MAKE US YOUR HOMEPAGE | Tuesday, February 09, 2010 | WIRELESS CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBER SERVICES | SIGN IN SIGN OUT | MY PROFILE PAGE | MY ACCOUNT

Home > News > Article

Newspaper View Newspaper View      Print this story Print      Email this story Email      Comment Comment      RSS RSS     
Share      Bookmark Bookmark

Ultrasound bill goes to Henry
 
By BARBARA HOBEROCK World Capitol Bureau
Published: 4/10/2008  1:02 AM
Last Modified: 4/11/2008  12:47 AM


Correction
This story on abortion legislation headed to the governor’s desk incorrectly described a provision that will require minors seeking abortions to sign consent forms.


It would mandate such examinations before a woman could have an abortion.

OKLAHOMA CITY -- A controversial abortion bill that includes a provision requiring a woman to undergo an ultrasound examination before she can terminate her pregnancy is on its way to Gov. Brad Hen ry's desk.

Henry's spokesman Paul Sund said Henry would withhold judgment until he had reviewed the measure.

The Senate voted 38-10 on Wednesday for Senate Bill 1878, which was amended in the House to include several abortion measures. The bill's authors are Sen. Todd Lamb, R-Edmond, and Rep. Pam Peterson, R-Tulsa.

SB 1878 combines various pieces of abortion legislation proposed this session.

One provision would require women who seek an abortion to undergo an ultrasound within one hour of the procedure.

Dr. Dana Stone, an Oklahoma City physician who is the chairwoman of the Oklahoma Section of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, said the ultrasound legislation was of great concern to her because of its invasive nature early in pregnancy.

"The patient has no ability to opt out," she said.

Lamb noted that the legislation does not require a woman to view the ultrasound images.

It does require that the images be displayed so the woman may see them. It also re quires the examiner to give a medical description of the images, to include dimensions of the embryo or fetus and the presence of cardiac activity.

The bill also would require minors who seek abortions to provide written parental consent. Lamb said that is needed to ensure that minors aren't coerced into ending pregnancy.

The measure also would allow health-care providers to refuse to participate in abortions and would ban wrongful-life lawsuits, which claim that a baby would have been better off aborted.

Lamb said no such suits have been filed in Oklahoma, but such claims have been made in at least one state.

The measure also would require documentation when the chemical abortion pill RU- 486 is prescribed and used to ensure that it is administered properly, Lamb said. Doctors who prescribe RU-486 would have to report adverse effects to the Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision or the State Board of Osteopathic Examiners. The information, except the patient's name or other personal identifying information, would be public.

Sen. Debbe Leftwich, D-Oklahoma City, voted for the measure but said she was concerned that it would require victims of rape and incest to view an ultrasound.

Sen. Jeff Rabon, D-Hugo, said that lawmakers are asked repeatedly to vote on the gut-wrenching issue when opponents of abortion simply want it banned.

"We had an abortion bill last year," he said. "I don't imagine this is new stuff. I imagine it was around then."

Last year, Henry vetoed a bill that prohibited the use of state funds or facilities for abortions but chose to let a subsequent version that provided exceptions for rape and incest victims become law without his signature.

Tony J. Lauinger, the chairman of Oklahomans For Life, said SB 1878 would "help to protect pregnant women, pro-life health-care professionals, persons with disabilities and unborn children. We are grateful for the strong support from both the House and the Senate."


Barbara Hoberock (405) 528-2465
barbara.hoberock@tulsaworld.com


Vote details

The state Senate voted 38-10 Wednesday for Senate Bill 1878, which included a number of abortion provisions.

Democrats voting for the measure (14): Randy Bass, Sean Burrage, Kenneth Corn, Mary Easley, Earl Garrison, Jay Paul Gumm, Tom Ivester, Charlie Laster, Debbe Leftwich, Susan Paddack, Nancy Riley, John Sparks, Joe Sweeden and Charles Wyrick.

Republicans voting for the measure (24): Cliff Aldridge, Patrick Anderson, Don Barrington, Brian Bingman, Cliff Branan, Randy Brogdon, Bill Brown, Harry Coates, Glenn Coffee, Brian Crain, John Ford, Mike Johnson, Clark Jolley, Ron Justice, Todd Lamb, Owen Laughlin, Mike Mazzei, David Myers, Jonathan Nichols, Jim Reynolds, Mike Schulz, Anthony Sykes, Kathleen Wilcoxson and James Williamson.

