Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Oklahoma law will publicy post details of women’s abortions online.
thinkprogress.org ^ | 10/08/2009 | Amanda Terkel

Posted on 10/09/2009 3:40:31 AM PDT by prisoner6

New Oklahoma law will publicy post details of women’s abortions online.

On Nov. 1, a law in Oklahoma will go into effect that will collect personal details about every single abortion performed in the state and post them on a public website. Implementing the measure will “cost $281,285 the first year and $256,285 each subsequent year.” Here are the first eight questions that women will have to reveal:

1. Date of abortion
2. County in which abortion performed
3. Age of mother
4. Marital status of mother
(married, divorced, separated, widowed, or never married)
5. Race of mother
6. Years of education of mother
(specify highest year completed)
7. State or foreign country of residence of mother
8. Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother Live Births
Miscarriages
Induced Abortions

Although the questionnaire does not ask for name, address, or “any information specifically identifying the patient,” as Feminists for Choice points out, these eight questions could easily be used to identify a woman in a small community.

“They’re really just trying to frighten women out of having abortions,” Keri Parks, director of external affairs at Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma, said.

The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging the law, arguing that “it violates the Oklahoma Constitution because it ‘covers more than one subject’ — a challenge that previously worked to strike down an abortion ultrasound law.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Oklahoma
KEYWORDS: abortion; choice; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
Good idea? Anyone see anything wrong?

Personally I don't have a problem with it.

Apparently this is from a pro-abortion website...thinkprogress.org. At least that's what the comments imply. I didn't go to the main page.

prisoner6

1 posted on 10/09/2009 3:40:31 AM PDT by prisoner6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: prisoner6
"The Center for Reproductive Rights is challenging the law, arguing that “it violates the Oklahoma Constitution because it ‘covers more than one subject’ — a challenge that previously worked to strike down an abortion ultrasound law."

For the center for reproductive rights.....

Babies Rights

2 posted on 10/09/2009 3:46:22 AM PDT by GloriaJane (http://www.last.fm/user/GloriaJane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

I think its a bad idea. Seems like a great way to entice a nutjob to attack.


3 posted on 10/09/2009 3:59:04 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Seniors, the new shovel ready project under socialized medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

Public Option should be public. Anyone who takes any public money, or services should be able to be looked up. Pelosi gets yet again another Michael Jackson skin stretch...public record.


4 posted on 10/09/2009 4:04:13 AM PDT by Leisler (It's going to be a hard, long winter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6
I don't see a real benefit from this and any invasion of privacy by the government like this strikes me as wrong.

It's not like they are going to do anything with these stats.

5 posted on 10/09/2009 4:05:27 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (Buck Ofama!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

Wouldn’t this violate the HIPAA rules?


6 posted on 10/09/2009 4:14:25 AM PDT by alephnull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6
Replace the word abortion with
“The planned Murder of the Most Helpless”.
7 posted on 10/09/2009 4:21:56 AM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran ((B.?) Hussein (Obama?Soetoro?Dunham?) Change America Will Die From.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

Has anyone fact-checked this? Sounds like at least some spinning going on here. It would be good to get a dispassionate account of what the law actually requires before teeing off on it.


8 posted on 10/09/2009 4:49:43 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

From what I can see, reading Oklahoma HR 1595, it’s true.

Maybe OK should start requiring similar mandatory reporting & publication for everyone who gets a Rx for Viagra, receives treatment for STD’s, has a vasectomy, treated for testicular &/or prostate cancer. Stuff to keep the busybodies from getting bored, ya know.


9 posted on 10/09/2009 5:36:37 AM PDT by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

The pro-aborts are always chirping about “education.” Let the facts be published far and wide.


10 posted on 10/09/2009 6:15:14 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

I think it’s a great idea. Public humiliation is sometimes an effective deterrent.


11 posted on 10/09/2009 6:17:04 AM PDT by ScottinVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leisler
Pelosi gets yet again another Michael Jackson skin stretch...public record.


12 posted on 10/09/2009 6:22:31 AM PDT by ScottinVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

That is BS and doesn’t belong in the public domain any more than treatment for STD or ownership of a firearm.


13 posted on 10/09/2009 7:17:59 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

Would you advocate the same postings for a woman who gives up her baby for adoption?


14 posted on 10/09/2009 7:20:49 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Eagle Eye

“Would you advocate the same postings for a woman who gives up her baby for adoption?”

Negative. No life is lost when a baby is put up for adoption.


15 posted on 10/09/2009 7:38:50 AM PDT by ScottinVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

What a bunch of horse shit.


16 posted on 10/09/2009 7:51:13 AM PDT by dainbramaged (If you want a friend, get a dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6

Collecting the details of individual abortions is not the same as publicizing them one-by-one. That is, of course, something the pro-abortion forces fail to tell you.

Kansas has a similar law, which is used to collect and report information in the aggregate, not on an individual basis. That information, gleaned from actual events, tends to paint a different picture about who is getting abortions and when during the course of the pregnancy they are performed than the pro-abortion forces would have others believe.

That, I suspect, is the reason for the opposition. It’s far more difficult to lie in the face of objective data that most recognize as accurate.


17 posted on 10/09/2009 9:33:35 AM PDT by dez (Giving resident visas to illegals is like giving car thieves legal title to the cars they steal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

I understand that distinction but how do you justify posting all this information about someone who has a legal procedure?


18 posted on 10/09/2009 1:37:10 PM PDT by Eagle Eye (Kenya? Kenya? Kenya just show us the birth certificate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dez

But all I’ve read about this law indicates that the details of individual abortions will be publicized one-by-one online for all to see. So the good gossips of Oklahoma will be able to read that, say, a 33-year-old white married women with three live births, one miscarriage, and two years of college had an abortion on November 3rd, and they can eagerly deduce which friend, relative, or acquaintance that may be.


19 posted on 10/09/2009 10:47:07 PM PDT by sugaree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: prisoner6
Anyone see anything wrong?

A lot of time, effort and money was spent drafting and implementing a law that is quite likely to be struck down in every court challenge it encounters.

20 posted on 10/09/2009 10:56:05 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson