North Carolina ultrasound abortion law ruled illegal by judge

Reuters ^ | January 17, 2014 | David Adams

[boatbums]

A federal judge on Friday struck down a 2011 North Carolina law requiring abortion providers to perform an ultrasound and explain it to a woman before having an abortion, arguing it violated the constitutional right to free speech of doctors.

U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles found that a state does not have "the power to compel a health care provider to speak, in his or her own voice, the state's ideological message in favor of carrying a pregnancy to term."

The law "compels a health care provider to act as the state's courier and to disseminate the state's message discouraging abortion, in the provider's own voice, in the middle of a medical procedure, and under circumstances where it would seem the message is the provider's and not the state's," she added in her 42-page ruling.

[Steve_Seattle]

"May she be forever overturned."

Since her idiotic ruling undermines the basis of ALL law, I think even liberal Supreme Court justices would overturn it.

[LibLieSlayer]

Hey satan... here is another judge for your furnace.

[Soul of the South]

“Judge is an Obama 2010 appointee”

The vote to confirm her in the Senate was unanimous. She is as much a product of the Republicans as she is of the Democrats.

[Adder]

“compels a health care provider to act as the state’s courier and to disseminate the state’s message

Hey, thats what zerocare does...

[txrefugee]

Anything states do that tries to prevent the murder of pre-born children by their mothers will be struck down by the ungodly federal government. Their paid executioners in black robes will continue this purge of the next generation because 60 million dead babies isn’t enough to satisfy Satan.

[trebb]

U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles found that a state does not have "the power to compel a health care provider to speak, in his or her own voice, the state's ideological message in favor of carrying a pregnancy to term." The law "compels a health care provider to act as the state's courier and to disseminate the state's message discouraging abortion, in the provider's own voice, in the middle of a medical procedure, and under circumstances where it would seem the message is the provider's and not the state's," she added in her 42-page ruling.

Would be interesting to know how the same "judge" would rule on the birth control mandate as opposed by religious entities.....

[MinuteGal]

Just another part of the Left's ongoing war against life....like the upcoming death panels.

In the liberal religion of which Obama is the Messiah, murdering unborn babies is the sacrifice to their pagan gods....just as drugs are their holy communion and plastic surgery is their "being born again".

Leni

[NormsRevenge]

same can be said for Leon Panetta and his Senate conformation vote as DoD Sec.

[boatbums]

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, heralded the judge's ruling as, "[It] marks a major victory for North Carolina women and sends a message to lawmakers across the country: It is unconstitutional for politicians to interfere in a woman's personal medical decisions.". Because Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the country, they have a vested interest (conflict of interest, really) in assuring NO barriers are erected to them giving the abortion and the money that gets paid (over a $1 BILLION a year industry).

Since 1994, the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services has required by regulation an ultrasound for any patient who is scheduled for an abortion procedure. Abortion providers use the information primarily to determine how far along the baby is rather than depending on the woman's guess as to when the pregnancy began. They then decide what procedure is used AND how much to charge since the further along the pregnancy is the more money it costs to end it. I find this ruling ludicrous on many levels. The "doctor" (and I use quotes because the person who would intentionally kill an unborn baby doesn't deserve the title) already has an ultrasound done before he/she can proceed. What this law did was allow the mother to see what the doctor sees and be told the gestational age of her baby, the beating heart, and, in many cases, the clearly defined body of that tiny human life (not a blob at all).

The rest of the law, called "The Woman's Right to Know Act", include:

Patients must wait at least 24 hours between scheduling the abortion and having the procedure.

Women must be given extensive information, including material about the medical risks of abortion, the gestational age of the fetus at the time of the operation, whether the surgeon has liability insurance for abortions, the resources available for birth and child care, the abrtion-alternative centers on the state website and told that the father of the child is liable for financial support. The law also states that doctors who violate it can be sued not only by the patient, but by the woman's spouse, parent or sibling. (taken from an article published today in the Charlotte Observer).

I think it is easy to see why the abortion rights advocates deplore laws such as this one as well as those in other states that limit when abortions are done in the term, who may perform them, the health conditions of the "clinics", admitting privileges to hospitals should complications arise and other regulations that actually DO put the best interest of women ahead of profits.

[boatbums]

You are right - there has been a fifty-year effort to obfuscate the nature of the human fetus/embryo, so many women really do not know the basic biological facts concerning their unborn child. They have been told it’s a blob of protoplasm, or something like a fish, or part of their own body, kind of like their appendix, but not the actual facts.

For those who profit mightily from abortions (over $1 BILLION a year industry), the LAST thing they want is an educated woman. In many cases, the pregnant woman is frantic and under duress either by the child's father, her parents, peers or society to not be pregnant. In my years of counseling these women, I have heard some of the saddest most heart-wrenching stories. RARELY is this a woman's choice all on her own. We really DO need to do more to help women make choices that are life-affirming.