Blog Stage 3: Legal, but is it Sound?

According to an editorial in the Austin American Statesman, a bill with an anti-abortion inclination to it has been proposed to the senate this past week.

The bill, written by Sen. Dan Patrick (R), proposes that anti-abortion information must be read to the patient before the procedure and that during the ultrasound all women seeking an abortion are required to have, the image of the unborn child must be described – in detail – to the patient. A last stipulation is that the heartbeat must be audible during the exam.

This bill would be added to the already in place procedure to inform women that abortion can increase the chances of breast cancer.

The editorial states that this bill was designed to “humiliate” women seeking an abortion and asserts that Pro-Life activists are jubilant with the bill, happy to be “right there in the clinic, shaking their collective fingers at the woman.”

One final point the editorial makes is that Texas, while notably strict on abortion rights, is also notably lacking when it come to providing for children after they are born; citing Perry’s and the Republican leadership’s stinginess with child healthcare for poor families.

The editorial ends with a few paragraphs on the Prevention Works Act (PWA), another bill in the senate house written by Sen. Kirk Watson (D) and Rep. Mark Strama (D). PWA, both the senator and representative claim, would reduce teen pregnancy by requiring schools to inform parents, in writing, what was being taught in sex education classes.

I agree with the viewpoint of the writer. Being subjected to a guilt trip by the government – when you are already in emotional and hormonal turmoil – is a travesty.

One other thing that I really like about this piece is that it doesn’t center solely on the ultrasound issue, but gives an alternative, more humanitarian (towards the women considering abortions) approach to counter unwanted pregnancy rates; although, I don’t know how effective informing parents of their childrens' sex education will be to deter their children from having sex, unprotected or otherwise since both can potentially result in pregnancy. I think that someone who:

a) knows how sex education should be taught and,

b) is willing to enforce the regulations desperately needed

I think, would be a better choice.

It also doesn’t address the concern that some of these women really are women, not teenage girls who should know better. How do we educate them?

One step at a time I suppose…