Planned Parenthood Does Abortion UltrasoundsPolitics

I’d be careful for the malcontents who proclaim that an ultrasound prior to an abortion is rape.

They’d have to admit that Planned Parenthood rapes women.

It’s clear on its website that explains what happens in the office during an abortion, and the word ULTRASOUND is there in plain English.

In fact, the National Abortion Federation includes ultrasounds as part of its Clinical Policy Guidelines, to “inform clinical decision-making and enhance the safety and efficacy of abortion care.”

Call Planned Parenthood in Virginia like Alana Goodman did, and you get this message:

“Patients who have a surgical abortion generally come in for two appointments. At the first visit we do a health assessment, perform all the necessary lab work, and do an ultrasound. This visit generally takes about an hour. At the second visit, the procedure takes place. This visit takes about an hour as well. For out of town patients for whom it would be difficult to make two trips to our office, we’re able to schedule both the initial appointment and the procedure on the same day.

Medical abortions generally require three visits. At the first visit, we do a health assessment, perform all the necessary lab work, and do an ultrasound. This visit takes about an hour. At the second visit, the physician gives the first pill and directions for taking two more pills at home. The third visit is required during which you will have an exam and another ultrasound.”

That’s a whole lot of ultrasounds in Planned Parenthood’s own procedures.

So what we’re really talking about is sharing these ultrasounds with women. Shouldn’t we wonder why the big hue and cry from the left over ultrasounds that are already being performed? Isn’t it really about the left blocking women from seeing their own ultrasounds?

Will liberals in the General Assembly take the floor today and say “Planned Parenthood rapes women”???

They actually should apologize to REAL rape victims for the insult.
They can also admit it’s not really about Planned Parenthood.

It’s about Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Although the Roe decision discovered abortion had been constitutionally protected all along to the great surprise of the people who wrote and ratified the document, Planned Parenthood v. Casey is the pre-eminent decision here that rewrote a lot of Roe.

(Yeah, remember the flap between Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood when Planned Parenthood claimed abortion was only 3% of their services? Well, abortion is so insignificant to them that the pre-eminent Supreme Court abortion case in the world is Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit.)

Planned Parenthood v. Casey invented an “undue burden” test for abortion regulation. What does “undue” mean? Whatever 5 justices of the Supreme Court say it means on any particular day. How do nine Justices decide on whether a regulation creates a burden that is undue? Substantial? Adequate?

With so few of the Justices on the Court from that decision, I think the silly “undue burden” test is going right where Roe‘s “trimester test” went – out the window.

And the lawsuits in other states give me the impression that these ultrasound issues are headed right to the Supreme Court of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy (who sided with the majority in Casey but dissented in the strikedown of partial birth abortion bans).

Not only is Casey on shaky ground, these ultrasound cases may just be enough for the Court to say “Out, damned spot” and wash their hands of the whole abortion business.

With Kennedy, Ginsburg and Breyer among the oldest Justices on the Court, who is President in 2013 becomes very interesting.

One thing is sure.

It will be tough for Planned Parenthood to sue over requiring ultrasounds that they already perform.

  • Mike Barrett

    So Brian, I could make this comparison in a number of disrespectful ways, but let me state it simply; do you know the difference between voluntary and mandatory?

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    Yes, voluntary is Mike Barrett commenting.

    Mandatory is me laughing at you.

  • Sara

    And that — is how “our side” wins!

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    Wins?

    Sara, is that what it’s about?

    We protect life, and you’re only interested in “winning”?

  • Sara

    Do you actually think you are winning the debate with that attitude? Go ahead and think that, then.

  • http://www.bearingdrift.com Brian Schoeneman

    Mike, the abortion itself isn’t mandatory, so your comparison fails.

  • Brian Kirwin

    Great, Sara, you can “win”

    Folks like you “won” when they kept slavery legal in the 1700s.

  • Mary

    The ultrasounds done by PP are NOT transvaginal. They are external. BIG difference.

