Scary side of Virginia ultrasound law

[PokaDot]

I don't understand what you're saying. These tests--particularly the ultrasound--*do* in fact approximate assault when they are done via coercion.

Separately, I've read a lot to indicate that the pap smear is not, in fact, such a great test. False negatives are extremely common, and if repeated too frequently it can badly damage the cervix. I'm sure it's a good and useful test in the scheme of things, but it should NOT be a prerequisite to obtain birth control. It is crazy that girls who are virgins are being forced to have Pap smears in order to get the Pill (it happened to me).

The first two docs I got BC from did not give me pap smears to get the pill. The third did, but by that point I was 22 and "should get them anyways"....despite the fact I was a virgin.

[bananacat]

From a doctor's perspective, once the patients reach a certain age, it's just not very likely that they are virgins. There comes a point when it's more likely that a woman is lying about being a virgin than is actually a virgin, thanks to our messed up culture that is obsessed with female virginity. I know I lied about it the first time and I was relatively feminist then, because I thought the doctor could tell my parents. If a woman wants birth control, it's even more likely that she is sexually active. On top of that, there are plenty of women who haven't had PIV sex but don't realize that HPV can be caught through other types of sexual activity, thanks again to our messed up culture that hates to teach young people accurate information about sexual activity. So if I were a doctor I would encourage women to get their paps according to the recommendations even if they were virgins. If she didn't follow through, I would not pressure her. However, I would never make it a requirement for BC in any case, no matter how little or how much sex she has had.

[TinyDancer87]

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/ ... ol/1386256

IDK how to embed videos, but if you haven't seem the SNL clip of this topic, you must see it! :clap:

[ladypuglover]

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/really-with-seth-and-amy-birth-control/1386256

IDK how to embed videos, but if you haven't seem the SNL clip of this topic, you must see it! :clap:

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[TinyDancer87]

Yes, Seth and Amy are my heroes!

[clarinetpower]

I've had two TV ultrasounds.

The first was a few hours after I found out the baby I was carrying was dead.

They had to "make sure", even though the doc could see the torn sac when she did a vaginal exam.

They left me there, with that thing in me, while they went in the hall to chat. The door was open. The room was big and cold. They weren't even talking about me. They were just chatting.

I finally broke. I told them I felt like a "fucking popsicle" and they needed to get in there and get that thing out of me. I was angry, humiliated, and so very sad. I felt violated.

It was a horrible experience, and I was not a rape victim. I can't imagine how awful it would be for a young woman in that position.

Since, I've had another when they wanted to figure out why I couldn't get pregnant. It wasn't pleasant, but I knew it was necessary. This one was better performed. It was in Paris. (The first one was in the US. So please, if it's your hot button issue, don't try to tell me that socialized medicine was to blame.)

I had a go-round with a FB friend recently about this. She told me they had to do them to date the pregnancy accurately, and it was already a part of medical procedure. Then when I asked why they had to add the term "require" to the TV ultrasound in the bill, she stopped answering my questions. My guess is that it's not a standard part of medical procedure preceding an abortion, but not being a medical professional, I don't know for sure.

I have since had 2 children. I've never again had a TV ultrasound. With both my successful pregnancies, I only had regular ultrasounds. With the first, I think I had 2 (I had to have surgery during pregnancy, so they did one just after to be sure things were OK). With my second, just one, and it was the gel on the belly version.

When I was given vaginal exams, the docs could tell by that about how far I was along, and also by measuring. There never seemed to be any question.

I believe this is to shame women. I believe it is cruel. I believe it is a violation. I can't believe that someone honestly thinks they have the right to make this the law. It makes me sick.

[quiningseven]

I think that this bill is ridiculous and I'm opposed to it in every way, shape and form... but I'm wary of pulling out the rape comparison. The way I see it, the problem with comparing it to rape is two-fold: one, it is a medical procedure and the context is different. There are women who are triggered from routine yearly pap smears, too, but that doesn't mean they're forced. I feel that calling it rape in some way diminishes the trauma and violence of actual rape (I imagine some woman who was beaten within an inch of her life and then someone saying, "I feel your pain. I had to get a transvaginal ultrasound.").

