Bill aims to Curb out of state Abortions

[irishgrl]

yet another angle by the anti abortion crowd.
You wont be able to cross state lines soon

Bill Aims to Curb Out-Of-State Abortions

By DAVID CRARY, AP National Writer

NEW YORK - The abortion bill most likely to become federal law this year would affect a relatively small number of pregnant teens, yet its impact on them could be dramatic-sharply reducing the options for girls in many states who dread telling their parents of their plight.

Supporters and opponents each offer vivid worst-case scenarios in debating the bill, which was included this week in the Senate Republicans' priority list. It would outlaw transporting a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion in order to evade parental consent or notification laws in the girl's home state.

The bill's advocates evoke the image of a girl being impregnated by an abusive older man who then drives her to an out-of-state abortion clinic so the girl's parents and the authorities won't find out about a relationship that might have been illegal because of age differences.

Opponents of the bill say it would criminalize the well-meaning acts of an aunt, older sister or other confidante who assist a girl terrified of being beaten or evicted from home if her parents learned of the pregnancy.

"You're talking about girls who really need support-let them use whatever support they have," said Shawn Towey of the National Network of Abortion Funds. "This bill is going to have a chilling effect on people who are just there to help."

Titled the Child Custody Protection Act, and carrying a sentence of up to one year in prison, the bill has bounced around Congress for years, winning House approval three times but never reaching a vote on the Senate floor. Only now ? after making the Senate GOP's Top 10 priority list ? do supporters and foes believe its passage is probable.

"We're proceeding as if it's going to pass," said Lorraine Kenny of the American Civil Liberties Union's Reproductive Freedom Project. ACLU lawyers already are studying possible challenges on grounds that the bill violates the right to travel from state to state and does not make an exception for cases when a girl's health is jeopardized.

Activists on both sides expect support for the bill from majority Republicans, perhaps joined by some Democrats. Some doubt Democratic leaders will wage an all-out fight against it.

"Politically, it would be very high risk for the Senate Democrats to filibuster this bill," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. "Polls show that about 80 percent of Americans support the concept of parental notification."

Opponents agree that young women are better off telling parents about a pregnancy, and say most do so voluntarily. But abortion-rights activists argue that politicians should not impose mandates that might backfire in cases where family communication already has broken down.

"Instead of encouraging them to involve a trusted adult who may be able to offer much-needed assistance, this law will cause some young women to face interstate travel for medical care alone," says a NARAL Pro-Choice America briefing paper. "Even worse, it may force young women to turn to self-induced or illegal abortions."

Thirty-two states have parental-involvement laws in force, though the National Right to Life Committee considers eight of the laws ineffectual because of loopholes.

In all 32 states except Utah, a procedure called judicial bypass allows a minor to petition a judge for permission to get an abortion without telling her parents. In many courts, these waivers are granted routinely to any reasonably mature girl who asks; elsewhere the requests often are denied, prompting some girls to opt for an abortion in another state without a parental involvement law.

Abortion-rights advocates cite Alabama (where consent of one parent is required before a minor's abortion) as a state with notable roadblocks for girls seeking a court waiver.

Jennifer Dalven of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project said judges in Birmingham and some other Alabama communities oppose waivers so adamantly that legal aid attorneys now advise pregnant minors not to bother requesting one. Instead, Dalven said, girls are counseled to consider getting an abortion in Georgia or Florida, where procedures are somewhat more flexible.

"Judges in Alabama call teens who seek abortion murderers, force them to sit through religious programming, and still deny their petitions," Dalven said. "For these teens, going out of state is their only option. ... It's been a critical safety valve that would be lost if this bill is passed."

The number of girls who might be affected by the law is difficult to calculate- perhaps a few thousand annually.



In 2000, the latest year with national statistics, about 92,000 girls 17 and under obtained legal abortions-7 percent of the U.S. total. Many of those teens were from states that don't require parental involvement, including populous California, New York and Illinois, while many of the girls in states with the laws notified their parents rather than traveling secretly out-of-state.

___

On the Net:

National Right to Life Committee: http://www.nrlc.org/

NARAL Pro-Choice America: http://www.naral.org/

Little by little, the options of pregnant women are disappearing.

[EnchantedSLN]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

yet another angle by the anti abortion crowd.
[URL=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=7&u=/ap/20050130/ap_on_re_us/teen_abortions]Thirty-two states have parental-involvement laws in force, though the National Right to Life Committee considers eight of the laws ineffectual because of loopholes.

I've seen a lot of people collecting sigs outside grocery stores to try to make that a law here too. It's absurd. Freedoms that took so long to get in the first place are slowly being chipped away at.

[eclipse]

This topic angers me so (and I guess it does that to a lot of people or it wouldn't be so hotly debated)

The simple fact is: Abortion is a medical procedure. It has nothing to do, nor any place in politics. Regardless of your beliefs...Pro or Con...It does not matter. If your heart tells you it is a wrong procedure-don't have it performed, try and talk all your friends and children into believing the same way you do, and they will opt not to have it performed.
But, if your heart tells you it is a necessay procedure, whatever the reason, then go to the safety of a Doctor's office, be able to walk in the door (without fear of some zealot with a gun), and get on with your life....

Laws are created to keep the masses in order and allow our society to function freely, without the fear of being persecuted, for thinking or saying something that the majority may not agee upon (or at least in theroy)
Men (generally), have made these laws over hundreds of years. The decision in 72' was the correct one-Leave women and their bodies alone.

It's a medical matter-Get it?