Democrats voting against the measure (10): Tom Adelson, Roger Ballenger, Johnnie Crutchfield, Judy Eason McIntyre, Constance Johnson, Richard Lerblance, Mike Morgan, Jeff Rabon, Andrew Rice and Jim Wilson.

Republicans voting against the measure (0).

By BARBARA HOBEROCK World Capitol Bureau

Newspaper View Newspaper View      Print this story Print      Email this story Email      Comment Comment      RSS RSS     
Share      Bookmark Bookmark

Reader Comments
       Add your comment

64 comments have been made on this story so far. Tell us what you think below!

Report Comment Reporting Comments

If you see a comment that violates our terms and conditions, please help us by clicking the "Report this Comment" link next to a comment. That will alert the web staff to review the comment. Thank you.  -- Web Editor Jason Collington
 
 
Report Comment
smedj, Tulsa (4/10/2008 4:01:53 AM)
This is sick and cruel. Its like a form of torture. Women who feel the need to have an abortion are not proud of it and already devestated that the circumstances in their lives are leading them to make this difficult choice. To rub their face it is horrendous. SHAME ON OKLAHOMA. This state is the most backwater reactionary cespool in the US. I won't be moving back!!!

And for the prolife republicans why not great situations where women don't feel compelled to terminate their pregnancy. Healthcare and a decent wage would certainly help. All of this right wing Christians are nothing but hypocrites with call for compassion. Shame.
Report Comment
Tony G, (4/10/2008 6:36:42 AM)
Personally, I am against abortion, but I can NOT make that decision for anyone other than myself.

I see this as cruel, to the woman who has decided to end a pregnancy.
Also--much more expensive for taxpayers!
Report Comment
mike, tulsa (4/10/2008 6:38:09 AM)
this is another attempt by the right to control and torture women. VETO this peice of garbage bill!
Report Comment
ET, tulsa (4/10/2008 7:20:52 AM)
Cruel to the woman?? It is cruel and unusual punishment to a baby. it is murder. i can't believe people calling taking a picture of a baby in a wonan's belly would be considered cruel. the murder of an unborn baby is unconstitutional. the constitution guarantees the right of LIFE, liberty, and the persuit of happiness to every citizen. these stupid women that don't want a baby should be taking birth control pills. they are much cheaper than an abortion. our tax payers money should be going to anything but the murder of babies. what amazes me are the same people that are for murdering babies are the same ones that are against executing inmates in prison. what hypocrisy.
Report Comment
Tulsan, (4/10/2008 7:23:36 AM)
Shame on the lawmakers! As if women making this decision didn't already have enough to worry about it. This law is just twisted -- I jope Gov. Henry has enough senseto veto it. There is no medical purpose to this -- it is just to try to make women feel bad. Shame!
Report Comment
Graychin, Eucha (4/10/2008 7:46:15 AM)
It's an election year, and there are very many single-issue "pro-life" voters.

What possible reason can there be for making the woman endure yet another medical procedure? I agree that it's cruel. Having the abortion is already painful enough. It has to be a very painful choice.

Is there anything about this bill that can be called "conservative"? Conservatives used to believe in leaving people alone and letting them make their own decisions. If there was ever a Nanny State bill, this is it.
Report Comment
amber, tulsa (4/10/2008 7:51:35 AM)
Cruel?? Punishment for the mom?? Cruel is injecting saline into the womb and dehydrating an unborn baby until it dies; cruel is inserting a device into the womb and sucking a baby apart limb by limb. THAT is cruel; taking a picture (that the "mother" is not even required to look at) is hardly cruel.
America began falling apart when abortin was legalized. How can we teach the future generations to respect life when as adults we murder unborn children so that we won't be embarrased or inconvenienced by our mistake. That doesn't set a very good example for our young people. Imagine how this logic sounds to them: "Violence is not the answer; killing people is wrong and you'll go to prison or be executed. But, if you get pregnant on accident it's ok--go ahead and kill the baby--"
Report Comment
Childless by Choice, (4/10/2008 8:22:16 AM)
Her body, her choice!
Report Comment
amber, tulsa (4/10/2008 8:34:15 AM)
"Her body, her choice!"
Then she should have made better choices BEFORE she got pregnant! I guess now her choice will get to be whether or not she has to look at the child before she kills it.
That is another problem that plagues America; selfishness to the point that women will kill their unborn child before they will be embarrased or inconvenienced!
Report Comment
Lori, Tulsa (4/10/2008 8:34:37 AM)
What about the baby? If the baby has a heartbeat then the baby is alive.

