You’d think the General Assembly that caught so much crap for trying to define pi would be a little careful with its definitions, but HB 1136 has a reckless swagger about its medical definition. Specifically, it says that “”Fetus” means a
human being produced by a human pregnancy from fertilization through birth, including a zygote, blastocyst, and fetus.”
Certainly the theologians can argue about when a human becomes a human, but zygote and blastocyst seem to have meanings that make them distinct from fetus.
In any event, this legislation would give pregnant women the right to determine the final disposition method for an aborted fetus, charge the state department of health with determining appropriate methods of disposal, and require abortion providers to discuss the matter with the woman.
This is pretty clearly part of an effort to make abortion providers talk with pregnant women about topics that might dissuade her from getting an abortion. Choices have consequences, and – while it’s paternalistic to think that women haven’t thought about these consequences – it’s not entirely inappropriate to want the woman’s choice to be an informed choice. However, I note that the statute does not spend any time requiring women to also consider the consequences of not having an abortion. (Again, it’s patronizing to think that women making these decisions haven’t thought it through.) So, this isn’t so much about making sure women make an informed choice, it’s more about trying to make sure women don’t make what these particular lawmakers regard as the wrong choice.
I’m a little confused about exactly where this bill stands in relation to the Republican priorities. Into which Republican legislative priority area does this bill fall? Budget, taxes, education, infrastructure or jobs?
Jobs for lawyers, material for standup comics.
You may find it patronizing to think that abortion-minded women haven’t thought it through, but a lot of them are getting railroaded or bullied into a choice they really don’t want, but about which they feel “I have no choice.” That’s not to say this Bill is fine-tuned to address that, but your dismissal is too facile.
Evidence for this? And is the solution to railroad everyone else out of doing what they wish?
Precisely who is doing all of the bullying and railroading? And where are the statistics to demonstrate that your assertion finds support.
Then give them a choice, a true choice. Free prenatal care for moms willing to give a child up for adoption. If they change their mind, some kind of support so they’re not overwhelmed.
And for those who are worried about people abusing the system, require IUD’s after child #2.
I am constantly amazed that the only solution offered by Indiana legislators who want less abortions to take place is making abortions harder to get, which isn’t going to have the desired impact. I wish they’d put their money where their mouths are and fund a true solution.
I’d love to see how many anti-abortion legislators would support a tax increase for a program intended to reduce the number of abortions by making adoption more prevalent.
A solution offered up to discourage abortion is to make adoption easier. It probably could be made easier, but there demand for adoptable children is very high and the supply relatively low. If you wish to decrease the number of abortions increase access and use of birth control. Statistics demonstrate that about half of pregnancies are unintended, and about half of unintended pregnancies result in abortion.
… but there demand for adoptable children is very high and the supply relatively low….
Source for this please?
Unless by “adoptable” you mean a specific race, gender and social background in good health (because the birth mother did not abuse alcohol and drugs and took care of herself during pregnancy).
While I read about people waiting a long time for an adoption the raw statistics of the number of children in foster care for long time periods make it appear to me that most of the waiting is bureaucratic or people wanting the ‘right’ child.
—
I agree that we could discourage unintended pregnancies (and thus abortions) by better access and use of birth control.
Rick, I did not wish to broach the subject of the “right” child. You answered your own question.
I have a solution that will reduce abortions and save Indiana taxpayers billions. Yes billions.
Accept the Medicaid expansion so the working poor have access to birth control with no co pays.
I think the Medicaid expansion puts about $8 billion into Indiana’s health care facilities.
Agreed. As someone that wants to see abortion happening as little as possible, we should do everything we can to prevent pregnancy to begin with.
Too many people opposed to abortion are more opposed to working with Democrats.
Two things:
-Government should decide scientific terms. They suck at it. Use the scientific terms and write your laws pointing to them.
-My wife and I lose our first child to miscarriage. In our grief, our unborn child was basically thrown away without asking us what we wanted done with the remains. I understand that for some people that support abortion, a 8-week old fetus is no more significant that a fingernail. If I have to accept their feeling on what that is to them, they should accept that for us, we lost a child.
I would have liked something that prevented our child’s remains from being flushed away without consent.
So, not all of this has to do with abortion, even if that was the intent of the law.
My condolences on your loss. I agree that you and your wife should have been consulted on what to do with the fetus.
I am sorry you and your wife experienced that painful loss. It must have been really hard for you both. Some events in life are so personal that others cannot fully understand, so any other response is not only inappropriate but may even induce more pain.
Unfortunately you and I are very much in the minority in Indiana.