Here We Go Again...

[Hat tip to supporter Paul Root Wolpe and our colleagues at Bioedge for bringing our attention to this story]

As we blogged about before on several occasions, the debate over the personhood and the legal/moral status of embryos (as well as other entities) continues: Even though the 'personhood for embryos' amendment in Colorado was resoundingly defeated, North Dakota is next in line to attempt to create a law that would give full moral and legal status to embryos.

The Grand Fork Herald reports that [The] "measure approved by the North Dakota House gives a fertilized human egg the legal rights of a human being, a step that would essentially ban abortion in the state.

The bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended abortion rights nationwide, supporters of the legislation said.

Representatives voted 51-41 to approve the measure. It now moves to the North Dakota Senate for its review.

The two-paragraph bill declares that 'any organism with the genome of homo sapiens' is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

It says the Legislature may choose one of its members to help defend the new law if its constitutionality is challenged in court." Full article accessible here.

I don't know if there are any fertility clinics in North Dakota, but I don't believe there are any exceptions for IVF. Given that this is an attempt to ban abortion, I wonder what consideration, if any, has been given to victims of rape or incest or those families who are choosing PGD to avoid transmission of painful genetic disorders. Or those women whose health might be threatened by a pregnancy (e.g. women with certain forms of MS or Eisenmenger's Syndrome).
There are less coercive ways to discourage and reduce numbers of abortions; and different ways to approach the issue, like Aspen Bakers' Pro-Voice solution.

Obama Repeals Global Gag Rule

One of the clearest things I remember about my time working at Planned Parenthood was the rejoicing that happened when Clinton repealed Bush, Sr's global gag rule order. Although I was no longer working for Planned Parenthood by the time W. re-enacted his father's gag order, I despaired at the number of women worldwide who were going to have their access to safe and legal information about abortion restricted or completely taken away.

Checking the news before bed tonight, I actually scared my cats reacting to the news that Obama has overturned the Mexico City Policy.

I realize that there are people in the reading audience who will be disappointed by this news, and will work to continue having it placed back into effect. And personally, my concern was never so much about the abortions being provided (or not), as it was my issue with the fact that NGO's were forced to choose between discussing the full range of care options for a pregnant woman or losing their funding from the US government. I haven't been where these NGOs work, and I can't even pretend to know what they see, daily, in the lives of the women they treat. But I know that medical abortions are necessary around the world, and I know that there are situations and reasons for choosing abortion in these countries that I might never fully comprehend. A woman should have the right to a full and open, honest discussion of all of her options with her health care provider, regardless of where she lives in the world. That honesty should not be a privilege only granted to those lucky enough to live in a first world country.
-Kelly Hills

A New Day...

Now that the numbers are in, here are some of the election results that our readers might be interested in:

South Dakota's Measure 11, aimed at triggering a Supreme Court showdown on Roe vs. Wade, has been defeated.

The ban on gay marriage is leading.

Colorado 'Personhood' Amendment Defeated.

The next American President is an advocate and steward for the environment.

Michigan became the 13th state to legalize marijuana for medical purposes, with 63 percent of the vote.

Voters in Massachusetts approved an initiative to decriminalize possession of less than an ounce of marijuana.

Recent reproductive rights rulings ...

A quick recap of two recent rulings that may be of interest:

Yesterday, a federal appeals court overturned Virginia's ban on late-term abortion, passed in 2003 as the "Partial Birth Infanticide Act". Although the US Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortion in 2007 (Gonzales v. Carhart), the Richmond-based US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit concluded that the Virginia ban was overly restrictive in comparison. In particular, unlike the federal ban, the Virginia law provided no legal protection for physicians who "accidentally" perform an intact dilation and extraction while performing a second-trimester abortion.

Across the pond, the British Parliament voted to keep an upper limit of 24 weeks for elective abortion, rebuffing critics who sought to lower the limit to 12 weeks. A very small number of infants born after only 24 weeks of gestation survive, but a majority of British MPs felt that the small chance of survival did not justify further restrictions on a woman's right to choose.

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg Says She Does Not Believe Roe v. Wade Will Be Overturned

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Sunday during a speech at Ahavath Achim synagogue in Atlanta said that she does not believe the court will overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that effectively barred state abortion bans, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports (Visser, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 10/21).

However, Ginsburg told the crowd of 500 people that if Roe were overturned, she does "not believe" it would "prevent women of means from accessing an abortion" but would "have a devastating impact on poor women" (AP/International Herald Tribune, 10/21). According to the Journal-Constitution, if Roe were overturned, middle-class women would be able to travel to states that allow the procedure, just as women who could afford to travel to California, Hawaii and New York -- where abortion was legalized prior to Roe -- did so to obtain an abortion (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 10/21).

Ginsburg added that divisive issues such as abortion demonstrate the need for a strong, vigorous minority in the court, particularly in light of the more conservative court. She said she hopes the latest court term, which began this month, will be less divided than the last term. One-third of the cases during the last term -- including the case that upheld a ban on so-called "partial-birth" abortion -- were decided by one vote, the AP/Herald Tribune reports. Ginsburg said, "I will continue to dissent if in my judgment the court veers in the wrong direction when important issues are at stake" (AP/International Herald Tribune, 10/21).

Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork.org. You can view the Kaiser Daily Reports online, search the archives, and sign up for email delivery at www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/. The Kaiser Daily Reports are published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. © 2007 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.