ONTD Political

Planned Parenthood Suspends Pill Abortions in Wis.

2:51 pm - 04/20/2012
Planned Parenthood ended nonsurgical abortions at its Wisconsin clinics Friday because of a new state law that subjects doctors who perform abortions but don't follow certain procedures to criminal penalties.

The law, signed by Gov. Scott Walker two weeks ago after the Republican-controlled state Legislature passed it earlier this year, took effect Friday.

It mandates that women having nonsurgical abortions visit the same doctor three times and that doctors ensure the woman is having the procedure voluntarily and without coercion. Failure to follow those requirements could result in felony charges against the doctor.

The law does not affect emergency contraception, known as the morning-after pill.

Planned Parenthood president and chief executive officer Teri Huyck said because of confusion over the new law, nonsurgical abortions are being suspended. Planned Parenthood will continue to provide surgical abortions at its clinics in Madison, Milwaukee and the Appleton area, its leaders said.


"The added risks of felony penalties for physicians who provide medication abortion are unnecessary and intended to threaten a physician's ability to provide women with medication abortion," Huyck said. "The decision to end a pregnancy is a complex one, specific to each woman and her individual circumstances. Decisions about childbearing should be made by a woman in consultation with her family and doctor — not by politicians."

Four other states — Arizona, Kansas, Nebraska and South Dakota — have similar laws to Wisconsin's new law, according to the New York-based Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research organization that supports abortion rights. There is also a similar law set to take effect in Tennessee in July, and legislatures in Alabama, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri and Oklahoma were considering like-minded proposals, according to the Institute.

In Wisconsin on Friday, Planned Parenthood supporters denounced the new law, while abortion opponents praised the development.

Lisa Subeck, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin, said the law adds unnecessary and intrusive restrictions for abortion providers.

And Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, who is one of four Democrats running against Walker in a recall election, said he would work to overturn the law if elected.


Abortion opponents, however, praised the development.

Barbara Lyons, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, called Planned Parenthood's decision a "true victory for Wisconsin women."

"This common sense law protects women at a time when it is most needed and provides help if she is a potential or real victim of domestic abuse," Lyons said in a statement.


Planned Parenthood said about 25 percent of women who terminate pregnancies use the pill-induced abortion method, which requires a woman to take two drugs within the first nine weeks of pregnancy.

Source

Abortion opponents, however, praised the development.
You said that twice, Scott Bauer.

This is seriously a new low. Cutting out 1-in-4 abortions, raising the doctor's visits to the highest number I've heard of and increasing the overall cost to the woman three times, four times, five times?? Yeah, I'll bet abortion opponents praise this shit. Hopefully, Wisconsin will get rid of all their horrendous legislators soon and they can work to overturn this. Just ridiculous.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
narwhalhugs 20th-Apr-2012 11:51 pm (UTC)
Sometimes I'm tempted to shit in front of his office. Since he's just trying to piss us off in every way possible out of spite, I feel obligated to do the same.
tsaraven 20th-Apr-2012 11:54 pm (UTC)
Do women who want to continue their pregnancies have to prove it's voluntary and not coerced as well?
nikoel 20th-Apr-2012 11:59 pm (UTC)
That would be "nice", wouldn't it? But no, of course this has nothing to do whatsoever with the well-being of women and everything to do with restricting abortion.
doverz 20th-Apr-2012 11:58 pm (UTC)
Fuck this. Wisconsin really, really needs to have a Democrat be governor or for the Democrats to control the Senate.
lilyginny27 20th-Apr-2012 11:58 pm (UTC)
My great-grandfather lost his first wife to a self-abortion. With all the laws that are coming about, we will be seeing more and more of them. While I wouldn't be here if she hadn't died (grandpa's from wife #2), I wouldn't wish what happened to my family on anyone.
nikoel 21st-Apr-2012 12:00 am (UTC)
That is incredibly sad. It amazes me that anyone can think that a woman losing her life is an "unfortunate consequence".
vexed_artist 20th-Apr-2012 11:58 pm (UTC)
""This common sense law protects women at a time when it is most needed and provides help if she is a potential or real victim of domestic abuse," Lyons said in a statement."

What?

What?

No, it fucking does not! If a woman is in an abusive situation, and is seeking an abortion because of that, forcing her to see a doctor three times before they'll do anything isn't going to protect or help her! It's going to do the exact opposite!

