ONTD Political

New Mexico Lawmaker Clarifies Her Bill Will Prosecute Doctors Who Perform Abortions For Rape Victims

9:03 pm - 01/28/2013
New Mexico Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R) made headlines this past week when she introduced a bill to charge women who become pregnant from rape with “tampering with evidence” if they choose to have an abortion. Brown has since clarified that House Bill 206 isn’t intended to target victims of sexual assault, and has worked to revise the language of the legislation — but although she wants to ensure rape survivors won’t be prosecuted for getting an abortion, she hasn’t extended the same protections for the doctors who perform those abortions.

As the Democratic Party of New Mexico pointed out in an official statement about HB 206, the revised bill still represents a dangerous step toward criminalizing abortion. “The bill still makes it a crime to ‘facilitate’ an abortion for a woman who wants one,” Scott Forrester, the director of the group, explained. “That means doctors, nurses, or anyone else who works at a health care clinic where this is one of the services provided would still be guilty of a felony.”

Targeting abortion providers is simply an indirect method of limiting women’s reproductive access, and it has been a successful tactic for anti-choice lawmakers across the country. Abortion opponents often subject abortion clinics and providers to burdensome regulations that aren’t placed on other medical professionals — and doctors who break those rules are typically faced with harsh consequences, like losing their medical licenses.

Brown isn’t the first GOP lawmaker to go as far as to suggest that doctors who perform abortions should be subject to criminal charges. But singling out the doctors who work in this field is having serious consequences. Partly due to the obstacles placed in front of the medical professionals who perform abortions, as well as rising levels of anti-abortion harassment, the country currently has a shortage of abortion doctors — particularly in states that are especially hostile to abortion rights, like New Mexico.

Source

She keeps digging herself deeper, doesn't she?
chaya 28th-Jan-2013 07:24 pm (UTC)
You need to add the New Mexico tag and rape tag at the very least.
ginger_maya 28th-Jan-2013 07:25 pm (UTC)
I will do so right away.
chaya 28th-Jan-2013 07:26 pm (UTC)
THEN YOU SHALL BE REWARDED WITH THE COMPLIANCE PLATYPUS

hangonego 29th-Jan-2013 01:58 am (UTC)
d'aw
asrana 29th-Jan-2013 10:12 am (UTC)
I can see the New Mexico tag but not the rape tag?
girly123 28th-Jan-2013 07:45 pm (UTC)
At least she's not hiding behind pretense anymore, I guess. What a fucking douche.
eyetosky 28th-Jan-2013 07:49 pm (UTC)
Oh, well, that's much better.
nesmith 28th-Jan-2013 08:01 pm (UTC)
I have a radical idea. How about a woman gets to have an abortion for any fucking reason she wants or for NO REASON WHATSOEVER because our bodies are NONE OF ANYONE'S FUCKING BUSINESS EXCEPT OUR OWN, and our doctor's. Everyone else BUTT OUT.

I feel like this should NOT even be in question.
vulturoso 28th-Jan-2013 08:57 pm (UTC)
EXACTLY. Why should I have to justify to ANYONE what I do with my body?
callmetothejedi 28th-Jan-2013 09:39 pm (UTC)
YES. I wish that this was the case. I wish LiveJournal had a "Love" button.
tabaqui 28th-Jan-2013 10:04 pm (UTC)
Fucking this.
abiding 28th-Jan-2013 10:08 pm (UTC)
THIS
shadowwolf1321 28th-Jan-2013 10:14 pm (UTC)
This. A fucking +
lickbrains 29th-Jan-2013 03:40 am (UTC)
yeap.
wrestlingdog 29th-Jan-2013 12:46 pm (UTC)
THANK YOU.
ebay313 28th-Jan-2013 08:14 pm (UTC)
Still targeting the wrong group if the purpose is to prevent/punish reproductive coercion -_-
jenny_jenkins 28th-Jan-2013 09:13 pm (UTC)
So you need to carry a baby to term to prove rape now?

Is this the new alternative to testing rape kits (thousands of which remain untouched in the state?)

Fuck everyone.
angelofdeath275 29th-Jan-2013 03:27 am (UTC)
dont rape kits cost a shiton?
hey_kayla_jay 29th-Jan-2013 05:53 am (UTC)
She COULD try to use her time making rape kits less costly for the victim and more readily available, since they provide this DNA evidence she's so concerned about, but that wouldn't save any poor fetuses so.....
futureframe 29th-Jan-2013 04:56 pm (UTC)
I'm sure they're quite cheap compared to paying for raising an infant, for the state.
tabaqui 28th-Jan-2013 10:04 pm (UTC)
Fuck her so very much.
omgangiepants 28th-Jan-2013 10:06 pm (UTC)
Sit.

