Scary side of Virginia ultrasound law

[chiccy]

So, the Virginia state legislature just passed a bill that women have to have an ultrasound before getting an abortion. In the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, which is when the vast majority of women get abortions, the ultrasound requires vaginal penetration with a probe. So it's literally forced penetration, which meets the state definition of rape. It's discussed in this article. I'm personally convinced and pretty appalled. What do you guys think?

[valsa]

I don't think there's a non-scary side to that law.

[Guest Anonymous]

Playing devil's advocate here, but wouldn't an ultrasound also detect things like cysts, tumors, etc. I know that's not the point of the law, but just saying....

[valsa]

Playing devil's advocate here, but wouldn't an ultrasound also detect things like cysts, tumors, etc. I know that's not the point of the law, but just saying....

Just saying what?

Should we create a law requiring any person getting any medical treatment to first undergo a full body scan or MRI, just on the off chance it might pick something up?

[ItISjustme]

FFS! I may have my reservations about abortion but this is appalling. It is no more than an attempt to threaten and intimidate women and I can't imagine the doctors are too thrilled about it, either.

[Littlebirdy]

Tools have to be inserted into the vagina for the abortion. Also, a pelvic exam is usually done unless the new u/s requirement would take the place of that.

I just read the website of our local abortion clinic and they do a pelvic exam and an ultrasound to accurately date the pregnancy. I do not live in VA btw.

I'm not defending this bill, but it really seems kind of silly to me to make a huge deal out of the vaginal transducer when you're at a clinic and most definitely going to be "penetrated" with other things.

[ItISjustme]

Tools have to be inserted into the vagina for the abortion. Also, a pelvic exam is usually done unless the new u/s requirement would take the place of that.

I just read the website of our local abortion clinic and they do a pelvic exam and an ultrasound to accurately date the pregnancy. I do not live in VA btw.

I'm not defending this bill, but it really seems kind of silly to me to make a huge deal out of the vaginal transducer when you're at a clinic and most definitely going to be "penetrated" with other things.

The whole point is that THIS ultrasound is not necessary.

[lovefromgirl]

Tools have to be inserted into the vagina for the abortion. Also, a pelvic exam is usually done unless the new u/s requirement would take the place of that.

I just read the website of our local abortion clinic and they do a pelvic exam and an ultrasound to accurately date the pregnancy. I do not live in VA btw.

I'm not defending this bill, but it really seems kind of silly to me to make a huge deal out of the vaginal transducer when you're at a clinic and most definitely going to be "penetrated" with other things.

Voluntarily penetrated. You get an abortion, you know what you've signed up for, and you have the option to be sedated or completely out for the penetration. You are also forgetting that the law would require the provider to show the woman, who frankly may not want to see what's in there.

[valsa]

I'm not defending this bill, but it really seems kind of silly to me to make a huge deal out of the vaginal transducer rape when you're at a clinic sexually active and most definitely going to be "penetrated" with other things by other men.

There. Fixed that for you.

A woman should only have things put into her body that she consents to, for a reason she consents to.

[Guest Anonymous]

Just saying what?

Should we create a law requiring any person getting any medical treatment to first undergo a full body scan or MRI, just on the off chance it might pick something up?

No of course not. Sorry, didn't do a good job of conveying what I wanted to say. What I meant was wouldn't it be possible that a woman might want an ultrasound for other medical reasons? I'm not saying I support this law.

[valsa]

No of course not. Sorry, didn't do a good job of conveying what I wanted to say. What I meant was wouldn't it be possible that a woman might want an ultrasound for other medical reasons? I'm not saying I support this law.

If she wants an ultrasound, what's stopping her from getting on? Ultrasounds weren't illegal before this bill passed.

[ItISjustme]

There. Fixed that for you.

A woman should only have things put into her body that she consents to, for a reason she consents to.

:clap:

[Mecca]

No of course not. Sorry, didn't do a good job of conveying what I wanted to say. What I meant was wouldn't it be possible that a woman might want an ultrasound for other medical reasons? I'm not saying I support this law.

Then SHE can ask for an ultrasound. It is not the place of lawmakers to force medical procedures on women.

[SayNoToMullets]

Voluntarily penetrated. You get an abortion, you know what you've signed up for, and you have the option to be sedated or completely out for the penetration. You are also forgetting that the law would require the provider to show the woman, who frankly may not want to see what's in there.

Exactly. I find this law insulting to women, in that it assumes that women don't understand the contents of their uterus enough to make the decision that's right for them. That oh, once they see the little baby in there, they'll change their feeble little minds :roll:

[emmiedahl]

I used to be kinda lukewarm on this issue becaue I thought, 'if it makes them feel better to be assured that women are making informed decisions...'

