Madfloridian's Journal - On the slippery slope of not caring about a women's health. Ob-Gyn speaks about Stupak.

There was a discussion in the Washington Post a couple of days ago about the Stupak amendment. One of the comments there by an Ob-Gyn really caught my attention.

Ignoring the health of the mother is nothing new, in fact many Democrats voted on a late term abortion ban in 2003 that only considered the mother's life, NOT her health. More on that below.

From the Washington Post:

Abortion and health-care reform: Explaining Stupak, what's next and more

Rochester, NY: I am an obstetrician/gynecologist, and the Stupak amendment worries me. Its premise is that abortion can be easily separated from the rest of health care. But I have a hard time accepting that this country wants to hurt pregnant woman.

This amendment would inflict special punishment on those who are ready to become mothers but whose pregnancies are making their medical conditions worse. A lot of damage can be done before a woman reaches the life-threatening stage when the Stupak amendment would relent and allow payment for abortion.

Because of their health problems, these women must have their abortions in the hospital, racking up thousands of dollars in bills that destroy their families' finances.

Is it true that the Stupak amendment would prohibit an insurance company in the exchange from covering my patient's abortion if her health is in danger or if the fetus is malformed?

Lori Montgomery: That is the fear, yes. Right now the language is the same as the Hyde amendment -- no abortion except in the case of rape, incest or to "save the life of the mother." I'm guessing that last category is open to wide interpretation, however.

We really are on a slippery slope now, and it is scary.

It is as though the House Democrats decided Friday that the health of a woman is beside the point, and made it even harder for a woman to get the medical care that should be between her and her doctor.

I never expected this to happen when the Democrats got a majority. Looking back, I guess I should not be surprised.

Banning late term abortion..2003

Please note that in all of it...a woman could only get an abortion if she were about to die. Even then there had to be a panel somewhere deciding or the doctor could go to jail for up to two years.

Harold Ford

Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life.
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003: Vote to pass a bill banning a medical procedure, which is commonly known as "partial-birth" abortion. The procedure would be allowed only in cases in which a women's life is in danger, not for cases where a women's health is in danger. Those who performed this procedure, would face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this procedure is performed on are not held criminally liable.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Santorum, R-PA; Bill S.3 ; vote number 2003-530 on Oct 2, 2003

Tom Carper:

Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.
S. 3 As Amended; Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Vote to pass a bill banning a medical procedure, which is commonly known as "partial-birth" abortion. Those who performed this procedure would then face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this procedure is performed on are not held criminally liable. This bill would make the exception for cases in which a women's life is in danger, not for cases where a women's health is in danger.

Also voting for the so-called "partial birth abortion" ban were other Democrats. The bill did not allow for a woman's health to be considered. Just a life or death situation.

In the Senate:

John Breaux, Harry Byrd, Kent Conrad, Tom Daschle, Byron Dorgan, Fritz Hollings, Tim Johnson, Mary Landrieu, Patrick Leahy, Blanche Lincoln, Miller (GA), Ben Nelson, Pryor AK, Harry Reid.

Not voting.
John Edwards, John Kerry, Joe Biden.

I remember when anti-choice Tom Daschle told a group of young people that at least he did not think a woman or doctor should go to jail.

How did we get to the point that being a nice guy means you think a woman shouldn't go to jail if she gets an abortion before she dies?

Maybe we are going to become a pro-life nation like El Salvador.

In this new movement toward criminalization, El Salvador is in the vanguard. The array of exceptions that tend to exist even in countries where abortion is circumscribed — rape, incest, fetal malformation, life of the mother — don't apply in El Salvador. They were rejected in the late 1990's, in a period after the country's long civil war ended. The country's penal system was revamped and its constitution was amended. Abortion is now absolutely forbidden in every possible circumstance. No exceptions.

There are other countries in the world that, like El Salvador, completely ban abortion, including Malta, Chile and Colombia. El Salvador, however, has not only a total ban on abortion but also an active law-enforcement apparatus — the police, investigators, medical spies, forensic vagina inspectors and a special division of the prosecutor's office responsible for Crimes Against Minors and Women, a unit charged with capturing, trying and incarcerating an unusual kind of criminal.

It goes deeper than abortion, that is just the surface issue.

It is about power. The power of men over women. The power of the church over a country.