Sex-iversity is a question and answer column designed to provide important information and answers to questions regarding sex, sexuality, sexual orientation, sexually transmitted infections and reproductive rights. Voiced by Julia Kristan, a member of Voices for Planned Parenthood branch at the University of Massachusetts and an active volunteer for the Everywoman’s Center on campus, the column is intended to help educate the university community about reproductive health, rights, legislation and responsibilities. Much of the statistical information provided in this column derives from research done through and obtained by Planned Parenthood and its national affiliates.
Q. What did the Partial Birth Abortion Ban signed into law recently do?
A. The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, signed into law on Nov. 5 of this year, prohibits the medical practice of dilation and extraction. Bear in mind the term “partial birth abortion” itself is not a legitimate name of the medical procedure. The medical term is “intact dilation and extraction.” The procedure is rarely used, and quite a difficult choice to make if one’s health is in danger. This procedure is used primarily in the third trimester of pregnancy if and when a woman’s life is in danger or in other cases when the fetus is dead. While the language of the legal document maintains, “a partial birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman,” many other sources, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, give information that there are cases where the procedure is necessary.
While the dilation and extraction procedure is rarely used (it was used in less than 2 percent of abortions in 2000), it has created a tidal wave of activity and debate over women’s rights, the right to life, and Roe v. Wade. Thirty years ago, abortions were deemed legal under Roe. v. Wade, giving women another option for their health and well being regarding childbearing. This act is an attack on the foundation of the Constitutional right to choose certain medical treatment. It has no health exception to protect women. Period. Not in rape, not in incest, not when the woman’s life is at risk.
Dilation and extraction is undoubtedly a tremendously difficult and possibly traumatic experience to go through, one, which I believe no woman, would ever opt to have. When a woman does need such a medical procedure, it is after much thought and consideration of the risks, and for a serious reason. This law seems to have put no thought and consideration to the health of women in the situations requiring a dilation and extraction. This law infringes on women’s right to privacy, as well as interfering in patient-doctor relationships. It takes away an option for doctors to treat patients. It essentially ignores the knowledge of the doctor and the needs of the patient, with no exception.
This law erodes the right to privacy and the right to medical treatment. It’s a foot in the door for law to take away more women’s health rights. The ban criminalizes a recognized medical procedure. Roe v. Wade, oddly enough, already outlaws abortions in the third trimester except to save the life or health of the woman. The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act is a broad and vague document which could possibly be used to criminalize legal second trimester abortions. Its inflammatory language and lack of Constitutionality, however, may lead to it being struck down. Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the Feminist Majority and other organizations have mobilized and begun the legal fight against the law.
If you are interested in taking action, contact VOX here on campus at the email address listed below. There are weekly meetings open to the public to discuss issues and take action. We will be attending the April 25 March for Freedom of Choice on Washington, D.C. There will be transportation provided through the area Planned Parenthood group.
On the Net:www.plannedparenthood.org
Questions? Comments? E-mail [email protected]. Confidentially is respected.
