Should South Dakota Pass the Abortion Ban?

Recommend (2) Comments (0)

·         Alleged Exceptions

“This [Initiated Measure 11] lays the foundation for the next step,’ – a more-stringent ban like the one that failed in 2006.” – Patti Giebink, Treasurer, VoteYesForLife.com, Wall Street Journal, 8/12/08

Those pushing the new abortion ban are promoting Initiated Measure 11 as 2006-abortion-ban-lite. They claim the new law has adequate exceptions for victims of rape or incest and to protect the health of the woman. Their claims are both wrong and disingenuous: this new abortion ban is every bit as dangerous as the one South Dakotans rejected in 2006.   

One of the primary authors of the abortion ban is a New Jersey trial lawyer named Harold Cassidy. He wrote an obscure memo to radical abortion ban proponents across the nation in which he defended the way the new law is written. He said that their real intention is to pass Initiated Measure 11 and then work to remove the “exceptions” for rape, incest and even the health of the woman from the law. Cassidy said the bill creates a “foundation” for banning all abortions in the United States .

“Those exceptions – as well as one for women in poor health – are included in the new measure. But they are far from simple; the full text of the proposed law is more than 2,400 words. In the voting booth this November, citizens will be presented only a 249-word summary .”   - Wall Street Journal, 8/12/08

·         Initiated Measure 11 Endangers Womens’ Health

“The exceptions in the new South Dakota proposal create some knotty questions for voters. For instance, should a woman be forced to continue a pregnancy if the fetus isn’t going to survive?   How ill must a woman be to qualify for an abortion under an exception for a woman in poor health?”   - Wall Street Journal, 8/12/08

If Measure 11 passes, doctors would risk felony charges and up to 10 years in prison if they believed terminating a pregnancy is best for their patient. The abortion ban would have a chilling effect on a family doctor’s ability to care for patients. Facing a health complication during a pregnancy is a difficult thing for a family, and every situation is different. Families should be allowed to weigh all options and determine what is right for their health and well-being.

The “health exception” contained in Initiated Measure 11 permits an abortion when “there is a serious risk of a substantial and irreversible impairment of the functioning of a major bodily organ or system of the pregnant woman,” unless in reaching that judgment the physician “knowingly disregards accepted standards of medical practice.” The “health exception” standards in the abortion ban are dangerously vague. 

The following list includes a few examples of medical conditions that create health complications for a woman during pregnancy. In all of these cases, an argument could be made that the condition does or does not involve “serious risk of a substantial or irreversible impairment of the functioning of a major bodily organ or system of the pregnant woman.”   The problem with Initiated Measure 11 is that those disputes would be settled in a courtroom after the fact and not left to the sound medical judgment of South Dakota physicians consulting with their patients.

·         Diabetes with renal disease and retinopathy – Pregnant women with diabetic complications risk worsening their condition if they carry a pregnancy to term, which could lead to blindness or need for dialysis.

·         Cervical cancer – When cervical cancer is first diagnosed in early pregnancy, a woman’s life is not immediately threatened. However, if the cancer is not treated until after a nine-month pregnancy, her life span could be shortened. Similar situations may arise for other forms of cancer first diagnosed during pregnancy.

·         Chorioamnionitis – This condition involves an inflammation of embryonic membranes.

·         Severe pulmonary hypertension – This condition involves increased pressure within the lung’s circulation system.

[ American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Position Statement on 2006 Abortion Ban, 9/26/06 ]

These conditions, and many others, sometimes warrant termination of a pregnancy to protect a woman’s health and life. That decision should always be left to a woman, her doctor, her family and others she elects to involve. Under Initiative Measure 11, Doctors would be threatened with felony charges and prison time for exercising proper medical judgment in these situations. Such a situation has a chilling effect on a doctor’s ability to properly care for his or her patients and would jeopardize women’s health. 

“Marvin Buehner, a Rapid City obstetrician and gynecologist who is campaigning against the ban, says he has performed abortions for seriously ill patients, including a woman with rectal cancer who needed chemotherapy and radiation. But he says he wouldn’t perform that abortion if the ban passed, at the risk of spending 10 years in prison. The phrase ‘accepted standards of medical practice,’ he adds, ‘is so vague and nebulous that no physicians I know, myself included, would take the chance.”   - Wall Street Journal, 8/12/08