• Wed, Nov 28 2012

Anti-Choice Group Pushing Law To Force Abortion Patients To View 4-D Ultrasound Of Fetus

In Nebraska, if you are seeking an abortion, the law requires you to have an ultrasound. During that ultrasound, the doctor must make sure you can see the images on the monitor easily. For a whole fucking hour (which may not sound like a lot to some people but it truly is). This bill, called LB675 and also known as “Mother’s Right to See Her Unborn Child Ultrasound Bill,” passed in the state legislature 40 to 5 in 2009. And as though this invasive, pseudo-concerned bill wasn’t enough violation of a woman’s reproductive rights, one group is now pushing for more.

Nebraska Right To Life, an anti-abortion organization, is trying to get a piece of legislation through that “would require that so-called 4-D ultrasound images of an unborn fetus be posted on a Nebraska state website.”

And Nebraska Right To Life is apparently starting to team up: according to ABC News, they’ve been in contact with Kansas for Life, the group that pursued and helped pass Kansas’ own 4-D imaging law.

Both groups’ websites are complete with plenty of propaganda, as well as tons of photos of children–a piece of pointed indoctrination in itself. If every human life is precious, why put only the youngest human beings–almost always Caucasian–on there? Why not a minority? Or a child with disabilities?  Why not put the elderly there, who also living human beings alive because they were not aborted as fetuses? These photos of little children that anti-choice groups put up are the ones they believe you’ll find most sympathetic, which is absolutely meant to persuade uncertain visitors.

I think one of the most aggravating things about both of these laws is their incredibly misleading titles. “Women’s Right to Know”? “Mother’s Right to See”? We have the right to see these things already; it’s not a right that’s being given, it’s one that’s being taken away completely. Anti-choice groups don’t just want to take the choice to have a child away from you–they want to take the choice for all other aspects away, as well. This isn’t a “right.” It’s a requirement.

(By the way, if you’re wondering why there’s a picture of a cat on an ultrasound at the top of this post, it’s because I don’t really feel like posting photos of an actual 4-D human ultrasound for a piece about why forcing women to see ultrasounds is not okay. I figured the cat worked.)

[ABCNews]

Photo: ultrasound-images.

Share This Post:
  • anna

    applause for you and a bit of vomit for nebraska.

    • Samantha_Escobar

      Thank you! + I am sitting in the proverbial stall next to you, breffing up a storm, too.

    • MyDearGirl

      I would hurl all over the screen. No ones choice but mine. Stop with all the lecturing. “ain’t nobody got time for that!”

  • s

    I live in Nebraska, and there is exactly one doctor who performs abortions. He is constantly subjected to death threats and protestors on the street. His nurses park in a garage he had built to prevent vandalism. I’ve read about him in the news before, seems like a pretty good guy, protecting our rights as women.

    • http://twitter.com/CeeCrowl Cee Crowl

      Yes! It’s not like women anticipate having abortions, but there are circumstances that come to that.

  • len132

    I am going to choose to believe that this law is about tesseracts.

  • Krissy

    I’m not going to get all into this, mainly because I know this is a left leaning website and I totally knew that, however, first and foremost, I’m pro-life, not anti-choice. I wouldn’t call any pro-choice people anti-life – that’s pretty disrespectful. Pro-life people aren’t “anti-choice” any more than pro-choice people are “anti-life”.

    That being said, I’m not for all the parts of this bill, but I’m all for requiring an ultrasound. Just as with any operation or invasive procedure, an informed decision on the behalf of the mother should be a requirement. (An hour is excessive, definitely). I think all too often people are making these decisions without a lot of information, or at very least, without enough information. I’m pretty sure there are a lot of women who go in for abortions truly believing it’s just a clump of cells in their uterus for removal, when that’s actually not at all the case. (If you don’t believe me, feel free to google what fetuses look like at each week up until the point when abortions are no longer an option; within a few weeks the baby already has a visible brain and spinal cord.)

    I respect the pro-choice standpoint, but why wouldn’t people want an ultrasound used to make an informed choice?

    • Gab

      So then, you are willing to raise the babies that these scared ass girls, who now will keep out of guilt, but don’t actually want. How about when you go for your abortion you can ask for this if you want to “see” or better yet why don’t we let a doctor deem it necessary IF it is medically needed. Yes, make someone feel even worse about an already hard choice, how humane of you.