Secondly, I feel that getting caught up in the definition of rape, what is rape and what isn't, just distracts everyone from the real problem: that politicians shouldn't be making these decisions for doctors, that it's intended to make hoops for women to jump through and ultimately attempt to take control of fertility away from women, and finally, that's it's being used as a shaming tool to out-and-out prevent abortion. I feel all these points are abhorrent enough without bringing in the question of rape.

THIS!

I feel comparing this to rape is absolutely ridiculous. Is this coercion, maybe, but no woman is being forced to have a vaginal ultrasound. Do you think clinics that currently have VU as part of their pre-abortion policy are raping women who choose to proceed? Are clinics, or states that don't offer medical abortion raping women who choose to then have a surgical abortion? There are enough things to dislike about the bill without bringing rape into it.

[Witsec1]

RICHMOND, Va. - House of Delegates Republicans have rejected a last-ditch bid by Democrats to allow women seeking abortions to opt out of an invasive ultrasonic procedure under anti-abortion legislation set for a final House vote Tuesday.

Legislation that has advanced on the strength of a GOP majority would force women to undergo a "transvaginal ultrasound" that produces fetal images.

An amendment by Del. David Englin, D-Alexandria, would have allowed medical professionals to determine whether images can be obtained without being penetrated by equipment used in the ultrasound.

Women would have to give written consent to such a probe under Englin's amendments, but not to sonograms that are not invasive. The amendment failed on 64-34 vote, setting the bill up for final House passage.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2723439

In other words, VA is requiring the TV ultrasound, whether or not doctors think it is necessary. It does not require that the woman consent to the procedure. I think the rape comparison is apt.

THIS!

I feel comparing this to rape is absolutely ridiculous. Is this coercion, maybe, but no woman is being forced to have a vaginal ultrasound.

.

So coerced penetration is not rape? It's only rape if the victim is completely immobilized?

Do you think clinics that currently have VU as part of their pre-abortion policy are raping women who choose to proceed?

Head-desk. Way to completely miss the fucking point.

Are clinics, or states that don't offer medical abortion raping women who choose to then have a surgical abortion?

Are there really states that outlaw medical abortion but allow surgical? That's all kinds of stupid.

There are enough things to dislike about the bill without bringing rape into it

The legislator who tried to get the amendment allowing docs to waive the procedure if not medically necessary, and to require the woman's written consent, thinks that a legal challenge can be mounted to the bill based on VA's sexual assault laws. That sounds like a good reason to bring rape into it.

[chiccy]

!#@##!#@#! I have no words. That perfectly reasonable, EXTREMELY generous amendment failed!?!?!?! So I guess everyone, not just early pregnancies, now has to have the transvaginal ultrasound....EVEN if the same images could be gotten by other means. Fuck...

I think it is as clear now as it could ever be. This isn't just about the images. This is about punishing women for having abortions. This is about deliberately adding to their pain and humiliation. This is about making them uncomfortable, making them wait, making them "sorry" (as in "you'll be sorry!")...this is just a way for the GOP to sneer at them.

I'm not a liberal; I'm a libertarian/moderate. I am substantially more pro-life than all of my friends and probably the majority of people on this forum. It doesn't take a militant liberal to see how much is bloody fucking wrong with this law. The fact that this PERFECTLY reasonable amendment was shot down is just the last straw. What is wrong with this country?!?!?!?!?!

[Witsec7]

Has anyone checked VA law to see if nonconsensual penetration with an object is legally defined as rape in that state? I would but I'm really on the run right now.

[Witsec1]

Experiencedd, the crime is referred to as "object sexual penetration". The fact that the legislators rejected the amendments requiring medical necessity and written consent is what makes it a crime.

