Court of Appeals Freezes Arizona Anti-Abortion Law
By Bianca Ciotti | 08/07/2012 | Activism, Arizona, Headline, Health Care, Issues, Legislation, Legislators, Movements, States | 5 Comments
(Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
On March 27th of this year, the Arizona House of Representatives passed HB2036, a bill aimed at outlawing selective abortions past 20 weeks of conception. Women’s rights activists breathed a sigh of relief on Wednesday when the US Court of Appeals granted an injunction to halt the implementation of HB2036.
HB2036 somehow flew beneath the national radar, passing quietly with a majority vote of 20-10. The bill contained the following major provisions:
- Requires the person who performs the abortion to be a trained medical professional.
- Outlaws the act of coercing a woman to have an abortion.
- Requires the informed consent of the woman in order to perform the abortion.
- Bans abortions later than 20 weeks after the woman’s last menstrual period.
- Requires an ultrasound immediately prior to a selective abortion.
The harm done by those last two provisions in HB2036 heavily outweighs the good in the first three provisions, especially since the positive aspects of the bill were already in effect. Most of the bill is simply the conduit for the sponsor, Rep. Kimberly Yee’s (R-Phoenix) real agenda: instituting a bill outlawing late term abortions based on dubious fetal pain studies.
In 2010, a wave of anti abortion laws were passed in 8 states based on the findings of a 1987 article published on the effects of pain on a fetus. Supporters of the bills cited the article as proof that a fetus as young as 20 weeks is able to feel pain. Since then, the article has been widely disputed within the scientific community. The author of the original article has stated himself that, “I have every reason to want to believe that the fetus feels pain… but if you look at the evidence, it’s hard to conclude that that’s true.”
On an even more mystifying note, HB 2036 would outlaw abortions 2 weeks earlier than the 20 week gestation period cited by the 1987 study. The bill defines “gestational age” as “the age of the unborn child as calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period of the pregnant woman.”
According to HB 2036, all women of menstruating age can be considered pregnant until proven otherwise. By the bill’s definition of gestational age, if a woman were to have her period and then get pregnant (up to a month afterward), the age of her fetus is bound to the period she last had before the actual conception. So, if a woman were to menstruate on the 2nd and conceive on the 20th, her fetus is already 18 days old at the moment of its conception.
As bizarre as the definition is, the implications are much worse than one might imagine. Many fatal prenatal diseases and deformities can not be measured before the 20 week mark. HB 2036 would force mothers of an unhealthy fetus to carry to full term if the issue was not found within the 20 week gestation age.
Recently, similar bills have been cropping up all over the country. In January, Rep Trent Franks (R-AZ) proposed a bill banning late term abortions in Washington DC based on the same logic as HB 2036. The mentality and disputed scientific foundation of fetal pain is the real issue here. The US Court of Appeals may have halted its enforcement at the last minute, but so long as its underlying ideology exists, a different iteration of HB 2036 could appear in any statehouse across the country.
Leave Your Comment →
5 Comments
Matt Metzner
08.07.2012
@mmetzner
All women are assumed pregnant unless proven otherwise? Really? Glad to see the AZ Rep/DC Mayor Trent Franks mention.
Bianca Ciotti
08.07.2012
@biancaciotti
Its more a statement based on the flawed logic of their definition of “gestational age.” They’re redefining the gestational age period FROM the moment of fertilization of the egg to the last period the woman had. By doing so, they can actually shorten the 20 week period by tacking on the extra days between the woman’s last period and the moment of conception.
Here’s an interesting take: If a woman is a virgin at the time of her last period, then has sex for the first time and gets pregnant two weeks later, Arizona’s definition of gestational age would define her as pregnant when she was still a virgin (for the two weeks in between her last period and the fertilization). As you can see, this redefinition of “gestational age” is flawed in more ways that one, and is simply a backwards way to push an anti-abortion agenda.
Amanda Le
08.07.2012
@amandale
Good points you make about the the actual scientific issues surrounding this case, especially the case the proponents of this bill are basing it off of. But in general, I’m not at ease with the idea of government telling a woman what to do with her body. Do you think a bill of this nature will appear in other parts of the country?
Bianca Ciotti
08.07.2012
@biancaciotti
Thank you! Yes, I believe this sort of bill is likely to appear in other parts of the country, mostly because it already has! I mentioned in the article that 8 states have already adopted similar laws (albeit less severe) based on the flawed fetal pain study. I agree with you about government having no part in a woman’s body – this bill is a very scary concept.
Justin
08.25.2012
What I find most disturbing is the authors obvious lack of research. Any mildly informed father or mother knows that gestational age HAS ALWAYS been determined by the last day of the last menstrual cycle IN EVERY STATE IN THE COUNTRY. Google is your friend. This isn’t a religious definition or political definition, it’s a SCIENTIFIC DEFINITION AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
The only time gestation age changes from the above is after measurements can be taken with an ultrasound (around 24 weeks). This is why a woman’s due date is always liable to change after about 6 months of pregnancy because the ultrasound measurements are more accurate.