By snoadmin
California Sen. Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego) has proposed a bill that would allow non-physicians to perform abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy. The bill, SB 1501, was proposed as a way to offer safer opportunities for women in rural areas of California to get abortions. The law sounds scary at first, and while the idea of a non-physician performing abortions is a lot to take in, ultimately the benefits may outweigh the perceived drawbacks.
The new bill will allow physicians’ assistants, nurse practitioners and midwives to perform aspiration abortions, which basically suck the fetus out. While the procedure seems fairly simple, deciding to have an abortion should be made after careful consideration, and the image of someone other than a licensed physician performing one is sort of jarring.
Midwives are typically present during childbirth to provide support for women during and after labor. They are not doctors. What makes them qualified to perform an abortion? A physician’s assistant or nurse practitioner, on the other hand, is probably more qualified.
Democrats in Congress are generally in favor of the new bill because it will give women more options to receive proper health care.
An article in the Los Angeles Times reported that many women in rural areas of California have to travel long distances at inconvenient times of the day to receive these procedures. Considering the alternatives, such as getting black market abortions, letting non-physicians who are located in less populated areas of the state perform abortions may be a woman’s best option.
One argument against this bill is that eventually California will allow “anyone” to perform an abortion at any time and any place. Anti-abortion activists have already spoken out against the bill and claimed that California should not be so accommodating when it comes to the procedure.
“My immediate response when I heard about this bill was visceral — I felt like I was kicked in the gut,” said Assemblyman Brian Jones (R-Santee). “I shouldn’t be shocked at the moral failure this represents, but I fear what it says about our society that we are actually looking for more ways to abort babies.”
Those against abortions will obviously disagree with this bill and, on some level, they may have a valid point. Deciding to get an abortion should be come after careful consideration.
The fact that any old physician’s assistant can perform one may send the message that the procedure does not warrant any more attention than, say, getting your tonsils out.
Getting an abortion is not a decision to be made on a whim and some may argue that SB 1501 will make it easier to do just that. Ultimately, the decision is not anyone’s to make except the woman getting the abortion.
Whether or not this bill will get passed has yet to be seen. It was introduced on Feb. 28, but within just 24 hours of its debut it gained support from Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles) and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento).
While the prospect of letting someone other than a licensed doctor perform an abortion does sound risky, the positives outweigh the negatives.
Women who live in under-populated areas of the state may not have the same kind of easy access to healthcare as someone who lives in Los Angeles or even Long Beach. If SB 1501 allows women to get a safe procedure instead of back-alley abortions, than the law should pass.
