, with this headline: 'Judge upholds law requiring doctors to tell women abortion ends life'.

A federal judge in South Dakota ruled Aug. 20 that a 2005 South Dakota law requiring doctors to inform patients that abortion kills a human being is constitutional.

(Note small ooopsie in the state. 'Twas Oklahoma, ye ijits.)

Depending on one's agenda -- on the one hand, forcing those dirty sluts to give birth; on the other, SHRIEEEEKING about the sanctity of life -- the judge's ruling was either a FAIL! or a WIN!

Go figure.

Me, I just love it when the anti-choicers eat their own. And each other.

Just Astonishing

What's next after mandatory ultrasounds, including those offered by Christianist-run fake clinics, mandatory bullshit lectures on fetal development, mandatory waiting periods, invasive reporting requirements, etc., etc., etc.?

Mandatory ultrasounds that the abortion-seeking woman must view and pay for herself.

Florida's Republican-led Senate pushed through an 11th-hour provision Wednesday that would require women seeking an abortion in their first trimester of pregnancy to pay for ultrasound exams.

The amendment, which had not been debated during committee meetings, was attached to a health care bill (HB 1143) by a 22-17 vote following two hours of emotional debate.

Oh. Wait. There's an exception for victims of rape, domestic violence, or incest. With two enormous buts.

One, the victim has to 'prove' she's a victim. How the hell does one do that?

Two -- and this is just astonishing:

Victims of such crimes would still be required to have the ultrasound exam and pay for the procedure, which lawmakers estimated average between $350 and $400.

Such victims would, however, be permitted to avert their eyes.

Such mercy.

The bill has passed both the senate and the house and has gone to be signed or vetoed by Governor Charlie Crist, who is facing his own political troubles. A moderate Republican -- yeah, they apparently still exist -- Crist wants to run for the federal senate, but he got teabagged for the Republican nomination. He is running as an independent.

Abortion is still legal in the Excited States, remember. Access to abortion though is becoming increasingly encased in state-level barbwire and triplines dreamed up by fetus fetishizing sadists.

And remember too -- we have people here in Canada who want to put restrictions on abortion. And once they get started -- well, we have only to look south to see how far they can go.

ADDED: To answer the regina mom's question in the comments, I reread recent blogpost. In soshalist Canada, an ultrasound costs $65.