S.D. bill appears to make fertility treatment a crime

[RC]

S.D. bill appears to make fertility treatment a crime
By Jane Ahlin,
Published Sunday, March 05, 2006
Here are a few terms and definitions used in the South Dakota abortion bill expected to challenge Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme court case that resulted in the legalization of abortion. (Note the insistent use of “fertilization.”)

-“Pregnant,” the human female reproductive condition, of having a living unborn human being within her body throughout the entire embryonic and fetal ages of the unborn child from fertilization to full gestation and childbirth.

-“Unborn human being,” an individual living member of the species, homo sapiens, throughout the entire embryonic and fetal ages of the unborn child from fertilization to full gestation and childbirth.

-“Fertilization,” that point in time when a male human sperm penetrates the zona pellucida of a female human ovum.

Later in the bill is this provision:

<SNIP>

Begin with this paragraph that criminalizes abortion. Among the problems not considered in the bill is one involving fertility treatments where multi-fetal pregnancies may result, particularly in vitro fertilization. The in vitro process includes the creation of extra embryos, each of which by the definition of the South Dakota law is a “living unborn human being.” In order to achieve pregnancy, several embryos are implanted in a woman’s womb with the expectation that some will not develop.

If too many develop, some embryos are “selectively reduced” when the woman is between two and three months pregnant. (Usually, a needle is inserted through the woman’s abdomen and potassium chloride is injected into the fetal heart chambers. The remaining fetus or fetuses have a better chance of developing normally and reaching full term.)

So here’s the question: Will South Dakota disallow fertility treatments? Certainly, as the bill reads now, fertility physicians are abortionists and criminals. On the other hand, if legislators make an exception for fertility clinics, the basic premise for the bill that defines a fertilized egg as a full-fledged human being goes right out the window.

http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=119551§ion=Opinion

* * * * * * *

This nation's views on human sexuality are so twisted and perverted the sickos can't slice hairs thin enough to accommodate reality.
Calling a one cell fertalized egg an unborn human being? Even the Bible did not give any rights to new borns till 30 days after birth.

[LizW]

1. They won't criminalize the fertility treatment

just the reduction of the number of fetuses. So a woman who has five or ten embryos inserted will be forced to carry all that implant, even if it reduces the chances of a healthy delivery, and even if it puts her health at risk.

News stories have for some time been glorifying women who refuse selective reduction and give birth to huge numbers of babies.

[HockeyMom]

2. Fertilization?

Bye, bye IUD's. Probably even plain old birth control pills too.

As so many have said, it's the Handmaiden's Tale come to the US of A.

[catabryna]

3. Interesting...

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, but in making exceptions for birth control methods such as IUDs and PCPs, the language seems to have left the door open to use of the emergency contraceptives, as well. I wanted to re-read the article, but the second time I was required to log on.

And yes, this is going to definitely present a problem for fertility clinics. The issues surrounding selective reduction were one of the reasons why we chose adoption. To implant fewer eggs changes the percentages and could increase the number of treatments needed to produce one pregnancy and, of course, each cycle is very expensive.

[ShortnFiery]

10. According to the nut case fundies,

emergency contraception (the day-after pill) equates to "an abortion."

Why? The fundies define PREGNANCY as "when the sperm unites with the egg" - unlike the medical world (and seemingly everyone else) views it - "when the fertilized egg is implanted in the uterus."

Therefore, South Dakota will BAN emergency contraception because in their narrow and misogynist view of the world, every fertilized egg destroyed is "an abortion."

Freaks! IMO, their not so hidden agenda is to push women down to second class citizenship.

[catabryna]

12. I understand what you are saying BUT...

the following language appears contradictory to their "definitions".

"Nothing of this Act may be construed to prohibit the sale, use, prescription, or administration of a contraceptive measure, drug or chemical, if it is administered prior to the time when a pregnancy could be determined through conventional medical testing and if the contraceptive measure is sold, used, prescribed, or administered in accordance with manufacturer instructions."

Emphasis mine.

