The State of Pro-Life Legislation; Progress in Protecting Women's Health Terrifies Big Abortion
Byline: Mailee Smith, SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES
In 2013, life-affirming federal and state legislation designed to protect women from the harms inherent in abortion has garnered increasing attention and support from legislators and the American public - and engendered increasing fear and consternation among abortion advocates and their allies.
This year, 48 states have considered approximately 360 measures related to abortion, most of which sought to protect women and their unborn children from a predatory abortion industry which, as the Kermit Gosnell case aptly demonstrates, places concerns for profit over women's health and safety. Of those, 69 provisions were enacted. This continued a trend begun in 2011 when 70 life-affirming measures were enacted, and 2012, when 38 such measures were passed - a large number for an election year.
Clearly, this life-affirming trend has staying power, and Big Abortion is terrified.
The successful passage of common-sense, protective legislation demonstrates that elected officials have their pulse on the will of the people - not the abortion lobby. The more abortion advocates lose in the legislatures and in public opinion, the more outrageous their claims become.
For example, rather than focus on the protective effect pro-life legislation has on women's health, abortion advocates wrongfully accuse pro-life legislators of ignoring the needs of women facing pregnancies conceived through rape. Sadly, the abortion lobby works for abortion with no regulations or limitations and without regard to its impact on the women who suffer them.
Abortion advocates appear particularly dismayed with recent legislative efforts to enact laws prohibiting abortion after five months of pregnancy. The reality is that a woman seeking an abortion at 20 weeks is 35 times more likely to die from abortion than she is in the first trimester. At 21 weeks or more, she is 91 times more likely to die from abortion than she is in the first trimester. Legislative efforts to limit abortion after this point directly protects maternal health, no matter how the pregnancy began. Even the liberal Huffington Post recently admitted that Americans overwhelmingly support limitations on such late-term abortions.
Yet abortion advocates oppose banning late-term abortion as well as laws requiring that women be informed of the health risks they face from abortion.
Another example is legislation requiring that physicians perform an ultrasound test prior to abortion. Ultrasounds serve an important medical purpose in determining the gestational age and location of the pregnancy - knowledge that is absolutely necessary before a physician can perform an abortion. In fact, the use of ultrasound is acknowledged by many as the gold standard for abortion care. Ultrasounds diagnose ectopic pregnancies which, if left undiagnosed, can result in infertility or even fatal blood loss. However, abortion advocates oppose lifesaving ultrasound requirements, going so far as to label ultrasound use as rape. …