As a woman, a resident, a voter and a student in the state of North Carolina, House Bill 854, which goes into effect today, infuriates me.
The North Carolina General Assembly does not believe that women have the ability to make rational, informed decisions. As such, they passed the “Women’s Right to Know Act.” The district judge Catherine Eagles has granted a preliminary injunction to block parts of the bill while the court considers the constitutional issues further, but it looks likely the bill will be defeated based on the First Amendment.
The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina, Planned Parenthood Health Systems, the Center for Reproductive Rights and numerous doctors in the state filed a lawsuit on Sept. 29 against Janice Huff, president of the N.C. Medical Board and Roy Cooper, the state attorney general, along with numerous other state officials.
To summarize, the bill first demands that doctors obtain informed consent from women who want to undergo an abortion 24 hours before, in writing, certifying that she had the opportunity to review state materials on the procedure. If she is “unable to read” the materials, a physician “shall read the materials” to her. Then, before the procedure, the doctor or “qualified technician” must provide an obstetric real-time view of the unborn child to the pregnant woman “in order for the woman to make an informed decision,” with a detailed “explanation of what the display is depicting” and with “medical descriptions of the images”—and provide the “opportunity to hear the fetal heart tone.” Physicians who fail to comply with the bill’s requirements may be subject to disciplinary penalties by the state medical board, including possible loss of their medical license.
Though the bill states that “nothing shall be construed to prevent a pregnant woman from averting her eyes from the ultrasound images required to be provided to and reviewed with her,” I find it absurd that a woman would feel comfortable covering her ears, closing her eyes, and going “lalalala” as her physician is compelled by the state to pass on an ideologically driven, value-based and agenda-laden message.
Gov. Bev Perdue vetoed the bill in June, stating that “it is a dangerous intrusion into the confidential relationship that exists between women and their doctors,” and that the provisions “are the most extreme in the nation in terms of interfering with that relationship.” However, the N.C. Senate overrode Perdue’s veto in July.
In a press release, Bebe Anderson, senior counsel for the Center for Reproductive Rights, noted that federal judges in Oklahoma and Texas have already blocked enforcement of similar requirements. This bill is offensive and paternalistic for so many reasons, but I’ll detail the main ones below.
First, North Carolina’s new official position is that women don’t know what they are getting themselves into when choosing to terminate a fetus. Now, women will be forced to receive information without regard to their personal consideration of the decision. Imagine a woman seeing an ultrasound image and saying, “Wow, I thought I was going to have a baby iguana, but since this resembles a human being, I can’t go through with this anymore!” Doctors are already compelled by the standards of their practice to perform ultrasounds before abortions, and women are always able to request to see the image if they so desire.
Indeed, in her declaration as a plaintiff, Dr. Gretchen Stuart, notes that she always offers her patients the opportunity to view the ultrasound. She estimates that 20 percent choose to do so, but she’s never had a patient who asked her to describe the image or who decided not to have the abortion after viewing the image. Stuart writes that “forcing me to impose harms on my patients harms me and the practice of medicine.”
Second, this bill forces doctors to violate multiple principles of medical ethics. It disrespects patient autonomy; it ignores the patient’s wishes; it potentially traumatizes patients (for instance, victims of rape or incest); it imposes unnecessary delays on patients (who may have to take time off work or pay for childcare); it doesn’t serve any medical purpose; and it takes away a doctor’s discretion. It forces doctors to engage in medically unethical conduct.
Dr. James R. Dingfelder states in his plaintiff declaration that the act “appears designed to induce shame and guilt in my patients. It is repugnant to think that I have to play an active role in shaming my patients in this manner.” Dingfelder says the act “uses” him; indeed, doctors are now mandated to act as tools of the state.
Third, this bill violates numerous constitutional rights. These include rights to due process, free speech, privacy, liberty, bodily integrity and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizure.
Finally, this is yet another burden placed upon women. We pay co-pays for birth control and undergo not-fun bodily cycles which men never have to subsidize or experience. Men can get physical and only have to worry about contracting STI’s; women have a whole host of other issues to consider.
I would appreciate being seen by the state of North Carolina as an individual who is not immoral, ignorant and incompetent. I am tired, as a woman, of being subject to religious values that are not my own. The plaintiffs are arguing in a Greensboro courtroom for the law to be blocked: Let’s hope this bill constitutes only a brief moment in North Carolina’s history.
Samantha Lachman, Trinity ’13
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.