Pre-abortion ultrasound: Too invasive?

RICHMOND

In a week dominated by abortion debate, foes of ultrasound legislation say that an overlooked aspect of the proposed law is how invasive it will be.

Determining gestational age early in a pregnancy often requires an internal probe rather than a scan over the stomach.

If past state data are a guide, the vast majority of Virginia women who get abortions get them in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, when it can be tougher to detect a fetus externally.

Legislation mandating an ultrasound before pregnancy termination is among the measures to curb abortion rights that are finding some success so far in the General Assembly as Republicans wield expanded power.

Other bills pending would strip public funding of certain abortions, prohibit many late-term abortions, and restrict abortion coverage under a state-run health benefits exchange.

What's different about the current climate in the legislature, the Family Foundation's Victoria Cobb suggested, isn't the number of abortion-control bills submitted, but how they're being treated.

"These bills are getting a fair hearing," said Cobb, president of the socially conservative group.

Instead of coming before a Senate Education and Health Committee "double-stacked with pro-abortion legislators," she added, they're being heard by a panel more representative of many Virginians' views on the issue.

Republicans gave themselves a one-seat advantage on the 15-member committee when they took control of the evenly divided Senate last month. The panel was stacked 10-5 in Democrats' favor before they lost the majority.

On a party-line vote last week, the panel passed the Senate bill that would require that a woman seeking an abortion get an ultrasound first; give her a chance to view the image; and require providers to keep a copy of it on file.

It is expected to pass the Republican-controlled House and be signed by Gov. Bob McDonnell.

Critics of that measure and similar House bills say what's lost in the debate over forcing women to get an unwanted medical procedure at added personal expense is how invasive early ultrasounds can be.

The fetus is so small through about the first eight weeks of pregnancy "that you cannot see it adequately with a probe on the abdomen," explained Sen. Ralph Northam, a Norfolk Democrat and physician who opposes the ultrasound bill.

At that stage, it's about the size of a sesame seed, added Northam, who thinks the legislature is misguided to "tell a patient that she must have a procedure against her will."

That view is shared by abortion-rights groups such as Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia, which are leading the resistance to many of the pending bills. Officials with both groups have made arguments against mandating invasive ultrasounds.

Cobb considers that tactic disingenuous.

"It is hypocritical for the abortion industry to, on the one hand, claim that abortion is easy and non-invasive, and then on the other hand claim that an ultrasound is," she said, describing the scan as a necessary safety precaution to prevent botched abortions.

The bill adopted by the Senate doesn't specify the type of ultrasound required, but Virginia statistics suggest that many could be invasive.

Of the 25,940 Virginia abortions reported two years ago, 25,574 were performed in the first trimester. In 2009, just 352 of the 27,429 abortions weren't done early in the pregnancy.

Virginia Beach Del. Chris Stolle, an obstetrician/gynecologist, said the type of ultrasound performed varies by woman and her stage of pregnancy.

The Republican legislator said ultrasound criteria from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is to perform an internal probe if a fetus can't be seen through an external scan.

He hasn't taken a position on the bills now before the General Assembly.

But ACOG has.

The group opposes legislation that interferes with the doctor-patient relationship or dictates medical practices, such as the mandatory ultrasound laws.

As the ultrasound measure moves ahead, so, too, does a bill that would eliminate state abortion funding for poor women with seriously troubled pregnancies.

Its sponsor, Spotsylvania County Republican Del. Mark Cole, said it would align Virginia with a federal law, commonly known as the Hyde Amendment, that limits public funding for abortions to cases of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the mother.

Opponents have criticized the bill as a cruel attack on women. It appears unlikely that it would save the state much - Virginia last year spent less than $2,800 in connection with 10 such abortions.

Less successful Thursday was a bill to ban most abortions beyond 20 weeks and set that threshold as the time by which a fetus can feel pain.

It failed to advance out of the Senate Education and Health Committee on a 7-7 vote, with Chesapeake Sen. Harry Blevins abstaining.

Blevins, who supported the ultrasound legislation, told reporters he was swayed by the tearful testimony of a woman who said she ended a midterm pregnancy after learning the fetus she carried had serious developmental defects.

The woman, Tara Schleifer of Haymarket, told committee members the 20-week demarcation would limit the time families facing such a tough choice have for research and additional testing before making a critical decision.

After that hearing, an ACOG lobbyist called the current session "the worst year ever for anti-choice, and leaving women to their own decisions."

Pilot writer Bill Sizemore contributed to this report.

Julian Walker, 804-697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com