In the blog lists Little Green Footballs I chose a blog written by Charles Johnson. He writes about a national issue going on today that affects a variety of people, abortion. In the authors blog he seems to be directing his issue towards women who are looking to have abortions in South Dakota. Her credibility comes from the "National Organization for Women". In this editorial he talks about how Republican governor of South Dakota, Dennis Daugaard, has signed a law that forces women considering on having an abortion to wait three days after meeting with a doctor as well as them undergoing counseling at anti-abortion. where girls wanting to have an abortion have to see a doctor 3 days before having an abortion as well as having someone talk to them about adoption. Supporters of the law passed say South Dakotas only abortion clinic, Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls, gives women little information before they have abortions done by doctors coming in from all over the United States. The author argues that the doctor who performs the abortions in South Dakota must be flown in from out of state which will result in double the cost for the operation if the doctor can even manage to fly all that way 2 times in a week. He says "poor women are denied a choice, once again. Rich girls fly out of state. Good job Republicans! Keep the poor poor. Barefoot and pregnant, thats the way it should be."
I mainly agree with the authors arguments. When someone goes to an abortion clinic to get an abortion they are not going to the clinic to get preached to about not having sex or necessarily what to do, they are going to get their abortion and to have support on their decision. Although it is a very hard thing to undergo and it does require plenty of thinking I don't believe that it is necessary to meet with the doctor 3 days before undergoing the abortion. Most people already know the consequences of abortions and since the doctors that do the abortions in south dakota have to fly in from other states I believe that it is a complete waste of time and money. For instance, what if a girl has a doctor fly in for a consolation and then decides she doesn't want an abortion, the doctor then wasted time and money. I believe that women should be able to have rights to their own decisions and having someone try and convince you to do something you don't want to do is preventing women from having rights.
http://politicalviewskelseysewalson.blogspot.com/2011/03/anti-abortion-laws-passed-yet-again-in.html
ReplyDeleteI agree that the passage of this South Dakota law regarding the 3 day waiting period before an abortion can be performed is a waste of the doctor's time as well as an insult to the woman in question's intelligence and ability to reason.
With that said, I believe there is a larger issue at play within this law; it strategically reduces abortions by delaying a time-sensitive procedure. A number of women will be prohibited from legally obtaining an abortion once they have surpassed the pregnancy time-line within which the abortion can be performed. This is an anti-choice tactic, and the 'successes' gained by it are artificial. The patient did not change her mind because she was enlightened by information she had not been exposed to before seeing a doctor, she ran out of time and was left with no choice.
Not only do poor women stand at risk to be disproportionately affected by this law, but women in abusive relationships and victims of incest also are impacted more profoundly. The safety aspect of the situation means that abused women must first find shelter and support before getting to a clinic; the abusive partner's reproductive coercion may be what led to the unwanted pregnancy in the first place and he is not going to let his partner have a choice about whether or not to continue with the pregnancy. Getting away from the abuser and into a domestic violence shelter can take weeks if placed on a waiting list due to lack of space at the shelter. Only after safety is addressed can the pregnant woman then explore her options about the pregnancy. It's too bad that she will then be re-victimized by a law that exerts further control over her body, minimizes her ability to make decisions, and questions her understanding of a subject she is all too intimately aware of.