Newsflash #3: Nebraska Law Sets Limits on Abortion

New Nebraska Law: A Dangerous Development in the Abortion Debate
Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman signs the bill:


On Tuesday the state of Nebraska passed a piece of legislature that banned abortions after 20 weeks on the basis that the fetus is able to feel pain at that stage of development. While there are still provisions which allow exceptions in cases for medical emergencies and threat to the mother’s life, this bill represents a fundamental shift in the abortion debate, from limiting abortion to when the fetus is viable outside the uterus to considering the pain of the fetus. This legal development is an indicator to how the issue has become over-politicized to the detriment of women, limiting their ability to make individual decisions for what is the appropriate choice for them and their baby. It sets a dangerous precedent for future abortion restrictions based on unproven medical findings. Anti-abortion groups can couple the idea of fetal pain with the concept of “post-abortion syndrome” to provide a convincing, emotional argument for the pro-life side. Additionally, restricting later term abortions places more of a burden on teenage mothers.

The law changes the cutoff point for abortions to make it earlier based on fetal pain stead of viability outside the uterus. Abortion is currently allowed until 22-24 weeks, this would ban them at 20 weeks. It marks a huge shift in abortion legislation because it infers that the state can protect the fetus before it is viable outside of the womb. Proponents of the law argue that new scientific information has become available since the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade.

Abortion is one of the most polarizing, hot button issues in the United States and its over-politicization ends up overlooking individual women who are affected by the laws. In this case, one of the goals of the law is to prevent Dr. LeRoy H. Carhart from performing later-term abortions. Carhart worked with Dr. George R. Tiller, who also performed late term abortions but was murdered by a pro-life individual. Carhart is continuing in Tiller’s legacy, which concerns Nebraskan voters and legislators who worry that their state will become the “late-term abortion capital of the Midwest” (Davey 1). Instead of genuine concern for the welfare of women or their unborn children, this law reflects how politicians, concerned for their voter popularity, create laws for their own political gain instead of sincerely trying to protect reproductive health. The scientific evidence for fetal pain is unclear and scientifically unproven, which could mean that the fetal pain argument is simply a manipulative method for the pro-life movement to advance their cause. The Journal of American Medical Association concluded in 2005 that evidence “regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited” and that it is unlikely to occur before the third trimester. Blinded by pushing forward their side of the cause, politicians have resorted to medical information which is scientifically unproven.

Restricting abortion based on fetal pain sets a dangerous precedent because there is no clear cutoff point. It could mean a slippery slope as “pain” becomes “harm” and then abortion is banned completely. There is no clear scientific data for the time in which a fetus can feel pain and which a fetus does not have the physiological development. The pro-life argument for fetal pain is a poignant strategy, because it evokes a visceral, emotional reaction. It parallels their campaigns which show bloody fetuses with their limbs cut off, which are extremely effective at evoking an intense anti-abortion reaction. The pro-life side has the advantage of touching rhetoric which is heartfelt and emotional. Arguing that fetuses feel pain is not a new argument. 1984 President Ronald Reagan said in a speech, “When the lives of the unborn are snuffed out, they often feel pain, pain that is long and agonizing”. They have also used strategies such as The Silent Scream video, which is an ultrasound of a suction abortion, displaying a fetus dodging the instrument and being dismembered. Its mouth opens, as if in a silent scream. While many have debunked the video as inaccurate, regardless of its scientific truth it evokes an intense emotional reaction. They illustrate the procedure graphically and gruesomely, even in medical journals such as the British Medical Journal in 1980 which wrote: “It cannot be comfortable for the fetus to have a scalp electrode implanted on his skin, to have blood taken from the scalp or to suffer the skull compression that may occur even with spontaneous delivery. It is hardly surprising that infants delivered by difficult forceps extraction act as if they have a severe headache." (Valman & Pearson, "What the Fetus Feels”)

The pro-life side has a strong argument when it couples the idea of fetal pain with the concept of post-abortion syndrome. While both are scientifically questionable, together they combine to paint abortion as a physically and morally horrible process for both the fetus and the mother. They depict it as a painful death for the fetus and a procedure which can cause in the woman “recurrent dreams of the abortion experience, avoidance of emotional attachment, relationship problems, sleep disturbances, guilt about surviving, memory impairment, hostile outbursts, suicidal thoughts or actions, depression, and substance abuse” (AbortionFacts.com). The pro-choice side can respond by arguing that many of these claims are factually untrue, and additionally, even if there is an emotional cost to abortion, a woman should be able to choose which life path would bring her the least emotional pain: having a child at point in life in which she is unprepared and did not intent to have a child, or the pain of an abortion.

Neither feminists nor the pro-choice movement ignore the pain that an abortion can cause. Igna Muscio is an example of this in her essay in Listen Up, in which she describes both the physical pain and emotional sorrow of the abortion process. However, portraying “post-abortion syndrome” and the idea of fetal pain when they are both scientifically unproven contributes to women being misled about what is actually occurring in their bodies. Instead of blind, aggressive attempts to advance one political side, the abortion debate needs to be grounded in sound, proven, peer-reviewed medical information. Coupled with science, women’s voices need to be heard, like Muscio’s. Then women can decide what the appropriate decision for them is, and the state can make legislature that accurately reflects the needs of the people and protects the unborn where necessary.

The Nebraska law places a greater burden on teenage mothers. While 88% of abortions in the United States are within the first 12-13 weeks of pregnancy, nearly 1/3 of abortions after the 12 week point are by teenagers, who face many obstacles in dealing with pregnancy. (ProChoice.org). For teenage women, it is difficult to initially recognize the signs of pregnancy because they are less familiar with their bodies and have irregular menstrual periods. They lack knowledge and information about birth control, and face difficulty with medical care. Often, they must keep it a secret from their parents or cannot afford medical care, which results in waiting until later in the pregnancy. Because of these factors, late term abortion is often needed for pregnant teens. Banning abortions after 20 weeks places another weight on these young women’s shoulders, who already face numerous obstacles.

The Nebraska law will definitely be challenged in the courts. Even if it is struck down as unconstitutional, it represents a new development in anti-abortion legislature which sets a dangerous precedent of limiting abortions based on fetal pain. More scientific research and awareness is needed to the law can accurately reflect both the biological aspect of the abortion procedure and the true emotional impact on women.

The movie poster for the Silent Scream Video:


Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/us/14abortion.html

http://www.abortionfacts.com/

http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/index.html

http://www.allaboutlifechallenges.org/post-abortion-syndrome.htm

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/294/8/947?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=rosen+MA+2005&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

Findlen, Barbara. Listen Up: Voices from the Next Feminist Generation. Seattle, Wash.: Seal Press, 1995.