Oklahoma Senate Clears Anti-Abortion “Personhood” Bill

02/17/2012 1:30 pm by

This has not been a good week for reproductive rights. Yesterday, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on whether or not religious organizations should be “forced” to include contraception in their health insurance plans. All of the witnesses who testified were men, a fact which did not go unnoticed. Also, earlier this week, the Virginia state legislature passed a bill requiring women seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound prior to the procedure. Since many abortions take place during the early stages of pregnancy, this means that in most cases only transvaginal ultrasounds would be able to produce images. Many critics are calling the measure state-sanctioned rape, as women seeking an abortion would have to be penetrated for a preliminary procedure that they don’t want or need.

The latest blow came yesterday, when the Oklahoma Senate cleared the “Personhood Act.” The act redefines the word “person” to include zygotes at the moment of conception.

Zygote Oklahoma Senate Clears Anti Abortion Personhood Bill

I guess it does kind of look like it's staring at me.

The measure now has to go to the state House. Like the Senate, the Oklahoma House is vastly Republican, so it seems likely that the act will pass there as well. If the act is made into law, all abortions would effectively be illegal.

Opponents of the bill are, not surprisingly, quite concerned. Martha Skeeters is the president of the Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, which is very low on the list of jobs that I would ever be patient enough to take on. Skeeters noted that the bill offers no concessions for victims of rape or incest. She also noted that the bill could affect doctors who perform in vitro fertilizations, who would practice in fear of being brought up on manslaughter charges should an embryo fail under their care.

It also seems likely that women who suffer miscarriages would have to be investigated to make sure that they didn’t somehow cause the pregnancy to fail. And since it’s estimated that up to half of all pregnancies end in miscarriages, it seems possible that the women’s prison population in Oklahoma could potentially explode.

source

Share
pin it button Oklahoma Senate Clears Anti Abortion Personhood Bill
About Kelly Delaney

Kelly, aka kdiddy, is a full-time working stiff and a part-time angsty writer in Pittsburgh, PA. Her attempts to be a good mom and wife have mixed results.

Filed Under: News and Politics


From Our Partners

  • livi

    So depressing…

  • SuzyQuzey

    This is stupid, invasive, controlling, annoying, frustrating, and maddening. What’s worse is that if men were the creatures who bore children, you just KNOW that abortion would always be free, legal and safe, and birth control would always be covered.

    • AyLo

      yes! this! exactly!

  • avanut

    “It also seems likely that women who suffer miscarriages would have to be
    investigated to make sure that they didn’t somehow cause the pregnancy
    to fail.”

    This is horrifying.  I have had two miscarriages myself and there is already PLENTY of guilt involved, with the woman second guessing Every. Single. Moment. of her past few weeks or months, without the state “investigating” her on top of that.

  • sallygolightly

    I don’t want to depress you further, but the Virginia House of Delegates also pushed through a so-called “Personhood” bill this week. The only saving grace to all of this foolishness, is that bills such as these are currently unconstitutional, thanks to Roe v. Wade. Just pathetic and sad and depressing and completely terrifying that they were ever even taken seriously by elected officials in the first place. Other than the one crackpot that every legislative body has, that is.

  • Tyskkvinna

    The thing that actually upsets me the most about the Oklahoma bill is — one of the politicians who supports it (or more, I don’t remember.) was on the radio defending it a few weeks ago. He was asked about the miscarriages and how they would be treated.. since effectively every woman would be a suspect, and how many women have a miscarriage without even REALISING it (IS there a special term for super-early natural ending pregnancies?)

    The politician said something to the effect of, “Well, it would technically fall under the law but we wouldn’t pursue that kind of thing, we’re just not interested in that”.

    I’m sorry. If you make something “TECHNICALLY ILLEGAL” and then say “But we’re not interested in punishing it” that simply leaves me terrified for the next person to fill your seat WHO WILL BE.

    • avanut

      You asked “IS there a special term for super-early natural ending pregnancies?”

       Yes – a pregnancy that ends super early is generally called a chemical pregnancy.  It means that the pregnancy got far enough to be detected on a home pregnancy test but failed almost immediately after that and the woman had a normal looking period maybe a week or two after she normally would.  Evidence of pregnancy wouldn’t show on ultrasound (you can’t see anything before about 6 weeks) but would show in blood/urine tests.   Women who are not actively trying to get pregnant and not testing right away would probably never even know, or maybe suspect something but never be sure.  People like me who have been trying for years with repeated miscarriages are almost always testing as early as possible, so we know about them.

      The “late” periods that our mothers’ generation got were probably often chemical pregnancies, but there were no home tests at the time.  No one knows how often a pregnancy ends this way, because it’s so difficult to detect them all.

  • http://snotw.blogspot.com Rachael1013

    This is just so incredibly messed up.