If you kill a baby then it's murder.
Report Comment
Steve, (4/10/2008 8:54:26 AM)
How is this bill cruel? It forces the mother of the child to face the truth about the viability of her child before killing it. It ensures that she is presented with the facts before making the final decision.
Report Comment
Doc Smarba, Broken Arrow, OK (4/10/2008 8:56:55 AM)
The correct choice for a woman is to NOT spread her legs in the first place. If you cant accept the outcome, don't take the risk.
Report Comment
mike, tulsa (4/10/2008 9:02:57 AM)
How about keeping your pants zipped doc..... If a fetus can't survive out of the womb then it is only a "murder" in your narrow minds. Allways try9ing to control others....I don't see you lining up at the adoption agency. Once again "doc" sex is not only for pro creation. Get a life of your own and quit trying to control something that is not your business
Report Comment
Todd, (4/10/2008 9:21:17 AM)
I think all you short-sighted conservs are forgetting about mothers whose lives are endagered by the baby and therefore choose abortion. Not all abortions are chosen by your oversexed teenagers.
Report Comment
amber, tulsa (4/10/2008 9:22:23 AM)
Mike- Then why is it that when a pregnant woman is murdered, the killer can be charged with TWO counts of MURDER, one for the woman and one for the baby? In 17 states the law applies at conception, not just at viability. In other states it is at 7 weeks which is past the embryonic stage.
As for the adoption agency comment, there are thousands and thousands of people on waiting list for adoption. And if there were more babies to adopt there would be even more on the waiting list.
Report Comment
amber, tulsa (4/10/2008 9:25:03 AM)
Todd- what happened to the days when mothers and fathers would give up their lives if their child had even a small chance of surviving??
Although there is definitely logic in your argument, we all know that the majority of abortions are performed for convenience sake, not because the life of the mother is endangered.
Report Comment
mike, tulsa (4/10/2008 9:41:58 AM)
what a ridiculous bunch of control freak legislation this is ....Oklahoma: House Bill 1686, signed into law on May 20, 2005, recognizes "an unborn child" as a victim under state laws against murder, manslaughter, and certain other acts of violence. The law defines "unborn child" as "the unborn offspring of human beings from the moment of conception, through pregnancy, and until live birth including the human conceptus, zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo and fetus." Following upon the law enacted in 2005, Senate Bill 1742, signed into law May 23, 2006, ensures that Oklahoma’s recognition of the unborn child as a separate victim applies uniformly across all of Oklahoma’s homicide statutes.........The thought police are definitley in control here in this back woods state. Along with some others.......I personally don't belive that it is right but, It is not my body period and it still needs to be a personal choice. I know I can hear them allready "what about the unborn voice" I dont know, it can't speak or think..(no proof of this). Like it or not abortion is going to happen for what ever reason. Is it not better to have it done in a clinic or a table at some house? It's like you neo's want abstinence only taught.......how is that working for ya? FAce it you can't control the lives of everyone, they don't think or act like you. I understand that only you are the "perfect" ones. In your own minds!
Report Comment
John, Broken Arrow (4/10/2008 9:49:56 AM)
Women who do not want to look at the picture will just go out of state to have it done, or perhaps out of the country. It will get done and no one will ever know. That is provided the women comes from a family with lots of money. If she is poor, it may be another story. In the end men think this is fair and women think it is cruel. But then men can jump a woman’s bones and drive away. They don’t answer the phone so they do not have to deal with it. They just go on to another helpless victim.
Report Comment
James, Weatherford (4/10/2008 9:50:40 AM)
So, the Oklahoma Legislature won't mandate insurance companies to provide needed coverage, but they want to mandate some doctors to provide specific medical procedures in the case of abortions? And they want to allow some college students to carry guns on campus? Is this the Twilight Zone or what?
Report Comment
amber, tulsa (4/10/2008 9:57:57 AM)
Mike-
I absolutely DO NOT want abstinence to be the only thing taught, because you are right--that doesn't work! I think that if women were made aware of exactly what they are aborting then maybe they can make a more informed decision. Many abortion providers tell women that the fetus does not feel pain, that it's not really a baby, and that there is no long term affects on the mother's health. These things are simply not true and I think many women would choose to give their child up for adoption rather than abort.
As for me being perfect, well let's see; I have had 2 children out of wedlock (both of which I chose to have and raise) so one: I am most certainly not perfect, and 2: I do know what I talking about.
Report Comment
Doc Smarba, Broken Arrow, OK (4/10/2008 10:04:07 AM)
Dear Todd,
Your concern for the health of the mother is admirable. I wonder what percentage of abortions are due to this... Let's do a quick Google search...ah, here it is!
-
Reasons Women Choose Aortion (U.S.)-
- Wants to postpone childbearing - 25.5%
- Want no (more) children - 7.9%
- Cannot afford a baby - 21.3%
- Having a baby will disrupt education or job - 10.8%
- Has relationship problem or partner does not want - 14.1%
- Too young: parents or others object to pregnancy - 12.2%
- Rape or incest - 1%
- Fetal abnormalities - 1%
- Risk to maternal health - 2.8%
- Other - 3.4%
Source - Alan Guttmacher Institute
-
So...it appears the vast majority of abortions come down to selfishness, laziness and a unwillingness to accept responsibility for one's actions. How disgusting!
Report Comment
Joshua, (4/10/2008 10:05:01 AM)
I'm pro-life, but I don't really see a point to this bill. It's not stopping abortion, it's just charging more money for an abortion. I do think certain parts of it are important, allowing health care workers to refuse to take part in abortions for example, but as to other parts of the bill, eh, taxing cigarettes through the roof and people still smoke.