Down.
kyra_neko_rei 28th-Jan-2013 11:19 pm (UTC)
How about you keep the charges for covering up a rapist to the rapist who covers up his tracks like this?!

How, precisely, are they going to prosecute this shit anyway? Based on a rape case they can't tell is rape without the evidence that got destroyed? Or are they just trying to make rape victims choose between being forced to have a baby and being forced to let their rape go unreported?

Seriously, are they not even making a distinction between rape victims who want an abortion and rape victims whose rapists are making them get an abortion? How is the clinic supposed to tell whether a patient is a rape victim or not, especially if this regulation tells rape victims they've got to lie about it in order to get an abortion?

Are the police going to be sending all licensed clinics the photographs and personal information of all recent rape victims so they know who can't get an abortion? (hello, privacy violation!) Or are they going to just make the clinics gamble with each abortion they perform that this particular patient isn't a rape victim that the state will then charge them all with felonies over?

And does this legislation care at any level what the victim wants? Or is the state going to be prosecuting abortion providers for giving a rape victim a desperately-wanted abortion over the objections of said rape victim?
harukakamiya 28th-Jan-2013 11:23 pm (UTC)
oh joy do I now get to hate my state of residence because of the fuckers running it or what

IT'S NOBODY'S GODDAMN BUSINESS BUT MY OWN IF I CHOOSE TO ABORT BECAUSE I GOT RAPED. A BABY IS NOT LEGITIMATE EVIDENCE OF A RAPE. BUT OFC MY OWN WORD DOESN'T COUNT FOR SHIT AND FUCKING LOOK AT ALL THE RAPISTS THAT ACTUALLY GET CONVICTED AND THROWN IN JAIL.

/breathes

/please pray/hope/whatever that this bill doesn't pass and also that I never get raped

/PLEASE NEW MEXICO PLEASE DON'T DO THIS I WANT TO STAY LIKING LIVING HERE
kyra_neko_rei 28th-Jan-2013 11:59 pm (UTC)
No shit!

Seriously, when someone's word that they're raped is believable enough to deny them abortion based on it but not believable enough to for a conviction, something is fucking wrong.
dw_10rosefan 28th-Jan-2013 11:32 pm (UTC)
Oh good lord! *facepalm*

I hope this bill never passes, it would be so wrong!
fairwells 29th-Jan-2013 12:31 am (UTC)
I'm tired of the GOP victimizing the victims over and over again. With language like "legitimate rape," the GOP is like a terrorist group on women everywhere.
paksenarrion2 29th-Jan-2013 03:16 am (UTC)
This times 1000.

fuck the GOP and this lady can go straight to hell. Do no pass go, do not collect $200.
fairwells 29th-Jan-2013 11:12 pm (UTC)
I'm with you bb.
kitschaster 29th-Jan-2013 01:12 am (UTC)
Oh, yeah, that makes it better.

Please go on about how this is going to lower rape in the state of NM? If anything, any man seeking to forcibly get a woman pregnant will rejoice at this, because once the baby is here then he can sue for visitation rights and continue to abuse the woman. Wow. It's like it was written by a panel of rapists or something, I can't even.
angelofdeath275 29th-Jan-2013 03:31 am (UTC)
well at least she came out out in the open and said it. just another way for GOP to attack abortion and rape victims.

but srsly abortion providers have it so rough...its times like these that i want to become one.
defacetheessays 29th-Jan-2013 06:04 am (UTC)
punishing women in any and every way they possibly can
boundbyash 29th-Jan-2013 06:05 am (UTC)
This is so seriously wrong on every level. It doesn't even make sense from a forensics points of view - I am assuming by "tampering with evidence" they mean the fetus's DNA (which would prove who the rapist was), but surely they can get that DNA from an aborted fetus. So once again, they don't know what they're talking about. Big surprise.
pleasure_past 29th-Jan-2013 01:33 pm (UTC)
I was wondering about the aborted-foetus DNA myself. I mean, it'd be a little weird to have abortion providers asking people if they wanted to take their aborted foetus home in a jar, but it seems like logically it ought to work just as well as DNA from a foetus that is still in the womb. The only problem is that it there would probably be blood from the person carrying the foetus mixed in, but can't they separate that out? (That's an honest question, for people who know more about this topic than I do. Can they separate it out?)

Of course, none of this really matters since they're clearly just doing this out of malice toward women and not out of any actual desire to catch rapists.
tinylegacies 29th-Jan-2013 06:38 pm (UTC)
I have a radical idea... if you want to protect rape victims you should be prosecuting... wait for it... RAPISTS.
This page was loaded Jul 11th 2014, 3:33 am GMT.