  • Sara

    Folks like me, huh? :)

    Don’t kid yourself Brian, it’s all about winning and losing. If Republicans hadn’t won in November, the debate wouldn’t have come this far.

  • JR

    Mary, you would be wrong. Planned Parenthood, like all good doctors, does the transvaginal ultrasound when the fetus is just a few weeks old, to make sure it is not an ectopic pregnancy (very dangerous) and to determine the number of fetuses. These ultra sounds are standard procedure. Virginia’s laws on abortion are actually not as strict as some states, like Maryland, and many unscrupulous clinics have sprung up. At least one woman had to have an hysterectomy because her doctor thought the baby was much younger and smaller than it was, and he started with the wrong procedure. Why should a young woman go through an abortion if the ultrasound shows she is not pregnant? this is the primary reason they do this, to verify the patient is in fact pregnant and the age of the fetus (which dictates the kind of procedure). Blood and urine tests are simply not accurate enough…and women have been hurt by the big business of abortion, and doctors who do not want to put the patients health first?

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/grossly-misrepresenting-virginias-proposed-ultrasound-law_631691.html

  • Brian Kirwin

    Sara, you’re a sad person if you’d let babies die because you’re worried about winning or losing.

  • Mike Barrett

    Sara, it is a shame these two guys have ganged up on you, but you clearly can hold you own.

    It is amazing that these two proponents for this legislation insist on creating more government intrusion into our private lives, yet insist the republican party is the party of freedom and liberty.

    The more they post, the more they prove their extremist, far right credentials on this issue and other matters the General Assembly has taken up in regard to limiting our personal liberty.

    They claim their view is principled, yet if they wish these action for their families just do it; don’t burden others with your commitment. You are not forced to use, or not use, contraception; you are not forced to have, or not to have, an ultra sound; you are not forced to have, or not to have, an abortion.

    Don’t force your religious views on everyone else.

  • Brian Kirwin

    gee, Mike, you sound like the guy from South Carolina in the Continental Congress talking about his “fair colony’s peculiar institution” to treat certain people as property.

  • Eric the 1/2 troll

    “Sara, you’re a sad person if you’d let babies die because you’re worried about winning or losing.”

    Indeed, Sara WOULD be a sad person if she let babies die for any reason. Of course this has nothing to do with babies at all.

  • Nathan Miller

    Brian certainly is trying to hard to get someone to bite on his slavery comments…

    Sad that he can’t come up with a better argument for his extremist views.

  • choice

    I’m not a conservative, so feel free to delete my comment if you like, but I would like to point out that the Virginia ultrasound bill as worded means that the procedure fits the definition of rape in Virginia’s own rape law as well as that of the FBI. The wording indicates that, if a woman seeks (not schedules) an abortion, a doctor must perform the procedure even if he/she deems it medically unnecessary and the woman refuses to consent to it. What is more, there is no exception for rape, so it is possible to hypothesize a case of a horribly traumatized victim of “forcible” rape seeking a very early abortion whom the doctor considers should not have any such procedure, for the sake of her well-being, unless medically necessary.

  • Sara

    Brian, the Continental Congress….really?

    The way you swing your sword at anybody here who dares question whether this bill is the RIGHT way to stop abortion may actually, when the battle is over, undermine what good you seek to do. If attitudes like yours make headlines, then the pendulum will swing to the other side, and more women will have abortions.

    Unfortunately you cannot see that. Frankly, I think many young women are probably terrified that there will be a Brian on the other end of the vaginal probe, forcing their will on them. Your best course is to stay far from the debate, if you want to win. I mean, not win — whatever.

  • Brian Kirwin

    Nathan, I tend not to agree with movements that try to decide who isn’t a “person.”

  • http://bearingdrift.com J.R. Hoeft

    Head-in-the-sand comments. Sad.

    You know, Brian. Why do we care? Let them keep killing babies. Less burden on the social welfare state. Margaret Sanger was right.

