Grave Concerns about the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act
The House passed a bill on Tuesday (6/18) designed to eliminate and criminalize virtually all abortions occurring after 20 weeks gestation and duplicate laws already passed in about a dozen states across the country.
Votes were divided along party lines 228/196 with Republicans voting in favor of this bill and Democrats voting against it. Introduced by Representative Trent Franks (R-Arizona) and debated by an all-male committee, its passage was announced by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), who did not hold a seat on the debate committee.
The bill is called H.R.1797 — the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and it specifically restricts abortions after 20 weeks gestation because it reflects a time frame that’s close to the age of viability when a baby might be able to survive outside the uterus, (which is generally agreed is 23 weeks and beyond). It’s also represented (though without medical evidence or agreement) as an age when fetuses feel pain. The bill goes further than the US Supreme Court allows and has no chance of passing in the Senate or escaping a White House veto, but is widely considered an attempt to force the Supreme Court to reargue Roe V. Wade and to rewrite the law to restrict women’s access to legal abortion.
Initially HR 1797 didn’t even include exceptions for rape and incest. At the last minute however, those clauses were quietly slipped into the bill with the stipulation that abortions performed in cases of rape could only be done if the woman could prove she’d reported her rape to the police. When Rep. Frank commented that the number of pregnancies caused by rape was “very low,” insinuating that this clause shouldn’t be considered an obstacle, all hell broke lose (again) in the media. Following that remark, the debating committee banned Rep. Frank from announcing the passage of his own bill.
While HR1797 is not expected to become the law of the land, debates like this show that certain members of society lack basic respect for women and their healthcare providers to make responsible decisions on private matters that greatly impact our own lives. Meanwhile, unsafe abortions continue to be one of the major contributors to maternal deaths, and even just the debates about these sorts of further restrictions will only serve to push women into situations where they have no options.
As the name of the bill suggests, there has been an emphasis in this round of debate on the idea that 20 weeks marks the point where a fetus can feel pain. Are we worried about fetal pain? Of course, but medical authorities state there’s insufficient evidence based on fetal brain and neurologic development to know whether pain is a legitimate restricting factor. While no one wants fetuses to suffer, we’re also concerned about women forced to endure unreasonable legal restrictions when forced to make a painful choice.
The bill also perpetuates concerning misperceptions in the way that it requires that rape victims prove they’ve reported their rape to the police. Data supplied by the Bureau of Justice shows that the percentage of rapes or sexual assaults reported to the police has dropped from 56% in 2003 to only 35% in 2010. Even the Hyde Amendment, which restricts federal funds from being used to pay for abortions provides exemptions for rape, incest and circumstances where the mother’s life is at risk and does not require that rape be reported as a crime. The fact that 65% of rape victims do not feel motivated, safe or supported to seek police involvement speaks to a much larger problem that affects a much greater number of women.
The fact is that only 1.4% of all abortions actually take place post-20 weeks. Many of the women who access such services are those who didn’t know they were pregnant, teenagers terrified to come forward, women with critical medical conditions who hoped they’d be able to carry to term, women who didn’t have the capabilities earlier in their pregnancies to access medical care or the funds to afford services and women so desperate due to social, financial or familial conditions that a late term abortion is their best option. In fact, a recent New York Times article provided some great context on who these women are and shares information about ongoing research looking at women seeking out abortions around this time.
Instead of creating diversionary tactics meant to restrict women’s rights to make their own healthcare decisions, we should focus our attention on measures proven to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place: access to healthcare, education, family planning and personal safety.
