Idaho’s SB 1387, the transvaginal ultrasound mandate for abortions has been pulled due to legal concerns that it would fail a court challenge and could set up the state’s entire existing informed consent law to be thrown out. That makes me wonder what other gems are in that law. While this might seem like a win, and it is, it’s not all roses, they’re planning on using the time between now and the next legislative session to create a bill that would be easier to defend in court.
Fortunately, the pressure is not off. The Boise County prosecution has sent a letter to the Speaker of the House informing him that the bill violates the Idaho Constitution by the government compelling patients to undergo a medical procedure that is not recommended by her doctor.
In case anyone isn’t convinced of how rediculous legislation is like this, it requires the state to provide a list of organizations that would provide the service and counseling free of charge, most of which would be anti-choice religious groups that would use the opportunity for lots and lots of slut shaming. It also lacks a rape exemption. A woman who has been forcibly penetrated by a man would then be forcibly penetrated by her government. Not cool.
This is a nice win, but vigilance is the price of liberty and we must not let the spotlight drift away from bull shit like this.
Permalink
As someone who has had an ultrasound of this sort in the past year, I can say that the cost was $600 to get it done, and week to have it scheduled. Because of the reason for the ultrasound in a case like abortion, I can see how that cost wouldn’t be covered by insurance in at least some cases, and the waiting time would probably be significantly worse if you didn’t have the money to pay for it.
The actual procedure was uncomfortable, obviously, and I can see how it may have some of the psychological effects that a rape could have if someone didn’t want to get it, but people aren’t talking as much as they should about the extra cost and time this makes a woman with an unwanted pregnancy incur, in addition to the cost of abortion which I think can run between $500-$3000 or so (Feel free to correct me on this) depending on how far in and what type of procedure is done. Not to weaken the rape argument, but I feel before forced to let the pregnancy progress for several more weeks than necessary would be more traumatic than the ultrasound.
What Pro-Life people don’t get is that they are only unfairly disadvantaging poor women and making the abortion ‘worse’ by prolonging the pregnancy to very little effect for their actual cause.