    So, I changed my mind. Nathan, Mike, Sara, Susan G, Lloyd the Idiot, Eric the 1/2 Troll – they’re all right.

    This is government intrusion. Hell, if the free market has already dictated that the ultrasound is the most effective way at ensuring the baby is found and exterminated, who are we to stand in the way?

  • Brian Kirwin

    Sara, sword? Really?

    It’s your side that uses the scraper, not mine.

  • Mike Barrett

    Well J.R., I’m not looking for affirmation from you. I am simply requesting that you not support legislation that takes personal freedom of choice away from me and my family.

  • Sara

    Brian…. I’m pro-life. I’m NOT pro government forcing women to have a photo taken of their insides using a vaginal probe and then putting that photo in a medical file for 7 years. If the woman desires to have it done, so she can be fully informed, that’s fantastic. If she signs a waiver, and does not want to have the information, and does not want the potential privacy issue that comes with having a photo in her file, that should be her right.

    By the way, Brian, I have three children. How many do you have?

  • ToR

    Brian,

    Do three things:
    -provide your definition of rape
    -provide the Virginia definition of rape
    -provide the federal government’s definition of rape

  • Eric the 1/2 troll

    JR, Why do you keep bringing babies up in this dicussion?

  • http://bearingdrift.com J.R. Hoeft

    I’m not Mike. I said you were the right. Choose abortion every time as far as I care. Why bother trying anymore? After all 50 million lives have already been cut short. It’s only 1/6 of our national population. It’s only nearly 10 times more than the Holocaust. It’s a highly effective procedure the abortion community recommends – so I say go for it. The less the merrier, right?

  • Brian Kirwin

    Sara, my family is none of your business.

    TorR – get a name, then talk to me.

  • Brian Kirwin

    Mike, you can have as many abortions as you like.

  • Brian Kirwin

    Hey, JR….These folks talk like there should be a bill to outlaw all ultrasounds prior to an abortion.

  • http://bearingdrift.com J.R. Hoeft

    @Sara – don’t be a jerk.

    Enjoy winning. Looks like the governor just knee-capped anyone out in front defending this bill anyway.

    So, I give up. Who cares. And what good is any of this.

  • ToR

    And my name is none of your business. But you’re a hypocrite and like to have your cake and eat it too.

    -provide your definition of rape
    -provide the Virginia definition of rape
    -provide the federal government’s definition of rape

  • ToR

    No Brian,

    We “talk like” women shouldn’t have to be raped prior to having a procedure that is legal.

  • Brian Kirwin

    It’s yummy cake. Why the hell would I have cake if I wasn’t going to eat it?

    Is it your position that people who have cake should be forbidden from eating it? Talk about being a hypocrite.

    I think all people who have cake should be free to eat it, too!

  • Eric the 1/2 troll

    “After all 50 million lives have already been cut short.”

    No they haven’t – when do you think THIS happen? I think you are thinking about Soviet Russia and that was like 20 million. Gotta watch those meds, JR.

  • Eric the 1/2 troll

    “I think all people who have cake should be free to eat it, too!”

    “…and by “people” I mean “male people”. “Female people” need the permission of the State Assembly first.”

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    Eric, JR’s stat of 50 million abortions comes from pro-abortion organizations themselves.

    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html

  • Eric the 1/2 troll

    “Eric, JR’s stat of 50 million abortions…”

    Brian, JR said nothing about 50 million abortions…here I’ll provide his quote again…:

    “After all 50 million lives have already been cut short.”

    Jeez, what is it with you guys? Don’t you read what you are writing?

  • JayD

    Good God! JR, when are you going to dump this stage actor political hack? Today’s role: constitutional law scholar defending innocent babes? Barf!
    _________________
    Watched Gov. Cristie last night and to paraphrase: governing well means making agreements – to be successful (make progress/accomplishments) you’ve got to be willing to negotiate and compromise AND build trust.

