Changing course after an unwelcome national uproar, the
Virginia Senate adopted a revised bill on Tuesday that still requires doctors to perform an ultrasound on women before they have an abortion, but also says that women cannot be forced to have an invasive vaginal ultrasound.
Gov. Bob McDonnell demanded the revisions last week, and their acceptance on Tuesday all but assured the state’s adoption of the ultrasound requirement. The original bill set off protests from women’s groups and others. Some critics called it “state rape,” and the plan was mocked on television comedy shows.
The furor has already had an effect in other states considering ultrasound mandates, including Alabama and Idaho, with lawmakers seeking to avoid accusations that they are subjecting women to an unwanted, invasive procedure.
In Virginia, the weakened version passed the Republican-led House last week but faced a battle in the Senate, which is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. On Tuesday the bill narrowly passed, 21 to 19, with further amendments that will require it to go back to the House for final approval. The Senate vote came after a bitter debate in which Democrats pleaded with the body not to adopt a bill that they said remained — even with the changes — demeaning to women and insulting to doctors.
Senator Ralph Northam, a Democrat and the only physician in the Senate, called it “a tremendous assault on women’s health care and a tremendous insult to physicians.”
The governor, an anti-abortion Republican who is said to have national political aspirations, is expected to sign the bill into law. Virginia would become the eighth state to require that women have ultrasounds before abortions and also be “offered” descriptions of the fetus. Anti-abortion advocates hope these mandates will persuade some women not to go through with an abortion, but many doctors and advocates for abortion rights describe them as an intrusive violation of doctor-patient relations.
In
Alabama, the sponsor of a bill to strengthen an existing ultrasound requirement said on Monday that he would seek a revision softening the bill. The existing bill mandates that the screen must face the pregnant woman and requires use of the scanning method that provides the clearest image — which would mean vaginal ultrasounds in most cases.
The choice of scanning techniques should “be the choice of the mother,” the sponsor, Senator Clay Scofield, a Republican, said in a television interview on Monday in Huntsville. “If she does not want a vaginal transducer she does not have to have it.”
In
Idaho, senators introducing a similar ultrasound bill added language on Monday requiring use of “whichever method the physician and patient agree is best under the circumstances.”
The choice is between vaginal ultrasounds, which involve placing a probe inside the body, or the more familiar abdominal procedure, done externally. Through most of the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, medical experts say, only the invasive procedure can provide a clear image of the tiny fetus or an audible record of the heartbeat, and most abortions occur within this period.
As a result, the bills under active consideration in several states, including
Pennsylvania and
Mississippi, require detailed fetal images that would in practice require many patients to have vaginal ultrasounds.
Such a requirement has been in effect since early this month in
Texas with little of the outcry seen in Virginia. Similar laws adopted in
Oklahoma and
North Carolina are now blocked by federal court order until their constitutionality is determined.
In
Alabama, the Virginia furor fanned new controversy over a proposal in the Legislature, prompting a swift reaction from voters and the author of the bill, which is called the “Right to Know and See Act.”
Even if it is amended to offer a choice of probes, the bill would contain some of the country’s strongest pre-abortion mandates.
It would require the ultrasound screen to face the woman while the doctor narrates the images, although the law states that it should not be “construed to prevent a pregnant woman from averting her eyes,” the bill reads. Doctors who do not follow the prescribed routines could face felony charges and could be sued by the potential father and grandparents.
“I do need to make sure that we leave that up to the women’s choice,” Mr. Scofield said of the scanning method. “But I do think it is very important that these women are given as much information as possible before they make this difficult decision.”
Dr. Pippa Abston, a pediatrician in Huntsville, objected to what she said were unnecessary roadblocks to a legal procedure. “As a physician I don’t like the idea that they are going to micromanage my medical practice,” she said.
In
Mississippi, a bill working its way through committee requires an ultrasound that provides an image of high quality, which cannot be achieved with abdominal procedures in the initial months of pregnancy. The woman must be offered a chance to see the image and hear the fetal heartbeat. She cannot avoid hearing a description of the sonogram unless, among other things, she is a victim of sexual assault or incest or the fetus is medically compromised.
The
Pennsylvania legislature is considering a law with some of the country’s strongest provisions. It would require vaginal probes in many cases, display of the scanning screen to the patient and a printout of the image for inclusion in the patient’s medical records. It would also impose a 24-hour waiting period between ultrasound and abortion that critics say would be a burden for some women.
Labeled the Women’s Right to Know Act, the bill is opposed by the Pennsylvania Medical Society and other medical groups. But it has been approved by a House committee and its sponsors hope for passage this year.
Kathy L. Rapp, a Republican representative and the main sponsor, said that the concerns about requiring vaginal ultrasounds were exaggerated because most clinics perform the procedures before abortions anyway.
She said that she did not have plans for revision in light of the Virginia experience but that if Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican, were to ask for changes, “just as the Virginia legislature heard from their governor, that would be a consideration.”
“But at this point the governor has not communicated any concerns regarding the bill,” she said.
Before the Virginia Senate passed the bill on Tuesday it was amended to say that victims of rape or incest, if they reported the crime, would not be required to have an ultrasound before an abortion. The bill must return to the House for final approval, which is expected, and then will go to the governor for signing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/us...ewanted=2&_r=1