Here's an article from Reproductive Health Reality Check:

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2 ... s-delegate

"Virginia Delegate Says Mandatory Ultrasound Bill Will Turn Doctors Into "Criminals" Under the Law

Author image

by Andy Kopsa

February 17, 2012 - 6:53pm (Print)

"[object sexual penetration] is a new issue I plan to raise when we debate the Senate version of this bill next week. But surely decent people who disagree about a woman's right to choose can at least agree she shouldn't be vaginally penetrated without her consent."

Englin told RH Reality Check:

"If it becomes law as it's currently written, the ultrasound mandate being pushed by anti-choice Virginia Republicans would subject women to a medically-unnecessary invasion of their bodies without their consent. That's a moral outrage that every decent person should oppose, regardless of partisan politics. Worse still, it appears as if the lack of any consent requirement would turn doctors into criminals by compelling them to commit object sexual penetration, which is a heinous sex crime under Virginia law."

The law he cites:

§ 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration; penalty.

A. An accused shall be guilty of inanimate or animate object sexual penetration if he or she penetrates the labia majora or anus of a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, other than for a bona fide medical purpose, or causes such complaining witness to so penetrate his or her own body with an object or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in such acts with any other person or to penetrate, or to be penetrated by, an animal, and

1. The complaining witness is less than 13 years of age, or

2. The act is accomplished against the will of the complaining witness, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person, or through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness. (emphasis mine).

The punishment can be up to life in prison but no less than five years.

[wildcatgrrl]

The rape statute only covers sexual intercourse. 18.2-61. Rape.

However, there is a separate legislation dealing with foreign objects, and it has a "bona fide medical purpose" exemption.: 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration; penalty

A. An accused shall be guilty of inanimate or animate object sexual penetration if he or she penetrates the labia majora or anus of a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, other than for a bona fide medical purpose, or causes such complaining witness to so penetrate his or her own body with an object or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in such acts with any other person or to penetrate, or to be penetrated by, an animal, and

1. The complaining witness is less than 13 years of age, or

2. The act is accomplished against the will of the complaining witness, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person, or through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness.

B. Inanimate or animate object sexual penetration is a felony punishable by confinement in the state correctional facility for life or for any term not less than five years.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... +18.2-67.2

[Witsec1]

The rape statute only covers sexual intercourse. 18.2-61. Rape.

However, there is a separate legislation dealing with foreign objects, and it has a "bona fide medical purpose" exemption.: 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration; penalty

See my comment above - the legislature specifically rejected an amendment that would have allowed doctors to waive the procedure if it served no medical purpose.

[wildcatgrrl]

See my comment above - the legislature specifically rejected an amendment that would have allowed doctors to waive the procedure if it served no medical purpose.

Yup.

BTW, I had no idea your avatar was Hugh Laurie. :doh:

[quiningseven]

So coerced penetration is not rape? It's only rape if the victim is completely immobilized?

Head-desk. Way to completely miss the fucking point.

Are there really states that outlaw medical abortion but allow surgical? That's all kinds of stupid.

The legislator who tried to get the amendment allowing docs to waive the procedure if not medically necessary, and to require the woman's written consent, thinks that a legal challenge can be mounted to the bill based on VA's sexual assault laws. That sounds like a good reason to bring rape into it.

It was my understanding that rape required lack of consent. By calling a vaginal ultrasound rapes when it is a prerequisite for abortion you are implying that women are either incapable of giving consent, that they are being held down and forcibly penetrated when they do not consent, or that not being able to procure an abortion is enough of a duress to constitue rape. I assume you must mean the latter, as the former two are just too ridiculous to even entertain. If it is the latter, then clinics that require VU before an abortion procedure are also raping women. You say that I'm missing the point- but if requiring a VU before an abortion procedure is rape, whether as a clinic decision or for liability reasons (some of which would certainly unnecessary), then some clinics have been raping women for some time now.

If the point I'm supposedly missing is that health care should be up to the individual and their doctor/clinic, I assure you I wholeheartedly agree, and can make that point perfectly well without calling it rape.