If you want to protect women from abusive SOs, draft legislation that more heavily penalizes domestic violence and provide more effective protection for victims - don't try to pretty up your anti-choice bullshit by claiming that it's "to protect abuse victims."
kaelstra 21st-Apr-2012 12:29 am (UTC)
Fucking A+
sixdemonhag 21st-Apr-2012 12:28 am (UTC)
You know, if her hulking, mean boyfriend is hanging out and hovering over her every word and movement, and she seems a bit sketchy about the whole thing, then you might want to take her aside and have a private conversation with her. Otherwise, I think it's safe to assume that a woman who makes an appointment for a medical abortion and shows up for it is actually wanting just that.
kaelstra 21st-Apr-2012 12:28 am (UTC)
I am so sick of this ridiculous shit where we force women to see doctors more and more just to get an abortion, and run up the cost for them, and thus, effectively shut down anyone who can't afford to see a doctor legally to wash down a pill, or to have three damn follow-up visits. Will insurance even cover that? Even if it does, I'm sure not everyone's will, and not everyone will have insurance at all.

This is such bullshit. I hate this country right now.
nikoel 21st-Apr-2012 12:42 am (UTC)
That's a good point about insurance. I wonder if they have to cover it since it's a legal requirement for the patient or if they'll be allowed to deny payment on the subsequent appointments. I've been wondering that about the transvaginal bills too. No war on women, huh?
sixdemonhag 21st-Apr-2012 12:35 am (UTC)
After reading about that one woman who had someone from out of state send her RU-486 I have wondered if there is some network of sympathetic people out there? Women who need it in states where it is not available, obtaining it from people in places where it is? I'm about sick of all this anti-choice, we know better than you do crap, and I'd love to be a part of something to get around all that.
nikoel 21st-Apr-2012 12:43 am (UTC)
Yeah, me too. It makes me wish I was independently wealthy. I would so love to fund something like that. It would be nice to know if anyone is doing it already so I could donate.
seraangel 21st-Apr-2012 01:25 am (UTC)
You know, I completely forgot that Americans have to pay for each doctor's visit, and so I was side eyeing this and thinking 'Why don't the Doctors just schedule three back to back visits in the one week then?' and then I realised, America and no public healthcare.

This sucks guys, I'm sorry your state governments are a bunch of d*ckbags. :(
liret 21st-Apr-2012 10:29 am (UTC)
If the nearest doctor who provides abortions is five hours away - or more - even if they're free, three visits in a week means having to get there and back (so you'd better have a car) and stay nearby for days, which is only possible if someone can afford a place to stay, get time off work, arrange for childcare, ect, ect.
kyra_neko_rei 21st-Apr-2012 01:27 am (UTC)
It mandates that women having nonsurgical abortions visit the same doctor three times and that doctors ensure the woman is having the procedure voluntarily and without coercion.

And meanwhile, every rape victim in the state will still be asked if she really did enough to make her refusal clear to the rapist.

In any case, how do they expect the clinic to identify and deal with coercion when they don't have the means to prevent the threat from being carried out? It's not as if the clinic staff can arrest someone accompanying a patient on the spot, on her say-so, and keep him there while the victim goes and safely moves out. If he's threatening something at home, like pets or kids, or she has her, say, necessary legal documents there, or if he owns the car and she'll lose her job without transportation, or she has nowhere to go, she'll be just as invested as he is in the clinic's not finding out about it. Because all they can do is refuse to perform the abortion and possibly prevent him from beating her in their building or leaving with her. They can't do anything past that, and if getting out of the abortion were the most important thing to her, the coercion would fail.

Want to eliminate coercion to get an abortion? Make it easier for women to safeguard themselves, their loved ones, and their personal property from their abusers, and make it easier for them to leave and get by independently of them. Guess which party tends to support things that do that? One guess and it doesn't start with an 'R' and if its mascot has a trunk, it's because it's going on vacation or possibly showing off the back end of its new car.
ladypolitik 21st-Apr-2012 01:27 am (UTC)
Flabbergasting.
ceilidh 21st-Apr-2012 01:55 am (UTC)
It mandates that women having nonsurgical abortions visit the same doctor three times

SUPER SHITTY LAW. Do they mandate that women giving birth and choosing a OB practice with multiple physicians see the same doctor three times? I don't think so.
not_emily 21st-Apr-2012 02:15 am (UTC)
I'm trying so hard not to scream at my laptop right not.

Barbara Lyons, executive director of Wisconsin Right to Life, called Planned Parenthood's decision a "true victory for Wisconsin women."

SHUT THE FUCK UP. When women lose the ability to make medical decisions for themselves, THAT IS NOT A FUCKING VICTORY.
dncingmalkavian 21st-Apr-2012 01:38 pm (UTC)
This. My other half was just remarking (sarcastically, of course), that society would totally fall apart if women were actually treated like adults.
xerox78 21st-Apr-2012 02:39 am (UTC)
It mandates that women having nonsurgical abortions visit the same doctor three times and that doctors ensure the woman is having the procedure voluntarily and without coercion.