[irishgrl]

the authors of the Bill say their INTENT is to bring the parents of pregnant teens into the loop and make sure they have a say before the young girl does anything permanent. I have several problems with this bill:
1) as mentioned in the article, if a girl's relationship with her parents has already broken down or WILL break down because of the revealed pregnancy, the young girl has no recourse and will be FORCED to go through with the pregnancy. I think this will only further erode relations between the family members.

2) I see this Bill as a future linking mechanism to prevent ANY woman from crossing state lines for an abortion regardless of her age. And if that particular state forbids abortions, then a woman is stuck. AND, if more states follow Washington State's lead (or that ONE Judge anyway) and forbid divorces to pregnant women, well you see the problem: a woman will be TRAPPED, and THAT concerns me.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

the authors of the Bill say their INTENT is to bring the parents of pregnant teens into the loop and make sure they have a say before the young girl does anything permanent. I have several problems with this bill:
1) as mentioned in the article, if a girl's relationship with her parents has already broken down or WILL break down because of the revealed pregnancy, the young girl has no recourse and will be FORCED to go through with the pregnancy. I think this will only further erode relations between the family members.

2) I see this Bill as a future linking mechanism to prevent ANY woman from crossing state lines for an abortion regardless of her age. And if that particular state forbids abortions, then a woman is stuck. AND, if more states follow Washington State's lead (or that ONE Judge anyway) and forbid divorces to pregnant women, well you see the problem: a woman will be TRAPPED, and THAT concerns me.

It will also set a precedent that a subtle roll back of abortion rights will pass. Many subtle roll backs = sweeping change and that is frightening. I am also frightened by these judges in power equating abortion with murder and using shocking propoganda to brainwash girls.

[DrummerDeanna]

Just playing devil's advocate here - but there are some people who truly DO believe that abortion is murder...that's where all the blurrines comes in....

These people believe so intensly just like pro-choice folks believe it is not murder, but a medical procedure...that is why I think it will be very hard to every find a common ground.

[markolas]

Why do people think that outlawing abortion will stop women from having abortions? Do they just want these girls to do it themselves with coat hangers, or sit in a bath tub full of Tabasco sauce? Because that's exactly what's going to wind up happening.

[DrummerDeanna]

Originally Posted by markolas

Why do people think that outlawing abortion will stop women from having abortions? Do they just want these girls to do it themselves with coat hangers, or sit in a bath tub full of Tabasco sauce? Because that's exactly what's going to wind up happening.

That's what I was wondering too - making abortions illegal will not stop them - but perhaps their thinking is - at least now - if a woman doesn't die from her botched abortion - they can then punish her for her illegal activity?

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by markolas

Why do people think that outlawing abortion will stop women from having abortions? Do they just want these girls to do it themselves with coat hangers, or sit in a bath tub full of Tabasco sauce? Because that's exactly what's going to wind up happening.

That's what my dad said. He got so pissed when I told him what's been going on with this issue and said, "What do they want women to stick coat hangers up there again?!!!?"

[markolas]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

That's what I was wondering too - making abortions illegal will not stop them - but perhaps their thinking is - at least now - if a woman doesn't die from her botched abortion - they can then punish her for her illegal activity?

That's probably exactly what they're thinking.

I don't believe these people really care about "the unborn." They want to take women's choices away. So, look out. The next time they amend the constitution, it might be to take away your right to vote.

[GateandGarden]

Originally Posted by DrummerDeanna

Just playing devil's advocate here - but there are some people who truly DO believe that abortion is murder...that's where all the blurrines comes in....

These people believe so intensly just like pro-choice folks believe it is not murder, but a medical procedure...that is why I think it will be very hard to every find a common ground.

That's why I can't really ever see an end to this particular debate.

[DrummerDeanna]

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

That's why I can't really ever see an end to this particular debate.

my point exactly.

[irishgrl]

when people realize their sphere of influence only extends to THEMSELVES and not one single other person, then the debate is over. In the end, we each answer to our creator for our OWN actions. Thus, everybody has enuff to do to clean up their OWN act and not worry about what is NOT their business.

This country is fast becoming the sort of country the orignal Pilgrims and Puritans left behind. Ironic isnt it?

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

when people realize their sphere of influence only extends to THEMSELVES and not one single other person, then the debate is over. In the end, we each answer to our creator for our OWN actions. Thus, everybody has enuff to do to clean up their OWN act and not worry about what is NOT their business.

This country is fast becoming the sort of country the orignal Pilgrims and Puritans left behind. Ironic isnt it?

I hate it. And the reason why this is an "issue" is because of the different sides of it, maybe they will never come together, but I'll never shut up about it either way.

[DrummerDeanna]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

when people realize their sphere of influence only extends to THEMSELVES and not one single other person, then the debate is over. In the end, we each answer to our creator for our OWN actions. Thus, everybody has enuff to do to clean up their OWN act and not worry about what is NOT their business.

This country is fast becoming the sort of country the orignal Pilgrims and Puritans left behind. Ironic isnt it?

Right. But unfortunately they don't see it like that. In the minds of the pro-lifers (not that I'm an expert here ) but they consider the fetus a human being - period. Regardless of any scientific data that may prove otherwise - it's seen as a person - therefore killing that person is murder - and therefore against the law.

So in that sense - it may not even be a wholly religious debate - anyone can just have the opinion that a fetus is a person...and then they're probably very unlikely to budge on this issue.

I agree that one's beliefs should not extend to everyone...the direction this country is moving in scares the bejeezus outta me...