A federal judge this week blocked enforcement of some of the new abortion laws that were passed during a tempestuous special session of the Texas Legislature over the summer. Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the laws can be enacted as scheduled while suits brought against them by Planned Parenthood and other abortion profiteers make their way through the courts.
At issue is whether Texas can legally require all abortionists to have admitting privileges at hospitals near their abortion clinics, and whether RU-486 can be administered in ways not approved by the Federal Drug Administration.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Circuit Court Judge Priscilla Owen wrote in her opinion that the state was likely to prevail in restricting medication abortions, and that there was a “substantial likelihood” that the state would “prevail in its argument that Planned Parenthood failed to establish an undue burden on women seeking abortions” or that the admitting-privileges requirement was a “substantial obstacle” for them.
Take a step back from all the legal arguments about hospital admitting privileges for a minute to consider what’s being debated here. The question is, should doctors who perform abortions have to be able to do follow-up care in a hospital setting for women whose “safe” abortions left them injured or sick. My answer? Of course they should! If you had knee surgery performed by an orthopedic surgeon in an ambulatory surgery center and something went awry, you would see that same doctor in a hospital for follow-up care. It just makes sense. Would you ever choose a doctor who couldn’t get hospital admitting privileges? I sure wouldn’t and I don’t think anyone would.
In my book, “Recall Abortion,” I talked at length about how abortion differs from every other ambulatory procedure. Any other type of invasive procedure requires a prior meeting with the doctor, and possibly the anesthesiologist. Blood work, chest x-rays and other tests are routinely performed to make sure a patient is healthy enough to have the surgery. Not so with abortion. A mother shows up, pays for the abortion up front – which is in itself a departure from standard medical practice – and sees the doctor for the first time after she’s already on the exam table. Many women who are part of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign say they never even learned the doctor’s name.
Planned Parenthood, which stands to lose money if any of its clinics have to close as a result of the new law, says the admitting privileges issue will keep women in Texas from being able to access “safe” abortions. But abortionists are notorious for practicing bad medicine, often with suspended or revoked licenses. How safe can an abortion be if the physician performing it has been turned away from the local hospital?
Pro-aborts in Texas and all over the country are claiming the new laws are part of the war against women. But these laws were enacted by a democratically elected body acting on the wishes of its constituents. And the three judges on the panel that allowed the laws to take effect were all women. The war they’re waging in Texas is not a war against women, but a war against bad medicine.
The truth of the matter is that abortion is the war against women and it’s high time we get this harmful product off the market. If you agree with me, please go to RecallAbortion.com to sign my petition. If you want to learn more about how abortion is harming women, please read the book.