Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rights and Liberties

South Dakota's Anti-Choice Charge

By Nancy Hatch Woodward, Choice! Magazine. Posted December 22, 2005.


South Dakota abortion opponents are hoping to make getting an abortion so onerous that women will just give up trying.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

When it comes to denying women access to abortions, it's hard to beat South Dakota.

  • Like several other states, South Dakota has a mandatory delay law, requiring a woman to wait 24 hours before she can get an abortion.
  • In March, South Dakota enacted restrictions that force doctors to read to women seeking abortions state-scripted information that is medically inaccurate and infused with ideology. The law also requires women to sign the scripts to certify that they understand them. Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota (PPMNS) is currently challenging the law in court.
  • The law in South Dakota also requires minors to notify a parent before getting an abortion.
  • Earlier this year, the state passed a "trigger bill," that will immediately ban all abortions, except to save the life of the woman, if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned.

On top of all these restrictions, there is also the fact that the PPMNS Sioux Falls health center is the only generally available abortion provider in the entire state of South Dakota.

The South Dakota Task Force

On Friday, December 9, the 17-member South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion held its final meeting and made recommendations that encourage the state to restrict abortion further. Advocating for a total ban, but recognizing that it cannot yet be implemented, the task force offered 14 legislative proposals that it would like to see the state pass, including

  • an amendment to the state constitution that gives the "unborn child, from the moment of conception," the same protections "a child receives after birth"
  • a requirement that a pregnant woman receives counseling at a "pregnancy care center that does not perform abortions" before she is allowed to make an appointment at an abortion clinic
  • a requirement that a pregnant woman be shown a "quality ultrasound image of her unborn child" before an abortion is performed

A majority of the task force members -- appointed by South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds, the Speaker of the South Dakota House, and the South Dakota Senate President Pro Tempore -- were staunchly anti-choice. "My perception is that no one was appointed without the person appointing them knowing [what] their position [on abortion] was," says Maria Bell, MD, a member of the pro-choice minority in the task force who served as vice-chair.

Kate Looby, South Dakota state director of PPMNS, who also served on the task force, says that there were approximately 10 members who were anti-choice, six who were pro-choice, and the chair of the task force, who was considered "moderate," but voted mostly with the pro-choice side. According to Looby, two of the pro-choice members never showed up to any meetings. She knows that at least one felt serving on the task force was a waste of time.

Exercise in Futility

The final meeting was supposed to be a time for members to decide what to put in the report and what recommendations to make. But at the start of the meeting, members were asked to approve a report that had already been written.

The report states, "... there are new facts and appreciations of those facts, as discussed in this Report, that disprove many factual assumptions made by the [Supreme] Court in Roe v. Wade, requiring that the Supreme Court reconsider its Roe decision."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Nancy Hatch Woodward is a freelance writer in Chattanooga, TN.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Thanks for paying attention to us in South Dakota
Posted by: SDres11 on Dec 22, 2005 8:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You folks at Alternet should do this more often and with a whole host of issues. What's about to happen to this country is the same as what has happened to my state, Kansas, and most of rural America especially in the north. That's why the North has been losing steadily. Now I don't want to do another North vs South thing but mind you, if we're going to take back America, we're going to have to unite the liberals and moderates and get back to actively fighting. Mind you, even in conservative states like mine, most of these rightwing phonies work rigorously round the clock to keep their base in line. If progressives would keep a structure in place, we will defeat the rightwing taliban even in the most conservative states like SD.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Viewing a QUality Ultrasound?
Posted by: lmwilker on Dec 23, 2005 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can the government force a woman to undergo a medical procedure, in this case an ultrasound, if she doesn't want to undergo such a procedure? Also, if a fetus has the same rights as a child already born does this mean that more pregnant women will be arrested for child abuse for such otherwise legal activities as having a drink or smoking a cigarette? If a poor woman does not seek prenatal care can she be arrested? Will people be able to claim fetuses on their tax returns and will they have to return the money if they miscarry? WIll women have to go before special courts to prove miscarriages were accidental? Women who don't wish to be "surrendered" as second class citizens need to wake up and organize.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Viewing a QUality Ultrasound? Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: Viewing a QUality Ultrasound? Posted by: originalbranek
There Are Some States Not Fit To Live In
Posted by: doneman2000 on Dec 23, 2005 5:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These are places where the slimy politicians have substituted some type of idealogical agenda for laws which should be people friendly as the slimballs work for US not the other way around. When the abortion foes start acting like they want to "save" the nearly 8 million children who die needlessly each year due to abject poverty, then maybe they'll start looking like the "saviors" of the children which is exactly what they want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Children's rights
Posted by: xs10shal on Dec 23, 2005 8:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since SD is so concerned about protecting the rights of unborn children, I'd like to know how concerned they are about protecting children in general. Would someone from S.Dak tell me how funded is state medical insurance for uninsured children? How funded is Headstart for children whose parents cannot afford preschool or may not have a culture of literacy in the home? How much of the state budget is earmarked for the agency that investigates and protects children from physical and sexual abuse and neglect? How much of the state budget is earmarked for drug and alcohol treatment for parents of children who are addicted to alcohol and meth and to teen drug treatment? How much of your states budget is devoted to education so that once a child is born in your state, there are suffiecent resources expended to make sure that they grow up literate and prepared to obtain good jobs so they can support their own burgeoning families. Hopefully, S. Dakota is a leader in this country in supporting children's rights. One would hate to think that the state's interest in the welfare of children stops at their birth or that your legislature is more interested in the talk and not the walk of children's rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Children's rights Posted by: SDres11
a brief word in defense of pro-lifers
Posted by: vespasian01 on Dec 25, 2005 1:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Opinions so strongly held are hard to convey without offending the opposition. It's easy to find posts on Alternet generalizing about the motives and mindset of pro-lifers, like me. But the generalizations are usually far from the mark. There are many of us old hippies who hold a consistent view on the wrongful nature of killing. Don't bunch us in with Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson or any of the other pod-people.

A final thought. Girls who are encouraged to undergo abortion at an early age often feel heartbroken by the decision later in life. A little early compassion for both the mother and baby would go a long way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

how will the progressive movement respond to Roe v. Wade overturn?
Posted by: JoeBackward on Jan 5, 2006 5:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Folks,

What happens if (when) Roe v. Wade is overturned?

The anti-choice movement has thought this through very carefully indeed. Witness the SD "trigger" law.

How will the progressive movement respond?

First of all, does an "illegal" abortion ALWAYS have to be a dangerous abortion? To a limited extent there are new, more private, ways for women to control their own bodies. I'm thinking of various pharmaceutical items. Safe clinics on main streets with supportive staff are obviously best, but what if that's not an option? Good alternative means will be necessary.

Second, we should keep in mind that the neocons' (the rich republicans') worst nightmare is actually overturning Roe v. Wade. Even if they continue their big-media big-money stranglehold on the national electoral process, they still have to get people to turn up and vote. Without Roe v. Wade they lose their strongest way of mobilizing lots of people. The issue is worth a lot more to them in the current state of affairs than it will be if they "win."

A successful politician from my state, Tip O'Neill, famously said, "all politics is local." Roe v. Wade makes choice politics national, not local. How will progressives respond to this issue suddenly becoming local again?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]