Tennessee bill would direct state Health Department to post a report of every abortion

posted at 5:25 pm on March 19, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Under consideration in the state legislature of Tennessee right now is a bill — the Life Defense Act of 2012 — that would direct the state Health Department to post a report of every abortion. Not surprisingly, the bill has already become a source of controversy:

The reports must include the “identification of the physician who performed the abortion and the physician’s office, clinic, hospital or other facility where the abortion was performed,” according to the official summary of the bill.

Chas Sisk of the Nashville Tennessean reports that abortion-rights advocates are worried that this could result in the intimidation of doctors, given violent acts against abortion providers in the past.

Although the bill states that patients will not be identified in the reports, it says the documents must include the woman’s county, age, race, marital status, plus her number of prior pregnancies, number of prior abortions, the gestational age of the fetus, and her preexisting medical conditions. That, critics say, could make it easy to guess identities, particularly in sparsely populated rural areas.

The sponsor of the bill, Matthew Hill, is a Republican state representative from the east Tennessee town of Jonesborough.

“The Department of Health already collects the data, but they don’t publish it,” Hill told the Tennessean. “All we’re asking is that the data they already collect be made public.”

In general, I’m highly in favor of state-level measures to deter abortion up to and even including personhood amendments, but this one stumps me. Right now, the law treats abortion as just another medical procedure. To direct the state Health Department to publish the details of a medical procedure in this way sets a dangerous precedent. Would we want the state Health Department to publish records of every medical procedure we receive? While I don’t want to invoke that awful “right to privacy” that abortion advocates pretend gives women the right to kill their unborn children, if ever a “right to privacy” existed, wouldn’t it be in relation to doctor-patient privilege?

The problem, of course, is that the law treats abortion as just a medical procedure, rather than the elimination of an innocent life. The criminalization of abortion is probably a long way off, but, in the meantime, a variety of less-drastic, pro-life legal measures can at least create or advance the awareness that a fetus is actually a human person with the right to life. Ultrasound requirements, for example, have that as their aim. So, too, do parental consent laws. But this new measure seems to have a different, less sympathetic aim: To shame doctors who perform abortions and to shame women who seek them. But I worry that such a law would do less to change the hearts and minds of abortion advocates than to harden in them the denial of the very awareness of reality we seek to awaken in them.

Let’s hope the Tennessee legislature proceeds cautiously on this one.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Who owns the body of the aborted baby?

Even on pure libertarian grounds, the baby has the right to not be killed because the mother doesn’t want it, or has been convinced it’s not really alive, or is just cravenly indifferent.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 19, 2012 at 9:10 PM


Exactly.
Is the woman’s MAIN desire to KILL (exterminate) the baby? OR is it SHE wants to get out from under the “discomfort to her life style” in that she does not want to be “responsible” for the child? —-So– let’s kill a baby??

The state should mandate that all viable babies be kept alive, and the ABORT-Mother has absolutely NO SAY WHATEVER IN THE MATTER !!

BUH-BYE MOM!!, now get your worthless carcass back into the street for more of your irresponsible, “self important” behavior—-but at least the viable, innocent child can keep it’s LIFE !!

BigSven on March 20, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Who owns the body of the aborted baby?

Even on pure libertarian grounds, the baby has the right to not be killed because the mother doesn’t want it, or has been convinced it’s not really alive, or is just cravenly indifferent.

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 19, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Agreed.
But, hey … POST-abortion, it becomes a marketable commodity.
http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Baby_Body_Parts/ViewVideo.cfm?video=1

pambi on March 20, 2012 at 10:09 AM

They will just lie. And a pro-death state administration, like Kathy Sebelius’ (personal friend to George Tiller), will allow them to cover it up and get rid of records. The previous AG, Steve Six, allowed these documents to be destroyed in Kansas:

http://kansansforlife.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/planned-parenthood-case-continues-wo-felony-charges/#more-8792

cptacek on March 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM

If people who are against this law are saying it is “slut shaming”…then aren’t THEY the ones calling women who get abortions sluts?

Hypocrites.

cptacek on March 20, 2012 at 11:00 AM

I like how Tina gets to the same conclusion I do going in the exact opposite direction.

There have been hundreds if not thousands of threats, acts of violence, and yes assassinations against doctors and their patients due to the abortions they perform.

This law? Only gonna make the targeted threats and violence that much easier.

triple on March 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM

If I must be forced to fund all girls and womens birth control (and per Gillibrat’s and Upchuck’s office I will come 2014), then why does abortion need to exist?

If a woman is so lazy and not get up off her azz and get her FREE birth control, why should a baby be killed because of her inability to manager her PERSONAL responsibility?

Abortion should be overturned based on the fact we must fund aborifacients, sterilizations, and birth control.

Dogood on March 20, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2