    But as Del. Yost illustrated yesterday (found on other BD post) and Shaun & Kirwin make plain every time they blog, too many in this fight lie or villainize the other side ~ not the way to build trust or change hearts, minds or policy, or build consensus. If you can’t build consensus, you can’t accomplish a damn thing. If you’re not trying to build consensus, you can’t be serious about solving the problem – just in for the fun of the fight (like Kirwin).

    You guys like polls and stats – every single poll taken produces the same outcome: a very small minority want to overturn Roe (18-20%) – the vast majority support 1st trimester access and then more limited access after that time; few want unfettered access (about the same that want NO access). When put to the ballot test in Colorado, voters rejected personhood amendments by a 3-1 margin (twice) and another fetal rights bill failed in Mississippi in 2011. If it can’t pass in ‘ole Miss, what makes you guys think it has a snowball’s chance in VA?

    Completely overturning Roe will never happen. Let me repeat. NEVER happen. The public supports reasonable tweaks (like parental notification and late-term bans) but when the core of Roe (legalized access) is seriously threatened republican women, youth, libertarians, and non-evangelicals leap across party line to defeat. Twelve years ago the March for Woman’s Lives drew 1.2 million, the largest mobilization in DC history. Clearly, VA legislators (and Gov. McD) got a token indication over the last few days of public reaction if the abortion bills were allowed to move forward … and the party power elite responded in a completely UNsurprising way – they shut it down at lightning speed.

    Pre-Roe days are gone forever because women in this country will never let it be any other way. If you sincerely want to reduce abortions, wouldn’t a better strategy (meaning one that has a chance of success) be to focus all this energy and cash towards tackling the reasons WHY woman choose to terminate? Such a positive force would no doubt bring more babies to full term but because of jerks like Kirwin, I’ll never see this happen in my lifetime.

    The Religious Right exists today ONLY because of the abortion debate and it delivered the White House to the red-team’s candidate 5 times (2x Reagan, Bush 1, 2x GW) since forming. What happens if Roe could be overturned? Think these folks just fade away? Hell no; democrats suffer their poverty pimps and we get the abortion pimps. [No disrespect intended towards true believers.]

    Think the red party retains a majority should it ever seriously try to overturn Roe? Not a chance, which is why, in spite of winning the oval office 5 times, Republicans have delivered nothing on this issue – including supreme court justices that want to overturn Roe – in the last 30 years.

    Aside from political realities, Latin American stats – where abortion is legal in only 1 country (and banned in all circumstances in 5!) – tell us banning abortions does NOT ‘save babies’.
    – The abortion rate in the southern sphere is 32 abortions per 1000 woman (compared to 19 per 1000 in North America).
    – Unsafe abortions are the 2nd leading cause of death in maternal mortality.
    – 4 million illegal abortions each year cause 4,000 AVOIDABLE deaths.
    – In Argentina, the number of illegal abortions each year
    is equal to the number of births.

    THIS is the reality in a region dominated by machismo and a Catholic Church committed to keeping the flock abortion-free.

    Those of us that support safe, legal, and accessible medical abortions are not baby-killers; we are advocates for women’s health and against over-reaching government intrusion into our personal lives.

    Government regulation can’t get crack cocaine off the streets, yet the life movement has convinced itself reversing Roe will make a difference? It won’t. It will fail (like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, etc.) because you cannot ever successfully legislate human behavior or change the human condition.

    2% of women between the ages of 18-44 have an abortion in the US each year. Read that number again please ~ 2%. We are destroying our ability to work together as adults in an at-risk nation on some really HUGE issues that WILL impact our already-born and the unborn for the next century.

    OK – outta here. As always, thank you JR for providing an uncensored soapbox for us all.

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    Safe, legal and accessible.

    What happened to rare?

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    By the way, don’t ya just love how the people who claim about “villianizing the other side” do so in their own comments?

  • JayD

    Rare is understood.

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    It is? 1.2 million a year is rare?

