SD: Women Enter At Your Own Risk (H/T – Helga)
l3wis Get out your banjos!
abortion
Guns & Abortion. Both legal in the United States. Why does SD want to limit one and not the other?
Tiffany Campbell sent me her opposition testimony to HB 1237 (AUDIO LINK. HB 1237 testimony starts at 24.56, and opposition testimony starts at 1:20:41);
Testimony in Opposition to HB 1237 • Tiffany Campbell • Advocacy Director
ACLU of SD believes – and works hard to ensure – that every woman has medically accurate, unbiased information so she is able to make the best choices for her and her circumstances, without undue pressure. This bill isn’t about letting a woman consider her decision, it’s about coercing her and shaming her for a decision she’s already made.
Forcing a woman who needs an abortion to delay her procedure for non-medical reasons is callous, cruel, and dangerous. Medical experts, including the World Health Organization, recommend that states consider eliminating waiting periods that are not medically required and work to expand services so that all women may access prompt abortion care.
South Dakota already has one of the most extreme laws of its kind on the books and this bill just makes it worse. There is no medical reason to make a woman wait 72 hours before her abortion, and there’s certainly no reason to make her wait even longer if her abortion happens to be scheduled after a weekend or a holiday.
Many things can happen in pregnancy. No woman wants to hear that carrying her pregnancy to term will seriously threaten her health or endanger her life. No woman wants to hear that the baby she’s been looking forward to holding will likely not survive the pregnancy. No woman plans to have an abortion for any reason.
I am one of those women. In 2006 I was a married mother of two wanting to add to my family. I was thrilled to learn I was expecting identical twin boys, but the excitement didn’t last long. I was told they might be suffering from Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome, a very deadly disease that left untreated has a morality rate of 100%. We were immediately sent to one of the top fetal care centers in the country. We were told that one of our boys was extremely sick and wouldn’t make it much longer. Our five doctors told us the only way to save the healthier twin was to selectively terminate the sicker twin. We had the procedure less than 12 hours later.  Five months later I gave birth to a healthy baby boy, and today my beautiful son, Brady, turns 6-years-old.
TTTS can progress incredibly fast. My friend Becky Matthews’s twins also suffered from TTTS. Becky and her husband were told of their treatment options and decided to think it over and scheduled a doctor appointment in Minneapolis for the following week. They never made that appointment. Her girls died in utero just days after being diagnosed.
These are just two examples of what can go wrong in a pregnancy.  The definition of a medical emergency as set forth in SD Codified Law 34-23A-1 (5), only applies for abortion to save a woman’s life or if a major bodily function would be irreversibly impaired. My life was not in danger, therefore the lifesaving procedure I chose wouldn’t be covered under SD law and I might have lost both babies. In difficult situations, medical decisions should be made by a woman, her family, and her doctor, not politicians. I urge you vote no on HB 1237 and preserve the right for a woman to make her own medical decisions without government intrusion.
Thank you and I will stand by for questions.
You may know Tiffany from this TV commercial;
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-jFedfN760[/youtube]
Governor Doobadd Asks For another $1 Million To Defend Anti-Abortion Law In Court (H/T – Helga)
No money for books and healthcare but plenty for frivolous lawsuits. When are these clowns going to figure out a majority of South Dakotans are pro-choice;
This year the GOP-led South Dakota legislature passed a law requiring women seeking abortions to face a three-day waiting period – the nation’s longest – and undergo counseling at pregnancy “help centers†that discourage abortion. Recognizing that the law is an assault on women’s constitutional right to an abortion under Roe v. Wade, a federal judge granted an injunction in September to prevent the law from taking effect while it’s being challenged in Court. U.S. District Chief Judge Karen Schreier noted that the law creates an undue burden and would humiliate and degrade women.
Now South Dakota’s Gov. Dennis Daugaard is requesting more than $1 million in additional funds to defend the state’s anti-abortion law:
Next year’s South Dakota budget calls for more than a million dollars in supplemental funding for the state’s legal fund, including small fees for several high-profile cases but the potential for big expenses defending a controversial abortion law.
Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s budget proposal asks for the Legislature to add $1.043 million to the state’s Extraordinary Litigation Fund, which pays for legal costs above and beyond the ordinary.
Most of the Legislature’s projected costs come from two lawsuits: the 2005 Planned Parenthood vs. Rounds case over the state’s “informed consent†law, and ongoing “diligent enforcement†legal disputes with tobacco coverage. The state Office of Risk Management predicts the Planned Parenthood case to cost South Dakota $750,000 in Fiscal Year 2012, which runs through the end of June 2012.
Additionally, if South Dakota loses the lawsuit, it could be required to pay Planned Parenthood’s legal fees. When South Dakota lost another abortion case against Planned Parenthood several years ago, the state paid around $410,000 in legal fees.
As states are facing their worst budget crunches since the Great Depression, Republican-led governments have insisted on pushing conservative social agendas instead of focusing on pressing economic needs. In fact, they’ve exacerbated state budget deficits by passing anti-abortion laws that can cost millions for the state to defend but are rarely upheld in court. Kansas, for instance, has spent $2,180 of taxpayers money every daydefending its anti-abortion laws.
Imagine that, the Feds put a stop to stupid anti-choice laws
This doesn’t surprise me one bit;
“Nothing in the text of the statute permits physicians to use their medical judgment to avoid disclosing information that is untrue, misleading or irrelevant,†she (U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier) wrote.
Oh, but this truly becomes ridiculous;
In arguments over the law on Monday, lawyers for Attorney General Marty Jackley argued that legislators simply intended for Planned Parenthood to provide a checklist for mental health risk factors.
Checklist? This isn’t Jiffy Lube. This is a place that provides many low income & younger single women health services (besides abortion). I think Planned Parenthood knows what they are doing. Nothing to see here, please move along.
What’s a life worth to Anti-Choicers in the state? About $20,000.
Doesn’t anyone find it ironic they have only raised $20,000 to combat HB 1217 lawsuits against the state?
Bill sponsor Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, has said private donors will step forward to cover legal expenses through the Life Protection Fund, which was set up in 2006 to help the state pay to defend previous abortion laws.
“I don’t think it’s a surprise to anyone that they’ve filed a lawsuit,†Hunt said. “We’ve been expecting this and preparing for it.â€
In late March, the fund had a balance of just under $20,000.
About the same amount the average single mother makes in a year in SD, if that. They of course know that the state will have to pony up the money, which is mostly from sales tax revenue, on things like food, from these same mothers. If the anti-choicers were so concerned about LIFE they would be concerned about these children after they are born and the mother’s who have to raise them by themselves, through education and worker training programs. Nope, the same clowns who vote for this crap slash education, slash medicade, and vote against ending a food tax. I’m starting to believe more and more that the neo-cons never want abortion to be illegal, because they couldn’t use it as an issue anymore.