State Rep. Shannon Jones (R) introduced HB 314 yesterday- another crap, anti-choice bill aimed at whittling away at women’s reproductive rights in Ohio by extending our state’s already-restrictive laws on abortion.

The sad part is, two Democrats co-sponsored the thing: Matthew H. Barrett (D-Amherst) and L. George Distel (D-Conneaut).

Come on boys, get with the program!

Here’s what the bill wants to add:

Sec. 2317.561. In addition to the requirements in section 2317.56 of the Revised Code, if an obstetric ultrasound examination is performed at any time prior to the performance or inducement of an abortion or the physician performing or inducing the abortion determines that an ultrasound examination will be performed as part of the abortion procedure, the physician shall do both of the following prior to the performance or inducement of the abortion:
(A) Provide the pregnant woman receiving the abortion the opportunity to view the active ultrasound image of the embryo or fetus;
(B) Offer to provide the pregnant woman with a physical picture of the ultrasound image of the embryo or fetus.
The requirements of division (A) of this section shall be performed at no additional charge to the pregnant woman.

 
  • “Would you like a souvenir photo from your abortion, miss? It’s only $20, and comes with this decorative ‘I aborted this fetus’ frame!”

  • That’s what I was thinking too.

    Still- I find it hard to believe that an ultrasound picture could really change anyone’s mind:

  • #1: They better NOT be charging $20:

    The requirements of division (A) of this section shall be performed at no additional charge to the pregnant woman.

  • I missed two democrat cosponsors (there are 4 total): Dodd and Garrison.

  • Pingback: Ohio legislators want to force doctors to show patients pre-abortion ultrasounds at time of procedure | Writes Like She Talks()

  • Joseph, I tend to agree with what you stated, if a picture of a fetus at that stage of development would make a woman change her mind about having an abortion then perhaps she was really questioning having one in the first place.

    I understand completely the reasoning behind not supporting this because it appears to place yet another requirement that a woman could have to go through to be able to have an abortion and while this bill may only “suggest” rather than require an ultrasound must be done, it’s very well possible if this passes the next step could be requiring an ultrasound for all abortions.

  • Pingback: Plunderbund - » Another Anti-Choice Bill Passes House()

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!