Reproductive Rights

Gov. Brad Henry’s recent veto of the Statistical Abortion Report Act bill was another sensible and prudent move against a backdrop of extremist GOP-sponsored bills that have defined the 2010 legislative session.

House Bill 3284, sponsored by state Rep. Pam Peterson (R-Tulsa), would require women in Oklahoma to fill out a lengthy questionnaire before they receive an abortion. The information would then be published on a web site maintained by the state. The bill’s alleged purpose is to collect research information about abortions, but it’s really just another way to harass and intimidate women seeking the procedure.

According to media reports, Henry’s veto message included this:

By forcing rape and incest victims to submit to a personally invasive questionnaire and posting the answers on a state website, this legislation will only increase the trauma of an already traumatic event. Victims of such horrific acts should be treated with dignity and respect in such situations, as should all people.

Requiring patients to publicly reveal highly intimate and personal details of their lives to obtain a medical procedure protected by this nation’s highest court constitutes an unconstitutional invasion of privacy and barrier to legal medical treatment.

Henry vetoed two other abortion-related bills this session. One bill would require women to have an ultrasound before the procedure and listen to a detailed description of it. The other bill prohibits women from collecting lawsuit damages if a physician withheld crucial information about their fetuses. The GOP-controlled legislature later voted to override Henry’s two vetoes.

Henry has also vetoed other extremist legislation that would allow Oklahoman to openly carry weapons and to allow the state to opt-out of the new federal health care program. The legislature sustained those two vetoes.

In his last year in office, Henry continues to check extremists who are intent on destroying Oklahoma’s image by passing ultra-conservative, freaky legislation that draws scrutiny and criticism from national media outlets.

As I’ve written before, Henry’s actions show how important it is that Oklahomans elect a Democrat as governor this year. If the Republicans leading candidate for governor—U.S. Rep Mary Fallin—gets elected, and the GOP maintains its majorities in the House and Senate, the 2011 legislative session will produce an avalanche of extremist bills that damage the state’s image.

The state bill requiring women receive an ultrasound of the fetus before an abortion is about the government intimidating women into not having the procedure here.

If it seems like we’ve been here before, it’s because we have. Last year, the Oklahoma Legislature passed a bill that contained the same provision, but it was ruled unconstitutional because it violated a rule that requires bills contain only one subject.

Now, legislators are going back and passing the same legislation separately.

The bill requiring the ultrasound, HB 2780, sponsored by state Rep. Lisa Billy, a Purcell Republican, was recently passed overwhelmingly by the House. It requires physicians or certified technicians to perform an ultrasound at least one hour before the abortion, ensuring the women can see the images. It also requires the medical staff to “provide a simultaneous explanation of what the ultrasound is depicting.” Under the bill, physicians or technicians must

Provide a medical description of the ultrasound images, which shall include the dimensions of the embryo or fetus, the presence of cardiac activity, if present and viewable, and the presence of external members and internal organs, if present and viewable . . .

Essentially, the bill, which apparently drew no debate before it was passed Tuesday on an 87-7 vote, requires a procedure that is not medically needed. It’s intent is to stop women from having abortions in Oklahoma. It creates one more roadblock for women seeking safe abortions, and it targets impoverished women, who might not have the money to travel out of the state to get the procedure.

As I’ve written before, the right-wing political discourse here is often centered on women’s bodies. Social conservatives want to control women’s reproductive matters. It’s a matter of religious duty and obligation for them.

Another bill under consideration this session would require women seeking an abortion to fill out an extensive questionnaire that asks personal questions about their lives. This information—supposedly anonymous, at least for now—would then be placed on a public website.

Oklahoma women, whether for or against abortion, should be concerned about this legislation and what it might portend for them in the future.

Here are some questions:

Once abortion is essentially illegal or impossible in Oklahoma, what’s next? Will legislators try to limit access to birth control and regulate all aspects of family planning? Does anyone really think there’s a stopping point for social conservatives when it comes to women’s bodies?

Why do state legislators continue to want to dictate what women do with their bodies when it comes to reproduction issues?

Why do they continue to crusade against science?

On Thursday, the Oklahoma House passed a bill, sponsored by state Rep. Rebecca Hamilton, an Oklahoma City Democrat, which would make it illegal for state fertility clinics to compensate women for donating eggs. Under the bill, women could still donate eggs. They just couldn’t be paid.

The bill’s intent, according to Hamilton, is to cut down on a practice she sees as harmful, but what’s to stop Oklahoma women from simply traveling out of state to donate eggs? Is she not worried about those women who donate eggs without getting compensated and are only doing it to help people build a family? Is she not worried about those women who use their own eggs during in vitro fertilization procedures?

As a college professor, I have discussed and debated this issue with students because companies seeking egg donations often target young college women through advertisements. There are competing arguments about compensation for eggs and the procedure itself, and these are worthy of a medical ethics discussion, but the bottom line is the legislature simply has no business meddling in this issue, which is a personal and private matter between egg-donor women, physicians and people trying to get pregnant.

A NewsOK story cited two doctors who say the bill, if passed and signed into law, would severely limit the options of local people trying to get pregnant using the eggs from another woman.

For me, the issue raises some areas of consideration.

(1) The state of Oklahoma doesn’t own women’s bodies. Too much of our political discourse in this state surrounds women’s reproductive issues, including abortion. These are private matters. The government shouldn’t interfere with medical decisions made by women under the care of physicians. Medical guidelines should be allowed to govern how the egg donation procedure is performed and how many times. This is simply more government intrusion into people’s lives, and it’s basic discrimination against women.

(2) The attack on science here must stop if the state wants to move forward. In the recent past, local politicians have attacked evolution theory in schools, local stem cell research and climate change. Now, it’s egg donation. These anti-science efforts make the state seem backwards and have a real potential to hurt the quality of life here. What if there were no or fewer fertility clinics in this state?

(3) What about women who want to donate eggs out of compassion for people struggling to get pregnant? As I mentioned, Hamilton’s bill doesn’t provide “relief” for these women. Under the bill’s logic, it’s apparently okay if an Oklahoma woman is harmed during the egg harvesting procedure, just as long as there is no compensation. If the bill’s intent is to protect women, then why doesn’t it try to protect all women here, not just women seeking money for eggs? If the procedure is highly damaging to women, as Hamilton argues, then why not just eliminate in vitro fertilization altogether.

(4) The process of donating eggs can be fairly rigorous, which helps prevent exploitation. Women who are compensated for selling eggs must be in good health with a decent medical history. These women are screened in several different ways. Look at the requirements for women at the Texas Fertility Center.

To make a point, state Rep. Ryan Kiesel, a Seminole Democrat, offered an amendment to the bill that would stop men from selling sperm, but it was defeated and the bill easily passed.

The Senate should defeat Hamilton’s bill. If it passes, Gov. Brad Henry should veto it.