I'm curious that no one has commented on the whole "requiring minors to have parental permission" part as that's always been a hot button when I've seen abortion discussed. (Personally, I think it's a good idea, but I can see the other side of the arguement.)

I do predict that this will become the most posted topic within a week. Probably in much less.
Report Comment
Doc Smarba, BA (4/10/2008 10:09:56 AM)
Dear Mike,
Your argument that abortion should be always completely legal because women are going to do it anyway is silly.
-
Should we make child molestation legal because people are going to do it anyway?
Should we make rape legal because people are going to do it anyway?
Should we make murder legal because people are going to do it anyway?
-
Oh, how evil the thought police who want to outlaw child molestation, rape and murder. Right?

Report Comment
Doc Smarba, BA (4/10/2008 10:36:14 AM)
Dear Mike,
Here's another nugget to chew on- statistics clearly show that blacks are more likely to have abortions than whites. In fact, there is controversy right now over Planned Parenthood's racists beginnings and current acceptance of black directed contributions. I recall several news articles in the recent past that noted the difference in the last two presidential campaigns was so small that had abortion never been legal, there likely would have been enough Democratic voters to elect Al Gore or John Kerry.
-
You guys are killing yourselves!
Report Comment
James, Weatherford (4/10/2008 10:38:40 AM)
Doc,
It is sad that you cannot see any difference between a fetus (at any stage of development) and a child. By your logic, a person with cancer should not have the tumor removed -- they're HUMAN cells; who are you to decide if they live or die!
25 of 64 comments displayed. | View All

 

 
Add Your Comment 
In order to post a comment on this article, you must sign in to Tulsaworld.com. If you do not have a site account, you can create an account for free.

 
  
Post Your Comment
 


Most Popular Stories
Comments made yesterday 2,015
Total Comments 1,033,287
Register to make reader comments

Most Popular Stories




Tulsa World

Home | About Tulsa World | Advertise With Us | Privacy | Usage Agreement | FAQ and Help | Contact Us | Today's Headlines
Copyright © 2010, World Publishing Co. All rights reserved.




Advanced Search