I was hoping the headline would read, "South Dakota abortion providers must STFU."

Oh, well. Puritanical culture strikes again, eh?

Pregnancy also ends the woman's life as she has known it, but no one ever wants to make a law stating that women who choose to continue a pregnancy be told exactly what having a child entails.

Well, the law isn't making the doctors lie to women, but this law is insulting. It's assuming that women have no idea the choice that they are making. Cause we all know that women make wild and emotional choices about major medical procedures all the time (I think it's their labia).

I also like to draw attention to the emotional and psychological implications of telling women that abortions could cause emotional stress. I find that we as human beings make a big deal out of what society tells us should be a big deal. It's all about perspective, and this law is essentially telling women that abortions should have the effect of making you depressed. If you're not depressed, you're uncaring. It's like one big punishment from the government for women choosing to have an abortion.

Destra, the law *is* making abortion providers lie to women if they have to say that a fetus is a whole and separate human being.

Valerie, no, not really. It's all a matter of how you define terms.

"I also like to draw attention to the emotional and psychological implications of telling women that abortions could cause emotional stress. I find that we as human beings make a big deal out of what society tells us should be a big deal. It's all about perspective, and this law is essentially telling women that abortions should have the effect of making you depressed. If you're not depressed, you're uncaring. It's like one big punishment from the government for women choosing to have an abortion."

I think you hit the nail on the head here. Lest we remember, that it wasn't just the mindless quotidian, bureaucratic system that the Juno's abortion clinic had set up, but the fact that she was idiosyncratically fixated on "fingernails." I had a similiar situation once buying the morning after pill for my girlfriend and, whereas, we see how feminism has the ability to seep through in cloaked form. Having recently gone over the counter by the state, the pills were mine for the taking (no Puritanical "you can't have these" horror stories here) but at the expense of the clerk trying to strike embarrassment by being "uniformed" (she had to ask her fellow pharmacists "how" to ring it up). Just put/keep it on the fucking back of the box; we're not going to read that shit anyway.

Destra-

You're right, it is all a matter of how you define the terms. The issue is: if there is no definitive answer on how to define "life," then how can it be the absolute truth that an abortion terminates life? It might be the "truth" to one, but a big fat lie to many others. No law should be codifying an issue like this one that is still under hot debate.

Can a parasite (and I say this as a mother currently incubating #2) really be considered separate and unique? I don't deny it's life (hell, if it was on Mars they'd say it's life), but I definitely dispute "separate and unique". Furthermore, like somebody before mentioned, it's insulting, like women just skip willy-nilly into abortion clinics. Why isn't the inverse of these laws also true? If they have to say that "Women also would have to be told they have a right to continue a pregnancy and that abortion may cause them psychological harm, including thoughts of suicide." then why don't they have to say that they have the right to END the pregnancy and that having a baby against their will can also cause psychological harm? People who think abortion is so psychologically damaging never seem to grasp that pregnancy can be just as bad, if not worse. Especially an unwanted pregnancy. But you never hear that, do you?

One can define a fetus however one likes, but that does not change the fact that it is connected to a woman's body and completely dependant on her to develop into something that can live separately, outside of her body. If it were a separate, whole human, it wouldn't need to be in her body.

I'm going to go ahead and zoom past the reality of how stupid and ridiculous this law is.

I realize of course that this is just another attempt to place road blocks in place to a person getting an abortion. I get that but this one doesn't frighten me like some others.

So long as the provider puts this legislatively mandated language at the bottom of the HIPPA form for the patient to sign...frankly I don't think it will make one darn bit of difference in real life.

You know what would cause me psychological harm, including thoughts of suicide? Having to carry and unplanned, unwanted pregnancy to term. I'm not joking.

I can see this becoming a first amendment issue, but I always sort of figured that the AMA should be deciding this kind of stuff.

Still, I never underestimate the will of the right wing to interfere with the personal lives of people who don't agree with them.

Guess what else causes "psychological harm?" POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION. Or maybe that's just us selfish women who aren't thoroughly enjoying our endless sleepless nights enough?

"I also like to draw attention to the emotional and psychological implications of telling women that abortions could cause emotional stress. I find that we as human beings make a big deal out of what society tells us should be a big deal. It's all about perspective, and this law is essentially telling women that abortions should have the effect of making you depressed. If you're not depressed, you're uncaring. It's like one big punishment from the government for women choosing to have an abortion."

that's an excellent point.

*sigh*

I know I can't be alone when I say that all of this makes me extremely exhausted. It's the same battle time and time again. One side trying to tell us how we're supposed to think and feel when all WE want is the right to think and feel in the way most fitting to our individual views and beliefs.

Like...WTF. Do we always need to take one step forward and two steps back??

ughhhhh. just....ughhhhh.

yanno, i just don't get how the pro-lifers STILL haven't learned the carrots-work-better-than-sticks lesson. if they were really interested in reducing abortions, they could try all manner of contraception-providing, sex-educating, pre-natal care-subsidizing, quality-daycare-providing....

it's not just that their tactics for reducing abortions are completely morally bankrupt. they're also IN-FUCKING-EFFECTIVE.

oh, i should just shut the hell up. i'm obviously making crazy-talk.

Valerie, no, not really. It's all a matter of how you define terms.

I think that’s what makes it a lie, that they are presenting it as the only definition. They don’t say “some believe that this procedure ends a human life,” they are stating it as a fact.

Although, it doesn’t matter either way, because, like you said, it’s not like a woman seeking an abortion hasn’t thought it through and doesn’t know what she’s doing.

"the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being"

Actually, a fetus is not whole. If it were whole, then it would be be able to live outside the uterus at any point during the pregnancy. It is not seperate. If it were seperate, it would be able to live outside the uterus at any point during the pregnancy. It is not unique. If it is only unique when it becomes aware (at least in my opinion), unless you mean DNA makes it unique. Then every cell in your body has its own right to life and exfoliating is criminal. As for living, well, that's for mothers to determine when that happens. A zygote is alive as much as a plant is, and in that case, mowing your lawn is assault.

anon said, "So long as the provider puts this legislatively mandated language at the bottom of the HIPPA form for the patient to sign...frankly I don't think it will make one darn bit of difference in real life."

nono, yo'ure missing the point. every time "ending human life" is paired with abortion, we get that much closer to abortion becoming illegal, because "abortion = murder."

fetuses =/= people, end of story.

Destra, it clearly isn't whole, because it's still gestating (and at the stage at which the overwhelming majority of abortions happen, it's missing some rather important parts, like most of its brain). It clearly isn't separate, or she wouldn't need the abortion in the first place. There's no reason why "unique" as applied to humans should make it any more special than it does when it's applied to my dog - his DNA is every bit as unique as any fetus'. Which leaves living, something every cell and bacterium in my body accomplishes.

So the first two are false, and the second two are irrelevant.