North Carolina Senate OKs Ultrasound Before Abortion Bill

State   Steven Ertelt   Jun 16, 2011   |   11:09AM    Charlotte, NC

On the heels of legislators making North Carolina the third state to de-fund the Planned Parenthood abortion business, North Carolina lawmakers have approved legislation to help women avoid abortions.

The state Senate voted 29-20 late Wednesday for a bill supported by pro-life groups that helps women obtain information about abortion’s risks and alternatives they may not otherwise receive before an abortion. The bill also allows women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn baby, something abortion centers routinely do but don’t let women see.

The measure, which also has a 24-hour waiting period component, is designed to help women find positive abortion alternatives. The Woman’s Right to Know bill, H 854, is similar to legislation other states have passed and is proven to reduce abortions. When women are given information about abortion that Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses don’t routinely provide, they frequently consider alternatives.

The state House previously voted 71-48 for the Right to Know bill that provides them with information about the development of their unborn child, the medical risks associated with having an abortion, and the availability of abortion alternatives.

Gov. Bev Perdue, who supports abortion, already vetoed the state budget in part because it disallowed state taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood, and she is expected to veto this pro-woman, pro-life bill as well. Last week, according to the Charlotte Observer, Perdue said “government has no role interfering in the relationship between a doctor and a patient” and one of her representatives called the bill an example of “Republicans’ more extreme agenda.”

“I suspect it will be one of several social issues that will arrive on the governor’s desk that illustrate the Republicans’ more extreme agenda. We have found places that we have been able to work together, but there have been very few this session,” said Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson. “She’ll have to give it very, very serious thought before taking action. The governor supports choice. She’s made that very clear.”

However, women seeking abortions have no prior relationship with the abortion practitioner and normally have never met him before the abortion because abortion practitioners do not typically engage in legitimate OBGYN or family practice medicine.

The House vote was one short of the two-thirds majority necessary to override a gubernatorial veto and the Senate would not have enough vote either if Perdue favors the abortion industry over the protection of women and unborn children.

Some 34 other states already have a waiting period on abortion on the books and Republican Sen. Warren Daniel of Morganton, on the Senate floor, told lawmakers, “We know statistically that this type of legislation helps to make abortions more rare.” He said the bill could reduce the 30,000 abortions in North Carolina annually by as much as 10 percent.

“We believe this gives women the best information they need to make a decision they will live with for the rest of their lives,” said Daniel. “Are we adding regulations to the abortion industry? Yes we are. We know statistically this will save lives.”

During the committee debate on the legislation, lawmakers engaged in a jaw-dropping discussion to determine if it is better that children not be killed in an abortion or save the state money. Members of the appropriations committee debated a fiscal note legislative staff attached to the bill saying it would result in more than 2,900 births of children annually who may otherwise have become victims of abortion. The made the estimates based on similar legislation in Mississippi that resulted in abortion reductions and claimed the births would cost the state approximately $7 million a year in Medicaid expenses.

Rep. Burt Jones of Rockingham was incredulous and said, according to WRAL, that he couldn’t believe legislators were debating whether more abortions or more expenses were better.

“To me, it is incredible that we would even debate the idea that somehow we can improve the fiscal impact of this state by not allowing children to be born,” he said. “I’m a fiscal conservative, but if we’ve got to pay a little more money in this state because more children have the right to be born, then so be it.”

North Carolina Right to Life president Barb Holt says the pro-life group strongly supports the legislation.

“This bill will provide women considering abortion with all the facts to make an informed decision 24 hours before an abortion,” she explained. “It will also ensure that she can view the ultrasound of her unborn child. Many women who later regret their abortions say seeing the ultrasound would have helped them choose birth rather than abortion for their unborn children.”

Holt says the bill will also ensure better enforcement of the state’s parental involvement law because it would “close a loophole that allows minors to forge their parent’s signature without the abortion provider having to verify that the parent has actually signed the consent for abortion form.”

“Similar laws in other states have saved many thousands of unborn children from abortion and their mothers from making a decision many later regret. We have the opportunity to save thousands of lives in our state by passing this bill,” Holt says.