Friday, January 27, 2012
Ultrasound bill stirs abortion debate
A Senate panel backed the bill, which would require the scans before an abortion takes place.
Related
The latest from our Blue Ridge Caucus politics blog
From The Roanoke Times
RICHMOND — A Senate committee that was overhauled after last year's elections endorsed legislation Thursday that would require pregnant women to undergo ultrasound imaging before having an abortion, a breakthrough for abortion opponents who have advocated for the requirement.
On a party-line vote of 8-7, the Republican-controlled Senate Education and Health Committee advanced the legislation to the full Senate. A similar bill is pending in the House of Delegates.
The House has passed similar legislation in previous years only to have it killed by a Democratic-controlled Senate committee. Republicans gained a majority on the Education and Health Committee after taking organizational control of the Senate earlier this month and the committee's new makeup gave the contentious proposal new life.
"I know it's something that divides many," said Sen. Ralph Smith, R-Roanoke County, a sponsor of the legislation. "There are radicals on both sides of the issue. But it's something that, when presented in a neutral fashion, a majority of Virginians believe in and ask for. And I'm glad we have the pro-life majority."
The committee advanced SB 484, which would require a pregnant woman to undergo ultrasound imaging to determine the gestation age of the fetus, and be given an opportunity to view the ultrasound image, before having an abortion. The proposed law also requires the abortion provider to keep a printed copy of the ultrasound image in the patient's file.
Supporters said the ultrasound requirement improves the state's existing "informed consent" law for abortion procedures. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Jill Vogel, R-Fauquier County, and incorporates Smith's identical bill.
"Giving a woman access to the most advanced medical technology available, including an ultrasound, can only ensure that her health is protected and that she can make her decision regarding an abortion with all the information available," said Victoria Cobb, the president of the Family Foundation of Virginia, which has pressed lawmakers to pass the ultrasound requirement.
Opponents maintained that the ultrasound requirement would subject women to an unnecessary and intrusive procedure. "Abortion is a safe and legal procedure and these transparent attempts to put up roadblocks to women's access and their rights are outright immoral and undemocratic," said Tarina Keene, the executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia.
John Kuta, a Henrico County radiologist who testified for the bill, said the ultrasound requirement is needed to better inform patients considering an abortion procedure.
Senate Minority Leader Richard Saslaw, D-Fairfax County, scoffed at assertions that the bill was designed to protect women.
"The intent of this bill — hell, it's so damn obvious Ray Charles can see through this," said Saslaw, the senior Democrat on the committee.
