The War on Women is 1 year old, going on 20

In 1992 the Supreme Court decided (Pennsylvania v. Casey) that states could implement “reasonable requirements”(notifications, consents and waiting periods) which a woman would have to meet in order to obtain an abortion.  At that time I wrote a letter to my local NJ paper, stating my view that while these requirements did not actually prevent a woman from obtaining an abortion, they very effectively limited a woman’s access to the abortion which was her right.

Today I unearthed that 20-year-old letter and saw that in 2012 women face the same issues and more. I am appalled.

“Reasonable requirements” are getting more sophisticated, thanks to technology advances.  Virginia  passed a law last week requiring women to undergo a transvaginal or abdominal ultrasound prior to having an abortion.  Iowa and Texas have passed similar laws.  These requirements are hardly reasonable.

First, the ultrasound requirement requires another visit to the doctor. The transvaginal ultrasound is physically invasive.  An abdominal ultrasound still requires the patient to undress.  Reasonable? Related to the pregnant woman’s health?

Second, there’s cost.  It goes without saying that this procedure costs money.  Probably a lot of money, given that it can cost over $100 for a plain vanilla x-ray.  Is this additional cost reasonable? Related to the pregnant woman’s health?

Third, there’s the availability of the procedure. I recently heard a proponent of this legislation say “So many doctors make this part of their regular medical care.” How many? My friend’s doctor? Not my doctor. What if the doctor that does ultrasounds is an hour’s drive away? What if the pregnant woman has no car, and gets to her doctor by bus?

What if that woman’s doctor doesn’t think an ultrasound is medically appropriate?

Then there are the states that go well beyond “reasonable restrictions.” Six states ban abortions after 20 weeks, period.  If this does not fly in the face of legally available abortions, I don’t know what does. To add insult to injury, Congressional Republicans are working tirelessly to ensure that health coverage does not include contraceptive devices or medications.

What's more upsetting is that today women face a lot more than abortion restrictions.  Women face government-sanctioned dangers to their lives and well-being.

In February 2010, Utah passed a Republican-sponsored bill into law that allows women to be criminally charged if they cannot prove a miscarriage was accidental. Women could be criminally charged for miscarriages caused by “reckless behavior”, such as failure to fasten a seat belt.

In Georgia, every miscarriage is now subject to legal investigation under the Georgia “Death Investigation Act”.

This very month (February 2012), every Republican in the Senate Judiciary Committee voted against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act, which funds services to protect adult and teen victims of domestic violence and sexually motivated crimes. How can the idea of denying protection from violence be acceptable to our nation’s lawmakers?

This post's title is because almost exactly one year ago, The New York Times’ main editorial was entitled “War on Women”. That editorial began, “Republicans in the House of Representatives are mounting an assault on women’s health and freedom that would deny millions of women access to affordable contraception and life-saving cancer screenings and cut nutritional support for millions of newborn babies in struggling families.”

And 20 years ago I wrote, “A woman can still get an abortion. But Roe v. Wade once guaranteed every female the right to choose an abortion.  Now your rights will depend on what kind of woman you are. Old enough. Near the right medical care. Able to find the right doctor. With money to pay.  Don’t kid yourselves. One day even being the right kind of woman may not guarantee you the choice you need, when you need it”.
 
I can't believe I'm writing those words again, today. But it’s not just about abortion any more.  It's about being denied access to medical care for ourselves and being denied nutrition for our children. It's about being denied protection from violence that every adult male in this country will enjoy protection from.

Jessica Valenti wrote, “…we need to ensure that Republicans are held accountable and don't get to brush these comments and actions off as mistakes or misunderstandings. Because they're not simple gaffes, they're a crystal clear window into the future that the GOP wants for women”. 

And if the just-as-duly-elected Democrats don’t stand up to their Republican counterparts, it’s a window into the future that our government wants for women. Not just unlucky women. Not just poor women. Not just liberal women. Not just women who live in red states. Not just women who live in blue states. All of us women.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/opinion/26sat1.html 
http://www.npr.org/2012/02/23/147284717/the-nation-men-all-men-and-birth-control
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/02/19/abortion-wars-real-people-behind-restrictions 
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2012/01/05/endofyear.html 
http://confessions-of-a-thinking-woman.blogspot.com/2012/02/grievances-against-gop-from-former.html