[Witsec1]

See the posts above on why the legislator whose amendments regarding medical necessity and consent were rejected, feels that this law rises to the level of sexual assault (object sexual penetration) under VA criminal code.

Are there any clinics that require a TV ultrasound if the doctor feels the abortion can be performed safely without it? Citation please.

[Witsec1]

If the point I'm supposedly missing is that health care should be up to the individual and their doctor/clinic, I assure you I wholeheartedly agree, and can make that point perfectly well without calling it rape.

I have no problem calling it sexual assault, because the legislature made it mandatory regardless of medical necessity, and without proof of consent.

[No Fun My Babe]

How is it not rape when the "choice" is either to have the ultrasound or carry the fetus? With this law, one can't exactly shop around for abortions, and some women may not have the means to go to another state.

"Judge, I told her that if she wanted something to eat, she'd have to let me fuck her. She said yes, so it's totally not rape!"

The ultrasound should only be performed if there's a valid medical reason for it, and that's something between a woman and her doctor, not the government.

[Witsec7]

If the woman has to be responsible for the cost of the US its likely many low income women will not be able to afford both the test and the medical procedure.

[quiningseven]

See the posts above on why the legislator whose amendments regarding medical necessity and consent were rejected, feels that this law rises to the level of sexual assault (object sexual penetration) under VA criminal code.

Are there any clinics that require a TV ultrasound if the doctor feels the abortion can be performed safely without it? Citation please.

I do agree that it is shitty that such a reasonable amendment was rejected- though frankly I don't think the bill will pass without one like it.

There aren't clinics that require TV ultrasound in all cases, there are some though that require ultrasound, and because of the early dates those ultrasounds end up being TV. There are, however, other restrictions that are placed on abortion clinics currently that come awfully close to the invasiveness of this law and which I think we would still say do not warrant comparison with rape. Many clinics aren't allowed to dispense drugs for medical abortion, for example, but we would not say that clinics that can, or choose to, only perform d&e are raping women, or that women who would prefer medical abortion and don't want a d&e are incapable of consenting to one. I agree that the law is there to demean women, just as the laws in some states that restrict who can dispense abortificant drugs are there to make the procedure more invasive and demeaning. I still don't think it's rape. Maybe I'm just splitting hairs here, but I suppose a big part of the reason it's a dumb idea to compare this to rape is that it results in this sort of bickering, and the focus is on this incendiary term rather than on the actual issue.

[chiccy]

"Judge, I told her that if she wanted something to eat, she'd have to let me fuck her. She said yes, so it's totally not rape!"

I was about to say something similar. And what if the pregnancy is life-threatening? Then it starts to approach the territory of rape with a threat of violence. "You'll let me penetrate you with this for no good reason, or I'm going to leave you to die." If the woman doesn't want to be penetrated, then her remaining option is to die.

[chiccy]

I do agree that it is shitty that such a reasonable amendment was rejected- though frankly I don't think the bill will pass without one like it.

It has already passed, if I'm not mistaken.

[Witsec1]

It has passed, and the governor has stated he will sign.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... eason.html

Englin is making a last-ditch effort to have his amendment included by the governor. Apparently in VA a governor can amend a bill, not just approve or veto.

ETA: I'm not holding my breath that the amendments will be added.

[quiningseven]

Am I blind? I'm reading the bill and don't see anything requiring TV ultrasound- just ultrasound generally...

ETA: yep- no mention of TV at all in the bill. If fetal age can be determined with external ultrasound, that's all that's required.

[No Fun My Babe]

A Republican supermajority has muscled two of the most restrictive anti-abortion bills in years through the Virginia House, despite bitter yet futile objections from Democrats, with one GOP delegate deriding most of the procedures as “matters of lifestyle convenience.â€

Delegate Bob Marshall's House Bill 1 would effectively outlaw all Virginia abortions by declaring that the rights of persons apply from the moment sperm and egg unite. It passed on a 66-32 vote.

And on a 63-36 vote, the House passed a bill that requires women to have a “transvaginal ultrasound†before undergoing abortions.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/blogs/firs ... 37008.html