Judge calls SD anti-choice law "untruthful and misleading"
In another win for reproductive justice this week, a federal judge called a South Dakota anti-choice law - which mandates that doctors tell women seeking abortions that the procedure increases the risk of suicide and suicidal thoughts - "untruthful and misleading."
On the suicide issue, Schreier was convinced by multiple studies showing women who get abortions have no increased risk of suicide. The state provided arguments, but no evidence, to the contrary, she said."Because such a risk is not 'known,' the suicide disclosure language of the statute is untruthful and misleading," Schreier wrote.
You know, because there is no link between abortion and depression.
The bad news?
But the judge upheld a portion of the informed consent law, which says abortions "terminate the life of a whole separate unique living human being."
Well, I'll take a small victory. For now.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Judge calls SD anti-choice law "untruthful and misleading".
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15616
I guess that language is better than "a pre-born American patriot," but technically speaking, how can a fetus be considered "separate" from a woman?
But the judge upheld a portion of the informed consent law, which says abortions "terminate the life of a whole separate unique living human being."
Disconnect between potential and actual.
Until the embryo or fetus can exist without need for the protection and nutrients in receives while in a woman's uterus and hooked up with an umbilical chord, I don't think you can really refer to it as a "separate" being.
Separated from the woman (before a certain time period), it would cease to exist.
Our good friend Leslee Unruh was in on this case, of course...
I wonder if the judge needs to see some studies about how many women who had abortions didn't realize that another human being was growing inside them and thought they were going for a vaginal massage or something.
The study actually doesn't say there is "no link between abortion and depression." It says that there is no "post-abortion syndrome" similar to PTSD or "long term mental anguish" caused by abortion.
To say that there is NO LINK between abortion and depression is just misleading and ignores the women who do have depression following the procedure. I'm not saying at all it is the norm, but come on, its possible. Any major life changes can cause depression--moving, having a baby, getting married, graduating, getting divorced, etc. There is not a "post grad syndrome," but that doesn't mean some recent grads aren't depressed. The study was a study of other studies, all with different methodologies and outcomes and wasn't focused solely on incidence of depression.
Saying there's no link isn't the same as saying no woman suffers from depression after having an abortion. It just means that when you take a sampling of women who haven't had abortions and another sampling of women who have, one group doesn't have a significantly higher risk of depression than the other.
So should the doctor inform them if they carry to term they risk post partum depression?
I'm not quite sure why you're asking me that, but I'll answer anyway. I don't think doctors should be compelled to tell women their risk of post-partum depression, the same way I don't think doctors should be compelled to tell women their risk of depression after having an abortion. I think what a doctor and woman discuss about the woman's pregnancy depends on the woman. If she asks the doctor her risk of depression after abortion, the doctor can give her the honest answer that there's no correlation between abortion and depression and that it depends on the woman and the circumstances surrounding the pregnancy and to seek professional mental help if she experiences depression at any point in her life.
True, I was just pointing out that since this study or some of the ones it focused on weren't looking at depression specifically, that that conclusion can't really be made.
You are right that there is no "post-grad syndrome", although some post-grads do get depressed. Therefore, the right thing to do is require every college admissions officer to inform every incoming grad student that there is a link between grad school and suicide.
You are reading things into my comment that aren't there. I am not at all saying that I support pre-abortion counseling like this. I was just disagreeing with one particular phrase in Jessica's post, not the overall message. We should not be telling women considering abortions that they could be more likely to commit suicide after. That is absurd.
If some doctor read that last bit to me, I'd be like "well, if its a separate person, then go ahead and separate it from me and see what happens."
That's pretty disgusting the way you put it...but I'm still LMAO...OMG!
This actually illustrates the point that ticks me off: "the life of a whole separate unique living human being."
"Living". The Left has let the Right win this debate as to when life begins. As if a judge can answer that question.
Yeah, especially considering how arbitrary a decision it is to determine when a "life" (i.e., personhood) begins. At conception? When the neural system develops so the fetus can feel pain (i.e., is sentient)? When the heart starts beating? When fingers and toes form?
A fetus is a fetus until it is BORN. Then it's a baby. And even then, many cultures don't consider a baby a "person" until much later in life, when that individual can take care of itself and its personality has formed more.
I'm not sure what anti-abortion proponents have against the word "choice" as in pro-CHOICE. As in, women have the right to decide whether or not to terminate their pregnancies. Not as in, no one's forcing anyone to have abortions.
Listening to their rhetoric, you'd think we were trying to deprive women of their right to CHOOSE. And according to them, since we are, then they feel a compulsion to remove that right and insist they know better. What could be more democratic than the right to free choice?
I'm not sure what anti-abortion proponents have against the word "choice" as in pro-CHOICE. As in, women have the right to decide whether or not to terminate their pregnancies. No one's forcing anyone to have abortions.
Listening to their rhetoric, you'd think we were trying to deprive women of their right to CHOOSE. And according to them, since we are, then they feel a compulsion to remove that right and insist they know better. What could be more democratic than the right to free choice?
It's important to note that Judge Schreier was already basically overturned by a higher court on the "terminate the life of a whole separate unique living human being" section. She wasn't really in a position to strike that down considering the disposition of the 8th circuit.