And that was stupid. The Republicans are not trying to inform anybody of anything. It looks like a ball of cells, big fucking surprise. And it makes women have to go through another fucking step to get what should be routine medical care. That is their point: conservatives cannot take down abortion, but they will chisel away at it until it takes women months to jump through the hoops and then, sorry ladies, it's too late.

There is no other routine medical procedure that requires this level of informed consent because it is fucking ridiculous.

Geniebelle, if a woman wants a vaginal ultrasound, she can get one. What does that have to do with her abortion?

[SpeakNow]

I think if it is a medically good idea to do an ultrasound before an abortion, then it should be done (and the woman should not have to watch if she does not want to). This law, however, has nothing to do with whether or not such an ultrasound is "medically necessary" and everything to do with chipping away at abortion rights. That's where I draw the line.

[crazyforkate]

Okay, I've never had an abortion, but my impression was always that most providers did an ultrasound anyway to make sure there wasn't an ectopic pregnancy or some other abnormality. And that transvaginal had to be done at that point in the pregnancy. I suppose the doctor would inform/ask her first?

But if the woman's forced to look at the picture, or the ultrasound is for other reasons than health, then yes, that is scary.

[Islandmom]

From what I understand, most doctors will do an ultrasound for dating anyway, but without this law it is optional for the woman to look if she wants. I know a doc who has to give the women info as mandated by the state but tells them she has to give it to them, they can read it or not. Most chose not to as most are already informed and sure of their choice. It's not something a woman enters into lightly. For ultrasounds, she does them, but the screen is turned toward her, and it is just for dating purposes and to preclude etopic and other issues that would effect the procedure. The woman does not have to look, or even turn her head away if she doesn't want to. IMHO that is how it should be if an ultrasound must be done. Just my 2 cents :)

[Sola]

Okay, I've never had an abortion, but my impression was always that most providers did an ultrasound anyway to make sure there wasn't an ectopic pregnancy or some other abnormality. And that transvaginal had to be done at that point in the pregnancy. I suppose the doctor would inform/ask her first?

But if the woman's forced to look at the picture, or the ultrasound is for other reasons than health, then yes, that is scary.

Not in the UK. An ultrasound is only done if you are unsure of the dates and its a toss up between medical and surgical abortion. Though some arsehole conservative is trying to bring in a similar law here. Wont happen though. Most abortions here are on the NHS and an unnecessary scan wastes money.

[Katiebug]

FWIW, they don't always have to do transvaginal ultrasound in the first trimester. My only transvaginal ultrasound was at 5 weeks when I had a little spotting, and even then the doctor could visualize the pregnancy as being uterine via abdominal U/S and only had to use the transvaginal to measure the yolk sac and fetal pole. My OB was able to get a good abdominal dating ultrasound at 8 weeks, and at 12 weeks for the nuchal translucency scan there was no problem at all with abdominal ultrasound.

I think this law is deeply disturbing on pretty much every level, though.

[Deleted03]

FWIW, they don't always have to do transvaginal ultrasound in the first trimester. My only transvaginal ultrasound was at 5 weeks when I had a little spotting, and even then the doctor could visualize the pregnancy as being uterine via abdominal U/S and only had to use the transvaginal to measure the yolk sac and fetal pole. My OB was able to get a good abdominal dating ultrasound at 8 weeks, and at 12 weeks for the nuchal translucency scan there was no problem at all with abdominal ultrasound.

I think this law is deeply disturbing on pretty much every level, though.

they only want the vaginal US so that you can get a good look at the embryo right? Vs an abdominal that would just confirm location and roughly size... I thought that's what I understood when the law was introduced...

[Nothing2CHere]

Exactly. I find this law insulting to women, in that it assumes that women don't understand the contents of their uterus enough to make the decision that's right for them. That oh, once they see the little baby in there, they'll change their feeble little minds :roll:

Have these lawmakers ever SEEN an early ultrasound image? I had a dating ultrasound done around 12 weeks for this baby my husband and I purposely conceived, and when the image came on the screen I said, "It looks like a space alien!" It does not look like a baby yet that early on.

[mirele]

What's disturbing about this law is the legislature mandating a procedure. It's no longer about the doctor-patient relationship.

What is it about Republicans? They're so busy trying to shrink government so that it can fit into a woman's uterus. Yuck.

[lessa]

This law won't matter soon if the other bill going through the VA legislature passing. The House passed a 'personhood' bill this week that states life begins at conception. First step in outlawing abortion and most forms of birth control.

Now that law if far scarier.

[Visionoyahweh]

I think a visual of the object women have to be raped with is the best explanation of this bill: