Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell signs Virginia ultrasound bill
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell.
/ MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty ImagesThe bill sparked national debate this month over a provision that would have required many women to undergo transvaginal ultrasounds, which opponents decried as medically unnecessary and physically invasive. McDonnell, a conservative who opposes abortion rights, ultimately requested that mandate be stripped. The Virginia House of Delegates passed a revised version last week that allows women to "reject" a transvaginal ultrasound and instead opt for an abdominal ultrasound, which generally yields less information in the early stages of a pregnancy.
In a statement Wednesday, McDonnell reiterated his support for the bill, which he argues will provide additional information that "can help the mother make a fully informed decision" about having an abortion.
"This bill does not legally alter a woman's ability to make a choice regarding her pregnancy," the statement said. "It does, however, put Virginia in line with 23 other states that have some type of requirement that a woman be offered a view of an ultrasound before an abortion can be performed."
The bill is slated to go into effect on July 1.
According to a study by the Guttmacher institute, Virginia will become the eighth state to require medical providers to administer ultrasounds on women before performing abortions. In Texas, the provider must also display and describe the image of the ultrasound.
Virginia Democrats on Wednesday blasted McDonnell for signing the bill, urging opponents of the legislation to contribute to the Democratic party as a means of fighting back.
"The overwhelming public response to the radical agenda that Republican extremists in Richmond and in Washington are trying to force on American families has left many right-wing politicians looking for a way to dodge accountability for their actions -- until they can find away to change the subject," said Brian Moran, chairman of the Virginia Democratic Party, in a statement. "Will you contribute $20, $50 or $100 to the Democratic Party of Virginia today and help us hold them accountable?"
In an email, the women health's organization NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia accused McDonnell of facilitating "an unprecedented invasion of privacy and government intrusion into the doctors' offices and living rooms of Virginia women."
The legislation has proved ideologically polarizing, with many Democrats decrying the bill as an invasion of privacy aimed at shaming women out of having abortions, and Republicans heralding it as a way to provide women with as much information as possible about their pregnancies prior to having an abortion.
"This law is a victory for women and their unborn children. We thank Gov. McDonnell and Virginia's pro-life legislators for their work to ensure that women have all the facts and will no longer be kept in the dark about their pregnancies," said the conservative Family Research Council President Tony Perkins in a statement.
He added: "Ultrasounds are vitally important to doctors when determining the health of an unborn baby. Women considering whether to have an abortion should be just as informed as doctors about the child they are carrying. This law ensures that they are."
The issue has taken on national prominence in light of the recent controversy and become a talking point for Virginia Democratic Senate candidate Tim Kaine, who has repeatedly blasted the legislation as an attack on women.
"I continue to believe this legislation is bad for Virginia's image, bad for Virginia's businesses and bad for Virginia's women," said Kaine, the state's former Democratic governor, in a statement on Wednesday. "Our country and our Commonwealth face serious challenges that will require us to put aside our differences and find common ground to create jobs, grow our economy, educate our workforce and tackle our deficit. Deviations into the social debates of the past not only distract from those challenges, but they actually hurt our reputation as a world-class place to do business."
Kaine's Republican Senate rival George Allen has remained relatively silent on the issue, declining to take a public position on the legislation. On Wednesday, his campaign declined to immediately comment to Hotsheet on whether or not the candidate supported the bill.
Popular in Politics
- IRS' Lerner: "I have not done anything wrong" 456 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice"
- Anthony Weiner comeback try begins: Running for NYC mayor 118 Comments
- Obama to view Oklahoma tornado damage Sunday
- Christie: Keep politics out of Oklahoma disaster relief
- Major immigration overhaul passes first big test
- Will tornado relief funding escape politics? 47 Comments
- Top IRS official to invoke 5th Amendment at congressional testimony 219 Comments
I am glad I did get my period, though for the first time over 5 days late for the first time in nearly a decade, because I would have been spared a choice that was made not only within myself, my children and my SO in this "worst case" scenario, because having an ultra sound would have put upon me, based on an government infringement, extreme emotional and punitive duress.
To put it simply, I do not see anywhere in the Commonwealth of Virigina's Constitution, not the the United States Constitition, the right to infringe on my uterus and my decisions, citing Roe vs Wade.
This with New York City Mayor's attempts to ban salt, and now sugar is along the same lines. Nanny states. It would be like NY requiring anyone who wishes to buy a soda, to get a blood sugar upon purchase.
I understand the fact that there are many "pro life" people out there, and for a many a long years, I was pro choice generally speaking because I never felt it correct to impose my feelings on another... and now I am a middle aged woman, divorced, single, with three teen aged kids... and as all my children were planned,within marriage, and never pregnant otherwise with much credit to that fact because of Planned Parenthood, that ten years later, if I was in fact pregnant with the .01% as I have had an IUD since 2004 that I would know immediately my decision yet would have to be subjugated by LAW to be more emotionally traumatized? Is this not CRUEL and UNUSUAL? When I broke no law?
Furthermore, the law seems to be made from bleeding liberal hearts. And I took my recent perimenopausal scare, and took it to my two teenage level daughters. Do you REALLY think that my two daughters who are intelligent enough, who make the decision, which upon emotional shock is enough (heck, I was shocked, married and planned my kids!) that FORCING these already traumatized "young adults" will somehow be productive?
I'm not sure how or why this bill was passed other than some sort of Christian cult group and the fact that our Governor who otherwise seemed level headed, apparently never had a speculum inserted, gave birth, had a pap smear, and even as a man, makes me ponder if he even has a remote clue as to what women have to endure.
