Common Sense Prevails in Oklahoma, At Least For Today
by Jodi Jacobson, Editor in Chief, RH Reality Check
April 23, 2010 - 4:07pm (Print)
Sometimes common sense does prevail, at least for a while.
The Center for Reproductive Rights reports this afternoon that Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry vetoed two abortion bills recently passed in the state legislature.
A press release from the Governor's office states:
Gov. Brad Henry today vetoed abortion legislation previously declared unconstitutional by the courts, saying House Bill 2780 had numerous flaws and would ultimately result in another expensive and possibly futile legal battle for the state.
HB 2780 would have forced women to undergo an ultrasound and listen to a detailed description of it before they could obtain an abortion, even if the woman objected.
Gov. Henry also vetoed HB 2656, legislation that would have prohibited pregnant women and their families from seeking legal damages if physicians knowingly or negligently withheld important information or provided inaccurate information to them about their pregnancy, even if a doctor lied to a woman about a fetal abnormality.
Gov. Henry maintains that he supports "reasonable restrictions" on abortion, but said HB 2780 had several flaws, including the lack of an exemption for rape and incest victims.
“By forcing the victims of such horrific acts to undergo an ultrasound and listen to a detailed description of the procedure after they have faced the unspeakable trauma of rape or incest, the state victimizes the victim for a second time. It would be unconscionable to subject rape and incest victims to such treatment,” said the governor.
Gov. Henry vetoed similar legislation in 2008, but lawmakers overrode the veto. Opponents of the statute successfully challenged it in court and have said they are prepared to challenge HB 2780 if it becomes law. Although the court struck down the earlier law because it contained multiple subjects, the governor said the latest version of the proposal was also unconstitutional.
“HB 2780 represents an unconstitutional attempt by the Oklahoma Legislature to insert government into the private lives and decisions of its citizens. State policymakers should never mandate that a citizen be forced to undergo any medical procedure against his or her will, especially when such a procedure could cause physical or mental trauma. To do so amounts to an unconstitutional invasion of privacy,” the governor said in his veto message.
Henry continued: “Because a similar provision of law has already been struck down by the courts, this legislation will be challenged again, resulting in a costly and potentially futile legal battle for the state.”
Henry further criticized HB 5626, saying:
“By prohibiting recovery of damages in wrongful birth and life malpractice actions, the legislation would allow unscrupulous, reckless or negligent physicians to knowingly withhold information or negligently provide inaccurate information to pregnant women without facing the potential of legal consequences. At the very least, pregnant women and their families should expect to receive accurate, comprehensive information from their doctor so they can make appropriate medical decisions. It is unconscionable to grant a physician legal protection to mislead or misinform a pregnant woman in an effort to impose his or her personal beliefs on his patient,” said the governor.
Questions remain as to whether the legislature will override one or both vetoes in part because HB 2780 included an emergency clause; such a clause means will take a three-fourths vote by each chamber of the Legislature to override the governor’s veto. Bills that do not contain an emergency clause require only a two-thirds vote to override.
Representatives of CRR noted that members of the legislature supporting the bill were expected to spend the weekend "trying to round up votes" to override the vetoes.
For now, however, common sense prevails in Oklahoma.
"We are very pleased that Governor Henry vetoed these two extreme anti-abortion measures. Legislators have no business telling doctors how to practice medicine or making personal medical decisions for people," said Stephanie Toti, staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights and lead attorney on the prior lawsuit. "We strongly urge the legislature to stand down and stay out of the doctor's office."
Follow Jodi Jacobson on Twitter, @jljacobson
on both measures, according to this article, and is on its way to the Senate:
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-house-overrides-vetoes-on-two-anti-abortion-b...
I especially like how the bill requires vaginal ultrasounds, not just abdominal ultrasounds, even if the woman doesn't want one.
Similarly, did I read HB 5626 correctly, because it looks like it allows doctors to just flat-out lie to patients about the medical condition of the fetus? As in, they can just elect to tell expecting mothers that their fetus is just fine when test results show it isn't? And the mother can't sue the doctor for lying to her when she gives birth to a baby with severe neural tube defects a few months later? Please tell me I misread that bill.
Pretty disturbing, isn't it? My guess is the next bill will be to outlaw prenatal testing.
Vaginal ultrasounds produce a larger, clearer picture with which to guilt-trip women. It's stupid to insist on a vaginal ultrasound, though. If a woman has a tilted uterus, a vaginal ultrasound might be impossible to get (or quite painful to get the right angle for a good picture). With second trimester pregnancies, the vaginal ultrasound transducer is generally not calibrated to accurately measure the gestational age. That's why we always used the abdominal ultrasound for our second trimester patients... we're all about accuracy. Emotional arguments about this aside, requiring a vaginal ultrasound and scripted speech is just bad medicine.
Politicians have no place telling medical professionals how to do their jobs.
