Tomorrow, March 17th, the Indiana House Public Policy and Veterans' Affairs Committee will hear Senate Bill 76 in room 156-D of the statehouse at 10am. SB 76 would set up another unnecessary hurdle for a woman seeking an abortion, specifically an addition to the "Informed Consent" law. But SB 76 could become much worse: it could become the home of the invasive, unconstitutional ideas this committee already heard in House Bill 1607.
About SB 76, they say, SB 76 would require a health care provider to offer a pregnant woman the opportunity to view an ultrasound image or hear the heart tones of the fetus before performing an abortion. This bill does nothing to improve the quality of care received by patients. Indiana’s informed consent law already insures that patients receive full information on the abortion procedure, possible risks, and alternatives available. All Indiana abortion providers already perform an ultrasound before any abortion, to confirm the gestation of the fetus; all patients are welcome to view the ultrasound at that time. However, a fetoscope cannot detect a heartbeat until 16—20 weeks gestation, and even newer Doppler technology cannot measure heart tones until 8-10 weeks. 58% of abortions are performed by 8 weeks’ gestation; with advances in surgical technique and the availability of abortion by medication, the percentage of early abortions will only increase.
They're talking offer, not force. The patient can say no. The 'hurdle' is saying no to the ultrasound. What's wrong with this idea?