The best choice for our Governor is to decline, as he has, and invitation to any VP ticket with Romney. Romney is already losing the female vote. As much as I detest and loathe Obama for healthcare and other reasons, as a woman, with a latin last name, I am not persuaded to vote for some dude against planned parenthood, and then support him if he chooses a VP that makes me or my daughters endure more emotional duress during a very hard, emotional decision that we have to endure the rest of our lives... when NO CONSTITUTIONAL POWER GIVES THE RIGHT TO DICTATE THE UTERUSES OF WOMEN....
Stay out of my vagina. Stay out of my Uterus for four months after conception. Antyhing that after that, fair game.
Here is an idea.. how about abortions stop when the father can carry the baby until full term? Sounds fair. You want to save the baby, I want you to stay out of my uterus.. fair! So when you come up with a plan (being the government) that I can take the unexpected, unplanned fetus out of my body into his, lets consider this fair!
Though again, who, why is it that gives the Commonwealth of Virgina to expose anyone the CRUEl and UNUSAL punishment to seeing an ultrasound prior to an abortion when abortion is legal?
To be honest, had I not been delayed due to perimenopause, I'd be lawyering up right now.
Thank you.
I"m not saying there shouldn't be ultrasounds, but having them mandatory may be over-the-top. I'm sure that the doctors wouldn't mind giving a woman an ultrasound if she asks, nor would I consider it too over-the top for a doctor to strongly request that the patient do so- but in the end as it's her body she should be able to say yes or no.
Get your head out of the sand congressmen and senators. Do what you were elected to do. Pass a budget, work on the jobless rate and the high prices of gas. Not restricting the rights of women!!!
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 (1973), was a landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that declared a pregnant woman is entitled to have an Abortion until the end of the first trimester of pregnancy without any interference by the state.
WITHOUT ANY INTERFERENCE BY THE STATE!!!!!!
Republicans, please get your religious view out of our government!!
The concept of the separation of church and state refers to the distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state.
Evidently the Republicans cannot read and comprehend the written law. They cannot accept and respect that someone has different views.
I have voted Republican in the past, but that was the past. I am a man and I cannot condone a blatant assault on a woman's right to choose.
NOT ONCE in the law was the mention of a transvaginal scope used. The pro-choice advocates CLAIMED that would BECOME the issue - the "rape", the "invasion", the "abuse" on her "rights"to use such a thing!! They are so concerned for her, right?
Please note - Abortionists use transvaginal probes as a matter of routine on a daily basis while performing abortions. WHERE is the outrage, the emotional drumming on that "abuse", "rape", and "intrusion"???????
This bill is and always was for an abdominal ultrasound - period - made available for the woman to be fully informed of what she is choosing. We're all about "informed consent" right? Except when a child's life is on the line.
Pro-choice advocates are about surppressing the truth from young and often ignorant woman. They don't want them to hear the heartbeat, they don't want them to see the little life within - the heart pumping, the arms and legs, the face... the movements of LIFE happening. No, they want to keep them ignorant. Tell them it's "just tissue". Lie against scientific FACT and say that life does not begin at conception. . . that is what pro-choice is about. Lies and suppression of truth. I've been studying and watching this enough to see how laughable it is, except it is so vicious and evil and corrupt one cannot laugh.
Should you wish to re-study history from actual documents rather than revisionist lies, you will see that separation of church and state was to KEEP THE STATE OUT OF THE CHURCH in matters of control - such as our current President requiring religious institutions to provide contraceptives that are proven abortificients, thus violating their beliefs. THAT was the exact purpose from which our Founding Fathers sought to provide us with protection.
Thank you for considering this counter to your claim of an "assault" on a woman's right to choose.
KAbeaty, you must be a Republican following party guidelines and also cannot read and comprehend Roe V. Wade. which states "U.S. Supreme Court that declared a pregnant woman is entitled to have an Abortion until the end of the first trimester of pregnancy without any interference by the state."
This is not only a interference, but unwanted additional cost to that person. I see the Republicans would not also fund these unnecessary procedures, so this cost falls on those who need or want this procedure and many of them may not have insurance.
Who are you to insist that a person who wants an abortion has to go thru road blocks thrown up by someone who has no idea what that person is going thru. If you wish to spout this type of rhetoric do it in your church and keep your church beliefs and government separate.
After a firestorm of criticism, the Republicans pulled out of a provision demanding that women be required to undergo and pay for a medically unnecessary Vaginal Probe ultrasound, but the modifications were minor, and gained only with much arm-twisting.
After this, the only 'VP' associated with Mr McDonnell will stand for Vaginal Probe, not Vice President.
Welcome to the new old world where women are nothing but baby factories for men who control everything. This is just the start. Next will be a 5 day waiting period. Then required alternative faith based counseling educating the mother on options with another required waiting period. Then the restriction of birth control.
If a man wants an ED drug let's make them watch a porn for 2 hours to make sure it really doesn't work.
No woman has an abortion without a lot of reflection and pause. It isn't an easy decision but it hers to make.
Women demand informed consent to know that a baby may be "defective" and therefore not worthy of a chance to life - but they want suppression when it comes to merely viewing what we are talking about here - a human being, innocently existing due to her bedroom choices, but unwittingly in danger of death.
I simply do not understand why it is wrong to provide her with the chance to see what other mamas see who want to keep their baby. She should see what she is wanting to throw away, too - true "informed consent". Dangerous because she may just choose. . .
life. . . .and abortionists may just lose. . .
money?????
I think I can explain your question. THIS FORCES her to have an unwanted and costly test. What you think is irrelevant. So, are you God and can tell when life begins? You simply do not understand that it is her RIGHT, HER RIGHT, to chose, not yours. Like I said before, get your religion out of my government.
Why is it the Republicans can not leave this alone and I you want to spout this rhetoric do it in your church and do not try to force this down my throat.