  • http://www.bearingdrift.com/author/jrhoeft/ JR Hoeft

    Eric the half-wit: I was referring to abortions.

  • JayD

    One could argue that when only 2% of a populace engages in any activity, that would be classified as rare.

    But no, 1.2 million is too many and I, personally, would like to see zero. Only way to get there is lock up every male penis (over the age of 13) until its owner promises to wed and/or fully support (financially and emotionally) the mother and any offspring from his seed.

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    That would be fine, but just don’t require any ultrasounds. That would be extreme.

  • JayD

    HA! Ok, let us know when the lock-up bill is ready for a vote and I think I can guarantee, w/ 100% certainty, you’ll have the support of PP, and every woman’s movement pushing for passage.

  • ToR

    You’re going to delete my comments twice?

    So much for free speech, apparently only if it’s religious in nature does this website protect it.

    So again Brain,
    -provide your definition of rape
    -provide the Virginia definition of rape
    -provide the federal government’s definition of rape

    And how did this (apparently now defeated) bill not rape the women who wanted to undergo a completely legal procedure?

  • ToR

    And how’s the cake? Let me know when you want to know my name. You know what you need to do: stop deleting comments and well…you know.

  • http://Www.bearingdrift.com Brian W. Schoeneman

    No one has deleted your comments, ToR.

  • ToR

    I’ll take your word B.W.S., but I’ve had 2 comments disappear from this post. Now they might not have been the most polite in regards to Brian, but they have disappeared. I’m not sure if it was a server error or manual deletion but they’re certainly not here.

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    ToR, are you still whining?

  • http://www.bearingdrift.com/author/jrhoeft/ JR Hoeft

    ToR – the only thing that has been deleted around here are my comments that openly wonder why we still have this blog considering how reviled we are.

  • ToR

    Are you admitting deleting the comments?

    Are you still denying reality?

    Why don’t you just answer the questions?
    -provide your definition of rape
    -provide the Virginia definition of rape
    -provide the federal government’s definition of rape

    And how did this (apparently now defeated) bill not rape the women who wanted to undergo a completely legal procedure?

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    ToR, you seem highly preoccupied with rape. I’m starting to be concerned for the people around you.

  • http://Www.bearingdrift.com Brian W. Schoeneman

    We have multiple threads you are all posting in. I think perhaps that’s where the issue is. To my knowledge, we have not deleted any comments, and our comment policy is to the right.

    If you put hyperlinks in the comments they may have been caught by the spam filter.

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    Brian, maybe he endorsed Newt

  • ToR

    Still refusing to answer the question aren’t you Kirwin? And you’re resorting to personal attacks. If you can’t succeed with the facts, try to attack someone’s character.

  • ToR

    Curious, is “Brian Kirwin February 22, 2012 19:58 pm ToR, you seem highly preoccupied with rape. I’m starting to be concerned for the people around you.” not “defamatory under Virginia law; are obscene, pornographic, or sexually explicit; advocate illegal or violent acts”?

    Of course, Brian could just answer the question and quit resorting to outrageous personal attacks that are completely unfounded and outrageous. He doesn’t have to but it is a true sign of his character.

  • http://bearingdrift.com J.R. Hoeft

    Yes, I deleted mine. As the editor of this blog, I have that privilege. You don’t. If you want that privilege, get a blog and quit commenting on mine. Oh, that’s right, no one would read you on yours.

  • http://bearingdrift.com Brian Kirwin

    By the way, JayD, overturning Roe wouldn’t outlaw abortion. It would send it back to the states to decide. If abortion is so popular, it would be allowed in states where the people’s representatives voted to allow it.

  • JayD

    I know that and you know that and so did Delegate Yost, who tried to sell his support for Bob Marshall’s trigger bill under guise of helping women sue for damages for fetal loss after a car accident.

    Overturn Roe and trigger bill automatically kicks in making abortion immediately unlawful in any state that passes one of these so called ‘personhood’ bills(HB1).