These people talk about "coercion" so much, I am beginning to wonder if they are speaking from experience...like a mistress being coerced so they can hide an affair or coercing their teen/young adult daughters so they don't look like the Palins or because she got knocked up by someone of color from the wrong side of the tracks "inappropriate".
spiffynamehere tw domestic abuse21st-Apr-2012 02:41 am (UTC)
'"This common sense law protects women at a time when it is most needed and provides help if she is a potential or real victim of domestic abuse," Lyons said in a statement.'

WHAT THE GODDAMN FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT ASSWIPE, YOU ARE MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR ABUSE VICTIMS. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY WOMEN HAVE THEIR BIRTH CONTROL SABOTAGED BY THEIR ABUSER TO MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO LEAVE? DO YOU KNOW HOW HARD IT WOULD BE FOR THEM TO GET AN ABORTION AT ALL, LET ALONE THREE DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENTS? HOW ARE THEY GOING TO PAY FOR IT? HOW ARE THEY EVEN GOING TO GET THERE THREE TIMES WITHOUT THEIR ABUSER KNOWING?

WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?!
zeonchar Re: tw domestic abuse21st-Apr-2012 07:42 pm (UTC)
I wonder if doctors would be willing to get around this by scheduling all three appointments back to back in one day? Or does the law have something prohibiting that? This is just fucking ridiculous.
sweeetkiwi 21st-Apr-2012 03:52 am (UTC)
Now I am really ashamed of my goverment.

Edited at 2012-04-21 03:52 am (UTC)
dearmisterecho 21st-Apr-2012 04:31 am (UTC)
Um, no. I doubt that if a woman is being coerced into an abortion, the coercer is gonna give up after a couple doctor's visits. So fuck you very much for trying to hid behind this bullshit, solve-nothing excuse.
tabaqui 21st-Apr-2012 05:08 am (UTC)
FUCK YOU ALL. God, i am so very damn *sick of this shite*.
hashire 21st-Apr-2012 05:51 am (UTC)
Scott Bauer is an asshole and sucks at what he does.

I sat through one public hearing for this (on the Senate side). Lisa Subeck was the only one to testify against the bill, and the rest of the women there were for it. Afterward, Leah Vukmir and Mary Lazich came out and hugged all of them. My friend who went to the public hearing for the Assembly side said that the same women testified with the same testimony. One thing they had in common (for the most part) was that they all got pregnant as teens. When Chris Taylor asked if they had access to comprehensive sex education, the answer was no.

Julaine Appling and Barbara Lyons were also hovering outside the Assembly the night this passed. Michelle Litjens went out and had a nice chat with Lyons (whom I didn't recognize at the time, but I do have pictures of her there anyway) when it did pass. She also said it wasn't an abortion bill at one point.

Just some fun facts. At least we know for sure that Litjens is already gone. So is Jeffy Fitz (and a handful of others), so we're on our way to getting the bad ones out.
maladaptive 21st-Apr-2012 12:41 pm (UTC)
So when the fuck does this reach an "undue burden"? Jayzus.
zeonchar 21st-Apr-2012 07:35 pm (UTC)
"This common sense law protects women at a time when it is most needed and provides help if she is a potential or real victim of domestic abuse," Lyons said in a statement.

What does this have to do with abortion at all? It's not helping women, it's further hindering their ability to make decisions about their own health and body.
sexcasually 22nd-Apr-2012 03:30 am (UTC)
god i cant wait til he's recalled.
serenityone 22nd-Apr-2012 06:03 pm (UTC)
Scott Walker and the Republican legislators in this state don't care about women(the equal pay act was repealed earlier this month), or children(Badgercare, our free insurance for low income families and children, was one of the first things Walker tried to axe with the Budget "Repair" Bill last year), and I very much doubt they give a crap about abuse victims either (In Milwaukee Co Walker wanted to cut funding to domestic violence shelters in 2004).

To claim that he/they do anything in the name of protecting women is utter bullshit. Fuckers.

Edited at 2012-04-22 06:04 pm (UTC)
bleakwinters 23rd-Apr-2012 05:08 pm (UTC)
I wish these Republicans would take a good, hard look at Communist Romania pre-1989, at all the deaths caused by abortions, at all the women who took teas that may or may not work, who took knitting needles to their uteri, who injected saline solutions and gods know what else and all this knowing they could go to prison if caught.

Is that what they want for the US? Hundreds, if not thousands of deaths that are preventable? Oh wait, yes, I forget, fetuses are people, no one else is. Ceausescu high fives you morons from the grave.
araeil 23rd-Apr-2012 06:25 pm (UTC)
As a resident of Wisconsin who has used the pill abortion, this saddens me. The pill abortion made a difficult, but not regretful decision easier, and more private.

I'll never understand why the choices a woman makes and her healthcare are anyone else's business.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
This page was loaded May 20th 2013, 12:37 pm GMT.