Noli Irritare Leones

Nathan urges the pro-choice and generally socially liberal Christian Alliance for Progress to support the Coercive Abortion Prevention Act, a five bill package that has been introduced in the Michigan state legislature that “amends the penal code to define specific actions as criminal if they are intended to coerce a pregnant woman into seeking an abortion” and “amend existing law by requiring abortionists to take certain steps to screen each woman for possible coercion. The woman is screened for physical abuse, stalking, filing or threat to file for divorce, withdrawal or threat to withdraw financial support, change or threaten to change an existing housing arrangement, terminate or change in conditions of employment.” (Quotes from Right to Life of Michigan.)

Nathan adds that this legislation is supported by Right to Life of Michigan and opposed by MARAL Pro-Choice Michigan, so I jumped to their web sites, and, wow, pro-life groups have sure been busy in Michigan. At the Right to Life of Michigan site, I learn that

A prolife legal defense firm called Americans United for Life recently released an extensive state-by-state review and analysis of state laws dealing with prolife issues. The report, entitled Defending Life 2006, examined legislation dealing with abortion, end of life issues, bioethics and the conscience rights of health care workers. After analyzing the laws in all 50 states, Defending Life 2006 ranked Michigan the #1 Best State for Life. The hard work of Michigan prolife citizens and lawmakers has paid off in Michigan as we are leading the nation in defending the lives of the most vulnerable.

Meanwhile, looking at the currently introduced legislation that MARAL Pro-Choice Michigan is opposing, I find that it includes

House Bill 5311 would prohibit over-the-counter dispensing of emergency contraceptives, even if the Food and Drug Administration approved of its use.

House Bill 4246 and House Bill 4247 prevent abortion coverage in insurance plans unless a separate rider is purchased.

House Bill 4741, House Bill 4745, House Bill 4746, and House Bill 4775 are a package of bills that allow health care providers, facilities, and insurance companies to object to participating in a health care service as a matter of conscience, on ethical, moral, or religious grounds.

Senate Bill 938 allows health care providers to object to participating in a health care service as a matter of conscience, on ethical, moral, or religious grounds.

Senate Bill 307 requires the addition of a provision in Michigan’s Informed Consent law that would force women to have an ultrasound. The women would then have the ability to view the active ultrasound image and have a picture of the ultrasound image of the fetus prior to obtaining an abortion.

House Bill 4446 orginally required the addition of a provision in Michigan’s Informed Consent law that would force women to have an ultrasound. The bill was amended in the Senate, eliminating the mandate that women must have an ultrasound regardless of medical necessity. If an ultrasound is performed, women would then have the ability to view the active ultrasound image and have a picture of the ultrasound image of the fetus prior to obtaining an abortion.

Senate Bill 1177, Senate Bill 1178, Senate Bill 1179, Senate Bill 1180, and Senate Bill 1181, are a package of bills, dubbed the “Coercive Abortion Prevention Act”, which seeks to require providers to “screen” all patients for any potential “coercive” behavior on the part of anyone in the patients life and would impose an additional mandatory 24-hour delay if a patient indicated that had been “coerced”. If the patient is a minor, and indicates that someone has tried to “coerce” them to have an abortion, the provider most call child protective services. Additionally, anyone defined as exhibiting such “coercive” behavior would face possible criminal and civil penalties. Domestic violence groups also oppose these bills.

House Bill 5879, House Bill 5880, House Bill 5881, House Bill 5882, and House Bill 5883 are a package of bills, dubbed the “Coercive Abortion Prevention Act”, which seeks to require providers to “screen” all patients for any potential “coercive” behavior on the part of anyone in the patients life and mandates public notices in clinics stating that it is illegal to be coerced into having an abortion. If the patient is a minor, and indicates that someone has tried to “coerce” them to have an abortion, the provider most call child protective services. Additionally, anyone defined as exhibiting such “coercive” behavior would face possible criminal and civil penalties.

Domestic violence groups also oppose these bills. Amendments to ensure women were not coerced out of having an abortion failed in the House Committee on Health Policy.

House Bill 4831 is an omnibus bill that authorizes appropriations for most state agencies and programs for fiscal year 2005-2006. House Bill 4831 would cut more than $5 million dollars in pregnancy prevention and family planning funds. In addition, House Bill 4831 would continue to prioritize funds to providers who refuse to give all-options counseling and abortion referrals and would impose new regulations on agencies receiving family planning funds. The new regulations would require the following: 1) agencies receiving funds from the state would be required to increase male clients to 20% or provide services only to female patients; 2) agencies would have to track the sexual activity and related costs to married and unmarried clients who receive family planning and sexually transmitted disease prevention services; 3) agencies receiving funds for minors would be required to spend a of minimum of 50% of the funds targeting parents of minors; and 4) agencies would have to discourage sexual activity outside of marriage.

Senate Bill 9 prohibits research on a live or aborted embryo, fetus, or neonate except in instances of spontaneous abortion where consent of the mother has been obtained.

House Bill 4676 further restricts the current ban prohibiting research on embryonic stem cells by prohibiting financial benefit or compensation for the distribution or transfer of any portion of an embryo, fetus, or neonate except in instances of spontaneous abortion where consent of the mother has been obtained.

House Bill 5645, House Bill 5646, Senate Bill 1014, and Senate Bill 1015 are a package of to define and clarify the way in which fetal remains are disposed of in the case of a stillbirth, miscarriage or an abortion.

Descriptions are all in MARAL’s words; I eliminated duplication that comes from having the same description under each of a set of bills, but kept both the descriptions of the House and Senate versions for those cases where amendments or attempts at amendment made for differences in the two descriptions. There is also a list of legislation supported by MARAL, which includes some things like expanding insurance coverage to include contraception and expanding insurance coverage to include annual pap smears. But there’s certainly a large supply of pending legislation that MARAL doesn’t want.

So I found NARAL’s Bill Tracker for Pending State Legislation and compared my own state. It’s a striking contrast to Michigan, with one sex education bill that NARAL opposes (requiring parental consent), and a whole series of bills that NARAL likes.

Let me check New York. OK, this I didn’t expect; New York’s pretty darn liberal, and abortion there was legal even pre-Roe vs. Wade, but there’s a bill being introduced to ban abortion after 12 weeks. I guess the battlefield is being prepared everywhere for what happens if the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade. On the other side, there’s a whole raft of legislation being introduced in New York to promote access to emergency contraception.

At any rate, if you want pro-life legislation, Michigan is apparently your model state.

This entry was posted on Saturday, July 29th, 2006 at 7:50 am and is filed under Abortion, News and Commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.