Legislators In 11 States Plan To Require Ultrasound Prior To Abortion

All Headline News ^ | February 9, 2009 | AHN Staff

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Lincoln, NE (AHN) - Nebraska Sen. Tony Fulton filed the Ultrasound Bill which seeks to require a pregnant woman contemplating abortion to undergo an ultrasound and see her fetus before she undergoes the procedure.

Fulton explained that the aim of the legislation is to have an informed consent, especially for young women who are on the verge of making grave choices prior to an abortion.

Nebraska is just one of 11 states contemplating on a mandated ultrasound. The other states include Indiana and Texas. Earlier, Wyoming legislators attempted to pass a similar law, but were defeated on the state House committee level before it could even reach the floor.

So far 16 states have laws that are related to mandated ultrasounds before an abortion is allowed. Oklahama's law, which is facing a court challenge, requires the ultrasound image to be showed to the woman and for a physician to describe the picture.

Fulton has a second less restrictive bill which merely requires the doctor to tell the woman seeking an abortion that an ultrasound test is available.

Abortion takes center stage once more in the U.S. as a national issue with the creation last week by President Barack 0bama of a faith-based outreach office which seeks to strengthen family life and reduce abortions, beyond the usual social programs funded by the federal government.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Is that last sentence true?

[Troll_House_Cookies]

I think this is a great idea.

[gieriscm]

Watch the pro-aborts wail and gnash their teeth at the thought of women being “fully informed”.

[steve-b]

More Big Government.

[NordP]

WHAT A GREAT IDEA!!!

[Blood of Tyrants]

Not to blow my own horn, but I think that I was one of the first to ask my state legislators to introduce a bill requiring an ultrasound and to show the mother before the abortion. However, since the ‘Rats have controlled one or both state houses until this year, it has always died in committee. Perhaps this year will be the year, but with a traitor RINO (he conspired with 40 ‘Rats to elect him over the GOP nominee) as Speaker of the House, I am not certain of the outcome.

[gidget7]

They probably will, in fact NO DOUBT. But it is an excellent idea for many reasons, not just the obvious. PP has performed so called abortions when there was no pregnancy, and no I have no documentation or source. But at the very least, it should be proven that there is a pregnancy, since thus far PP does not have to prove that, or they simply don't in some areas. Mind you there are many more reasons, and most are much more important, but this one can be used to convince the left.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

Great idea, but I’ll bet my latest issue of the Limbaugh Letter that the militant feminazis are even now baring their teeth and showing their fangs about this. Naturally, BHO and a subservient congress will cower in fear and do the bidding of the feminazis.

[DoughtyOne]

Excellent! Add a good waiting period 3 to 7 days...

[George from New England]

Watch out. They will issue “Concealed Uterus Carry Permits” that allow a woman to get an immediate abortion and bypass any wait period.

[AuntB]

State by state is the only way we’ll fix some of these situations. The federal level is lost.

[peridot]

Carhart, here in NE, spends money like water. I’d like to cut into his profits. It’s time we got him off the gravy train.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

“State by state is the only way we’ll fix some of these situations. The federal level is lost.”

Agreed. Overturn Roe v. Wade and turn it back to the states. You’ll see abortion clinics boarded up all across the land.

Of course, there will be a state of two that will take the money and run, because there’s a LOT of money to be made in the abortion field.

How to take the MONEY out of it? That would kick it in the teeth, too. Who makes money off of abortion? That’s what we have to do...follow the money.