79°
forecast

Va. Senate passes ultrasound requirement for abortions

Posted to: Health Politics State Government Virginia

RICHMOND

Virginia women seeking an abortion may soon be required to undergo an ultrasound first.

The Virginia Senate approved the requirement Wednesday on a 21-18 vote mainly along party lines. It is the first significant anti-abortion measure to pass the Senate since Republicans took effective control of the chamber following the fall elections; more are pending.

Two Democratic senators, Charles Colgan of Prince William County and Phillip Puckett of Russell County, voted in favor of it, while Republican Sen. John Watkins of Powhatan County opposed it.

The bill from Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel would make women seeking abortions get an ultrasound, give them a chance to view the image, and require providers to keep a copy of it on file.

Vogel, a Fauquier County Republican, defended the measure as a way to determine the gestational age of a fetus and improve safety for women planning to end a pregnancy, and said it isn't an effort to stop them from doing so.

"It absolutely does not infringe on her right to have an abortion," she said. "All it says is that you'll have an ultrasound. It doesn't compel you to see the results."

Literature from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists indicates that pre-abortion ultrasounds aren't always a medical necessity.

Democratic critics such as Norfolk Sen. Ralph Northam, a physician, see the bill as imposing an unnecessary mandate, adding to the cost, and interfering with the doctor-patient relationship.

Northam said it's unethical to require patients to have a medical procedure against their will, and that it contradicts state efforts to control health-care spending.

Vogel's bill, SB484, now heads to the Republican-controlled House of Delegates, which in years past has approved similar legislation only to see it defeated in the Senate.

The measure would require an ultrasound at least 24 hours before an abortion, but would make an exception for women who live 100 miles or more from the abortion facility - theirs could be done two hours before the procedure.

The bill is a priority for social conservatives this session. Gov. Bob McDonnell has said he'll sign it if it reaches his desk.

Action on the bill was delayed Tuesday as Democrats crafted an amendment that would have made the ultrasound optional, but Republicans denied a request for a second postponement the following day.

Northam withdrew the proposed change before Wednesday's debate, later saying he pulled it because members of the Senate Democratic Caucus realized they didn't have enough votes to get it approved.

But a Democratic source with knowledge of the discussion painted a different picture.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Democratic leaders opted to abandon that fight and let the bill pass so they could use it against Republicans in future political battles.

When asked whether politics influenced strategy on the bill, caucus Chairman Sen. Donald McEachin, D-Henrico County, rejected that notion. He said many caucus members simply opposed voting for legislation requiring an ultrasound, even if it was softened.

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

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

Pony up boy's and girls! Your law, your money.

I am not going to discuss why or if abortion is a good or bad thing because the real question is; who is an ultrasound going to benefit? If there is a medical need, fine but we all know this is just another tactic to force a woman, whether it be by trying to shame them or by making it too expensive, into having children regardless of anything else. I have seen other articles about this bill where some people say they worry about the "emotional toll" abortion puts on a woman & this would help them make a more informed decision. If that's true than wouldn't a phych consult be better? I would say to those who want to pass this or any bill, you pass it, YOU PAY for it! I mean personally take the money out of YOUR pocket and pay the bill.

A lot of Christian bashing here… but riddle me this!

Which of the world’s religions condones abortion? Buddhists? Christian? Judaic? Moslem? Hindu?

Yeah, there are small off shoots of those major religions...but overall? It is not permitted by those major religions.

So.

Don’t drag religion into this unless you do not identify yourself with one since you cannot claim the Supreme Court as sanction to your defense.

If there is in fact no God/god, then this does not matter one bit.

Ya’ll can place an up/down thumb as much as you want. But religious facts are religious facts. I've studied religion for over 30 years.

It's......just......not......there.

So please, leave religion out of this. It has/should have, no bearing in this decision.

Christian conservatives

Christian conservatives control the house and you claim this isn't religious? What does it matter if both Budhists in Virginia also support the bill? They have no power. Christians are in power. Anti women's health is a Christian position. I guess you GOPers are so used to claiming north is south and up is down that you've completely disoriented yourself. Oh wait, this is another "some black people participated in the slave trade therefore white people are absolved of any responsibilty" arguments isn't it? It isn't convincing. It's transparent. And guess what, every one knows Intelligent Design is Christian clap trap too. Doesn't the bible have some sort of prohibtion against lying? Or is it OK if you lie in Jesus's name?

Just a thought.

GOP is against the mandated insurance part of the health care program because it requires people to buy a product (insurance) from a commercial source, (insurance company). They call it unconstitutional. Now, they are requiring a person to buy another product, (ultrasound procedure) from a commercial source, (a physician).
Does anyone see a conflict of interest here? Or is it just hypocracy in action?

Horse-hockey!

Someone will pay for it! That doctor's offce isn't going to suck up the cost of that latest ultrasound out of the goodness of their heart!

Think, man! Think!

Who will pay for this in the short term/lng run?

You? Me? The insurance company?

Virginia?

For sale: Cheap!

"Vogel, a Fauquier County Republican, defended the measure as a way to determine the gestational age of a fetus and improve safety for women planning to end a pregnancy, and said it isn't an effort to stop them from doing so."

If anyone actually believes that, I'm sure she has a bridge to sell you at a bargain! (In 50 years, actually, when the toll contract runs out)
Time to buy stock in the coat-hanger factory, and as the next step, study up on your eugenics so as to eliminate welfare mothers.

Here's proof.

http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm

link to a venomous arch christian propaganda site is now proof

Bible studies online? lol. That's proof? Of what, superstition and an extreme bias? The Christian right constantly overstates and, of course, oversimplifies Sanger's social views. And she died 50 years ago. You guys can't even remember who the last president was but you think Sanger is still relevent? That's a pretty extreme inconsistency there.

Actually, Eugenics was advocated by Planned Parenthood founder

Margaret Sanger.
Not exactly a Republican, is she?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: Health rss feed    Politics rss feed    State Government rss feed   



Toolbox


Partners

Find a HEALTH CARE PROVIDER

Doctor or facility name, keyword: i.e., optometrist, dental, home health care
City, State or Zip: i.e., Norfolk, VA or 23510