A woman has no way of knowing if she is pregnant until a couple of days after implantation and it takes a fertilized egg anywhere from five to seven days to travel down the fallopian tube before implantation can occur. So, a "conventional medical testing" even at a minimum is a store-bought pregnancy test. You can't get a positive for at least 6 to 7 days and testing done by a physician isn't going to be able to detect it any earlier than that either. Thus, there does appear to be a window for the use of an emergency contraceptive.

Thank you to the OP for sending me the text of the article!

[Gman]

4. Never confuse the fundies with logic

sound logic and science have no place in the fundie world.

[BeFree]

5. Good find!

Could one imagine that at any point after fertilization any action which tended to destroy the fertilized egg would amount to a criminal act?

They sure haven't though this one through, have they? But then if they had they would have given a pass to the implantationists in the law, and if they let one killer go lose then it would be unfair to the rest?

(I use the term 'killer' only as a way to clarify what the intention of the law is, not to describe those women who are exercising their rights)

[oldcoot]

7. I think that they will make an exception for the fertility clinics

I have always wondered why pro-lifers did not protest fertility clinics like they do abortion clinics. As a result partially of pro-lifers' silence on this particular issue, I have come to the conclusion their main goal is to punish sexually active women and not to save lives. I sincerely hope that the majority of women in South Dakota wake up and realize that fact and vote these assholes out of office.

[jumpoffdaplanet]

6. If they can afford fertility treatment,

They will just have the reduction treatment outside the state.

A loophole for the breeders

[Bridget Burke]

13. Well--there's only one place for fertility treatment in SD.

So those who can afford it might just go out of the state for the whole procedure.

www.obgynltd.org/services/index.php?id=13

[AtomicKitten]

8. State legislations are slowly but surely squeezing abortion rights.

If they can't declare them outright illegal, they will make them inaccessible.

I transcribe surgery reports for an acute care institution in California, and as of about two months ago they started doing abortion procedures that are normally done in clinics. The informed consent has become more specific and elaborate. My guess is that even here in California the wingnuts have managed to restrict access by confining the procedures to higher level care facilities, thus more costly and making the procedure inaccessible to the poor.

This is an insidious drive to impose the minority opinion on the majority of Americans. I only hope the incremental loss of access will be recognized for its intent.

[ShortnFiery]

9. South Dakota is a State most adorable in it's hypocrisy ...

South Dakota is where all these RW Anti-Family Planning initiatives are originating ...

However, please ALSO be aware that one of the most brutal blood-sports, namely "Cage Fighting" thrives in the state's largest city - Sioux Falls.



http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/national/28fights.html?ex=1280203200&en=41ea7a1759cecc76&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Yes, May-Ella may have to be sent to Canada for her abortion. However, there's plenty of chances for her brother, Earl Jr., to get his front teeth kicked out of his skull while of a bunch of drunk South Dakota farmers watch through the chain link fenced Cage.

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/09/28/wcage28.xml

snip

With the sun sinking behind the spreading cornfields of South Dakota's Great Plains, Lee Lohff, the 23-year-old unbeaten champion of the little town of Yankton, boxed and wrestled with Steve Sperb, also from Yankton, in a frantic flurry of jabs and kicks, bouncing from side to side of the chain-link cage.

"Break his toe; he's just a piece of meat," screamed the audience gathered round the cage in the car park of a bar called Club 52.

"Rip that f***er," cried a rake-thin pensioner, dressed in black with a scrawny beard trailing down to his chest. After an opening exchange of head punches, Lohff, 6ft 2in and nearly 12st, was flat on his back. His lanky body was pinioned to the canvas by Sperb's chunkier 5ft 11, 13st frame.

Lohff suddenly tucked his knees under his neck, flicked his feet in the air and pincered Sperb's right arm between his legs like a scorpion. "Arm-bar!" the crowd howled. Sperb pit-patted Lohff's thigh in the traditional sign of submission. Any more pressure and Lohff would have snapped his arm.

/snip

[IndianaGreen]

11. Gays and women are under attack by the rightwing across this country

yet we find people with "D" after their names saying that we shouldn't blow an ovary over an anti-choice Democratic candidate or over an homophobic one, and they are usually found in the same person!