The meddling by so-called social conservatives seems endless. But it has moved from the absurd to the downright cruel. Two years ago, Del. John Cosgrove wanted to require women who miscarried to file police reports within 12 hours. I wrote somewhat passionately about it then at Democracy for Virginia's blog Fortunately for the women of Virginia, the fantastic blogger, Maura Keaney, used her old Legislative Sentry project to take him on and spark a coalition. This coalition brought conservatives, moderates and liberals together in one voice to stop Cosgrove's malicious meddling in women's lives. The effort landed Maura (and Cosgrove, looking like a fool on national TV)on ABC's "Nightline."
The Handmaid's Tale is as relevant today as in 2005. Now comes a bill sponsored by S Chris Jones (R-Suffolk) making it a felony for women to "cause" their own miscarriage. And it has passed out of committee in the House of Delegates. Virginia is fast becoming a state unfit for women because roughly 20% of pregnancies result in miscarriage. And those unfortunate enough to endure one, will now be subject to possible police investigation and felony prosecution. Sentences could be for up to ten years in prison.
What does it mean to "cause" one's own miscarriage? The opportunity for legal mischief and malicious prosecution is alarming. If the woman accidentally falls, is she a causal agent? If a woman doesn't manage the minutia of her life in a manner consistent with the radical "wrong's" (they're not "right") dictates, did she cause it? Did she fail to manage stress? Was there an organic problem she might have corrected ahead of time? Should she not have worked? Why? Why? Why?
How, exactly, does one prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she didn't cause a miscarriage? Most miscarriages aren't explainable. But the implicit presumption of criminality here will up-end the cornerstone of our legal system: innocent until proven guilty. This is not going back to the so-called "good old days." Even pre-Roe v Wade, women weren't subject to such Draconian treatment.
I know because, as I wrote in that DFV blog article linked above, I lost a very much wanted pregnancy. And after a three-day labor ending in heartbreak, I was treated coldly, told told to get over it, and even forced to share a four-person hospital ward with nursing moms. Miscarrying women had "failed" at their primary job and there was no mercy. But this? How did we get to this place where an unfortunate accident of nature, as miscarriages are, is thought intentional or grounds for police investigtion? Or will only the miscarriages of moderates and liberals be presumed so?
I ended my 2005 DFV commentary in a lament about the legislators who conjure up such meddlesome, hurtful bills:
Do they not have legitimate concerns of the state to tend to? They'll thwart real prevention of unwanted pregnancies, then condemn the very statistics they help inflate. But they'll barely touch compassionate legislative efforts to help real (as opposed to "potential") children and women. They'll worship at the altar of first trimester ultrasound, even as children of America and the world suffer. For legislators such as they, "big government" isn't when you insert yourselves into the eggs within a woman's body or the sperm trying to make contact, but when the government does real good in our names.
Speaking of which, would you mind contacting me at cycle12@adelphia.net for an off-list but politically related question?
Thanks!
Steve
Sad.
I'm not sure it comports with Roe, in any event. In theory this bill covers procedures that aren't medically approved. Does Roe require that? Also, the language is so broad ... I'm not sure what the bill really covers.
Sorry, gotta run for now.
Thank you for having the courage to write this post and share your heartache. Any woman who has had a miscarriage (I have too) knows that it is a devastating and very emotional time. For any legislator to suggest that law enforcement officials would actually question a woman about her intent during such a crisis is really unbelievable. What further concerns me is that 75 of the delegates voted for this bill. Who are they? The actual vote by name hasn't been posted as yet. I certainly want to know if my delegate voted for or against it.
Evidently Virginia is not the only state with complete idiots in its state government. My son sent me this link today: http://www.nwcn.com/...
So, I guess this means that if you had a miscarriage and therefore didn't have any kids your marriage would be nullified.
Every woman (and man too) who reads this blog should call their state rep and let them know that we will not stand for this outrageous insult to our privacy.
An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.
It's a gay group making fun of those who would ban same sex unions by taking their pro-life arguments to its logical (or illogical and absurd) conclusions. Here's another giveaway:
Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage.
It's actually a very funny and creative tactic. We need to maintain our sense of irony and appreciation for the theater of the absurd. If anybody is old enough to recognize the reference: Abbie Hoffman would have loved this.
If abortion and contraception did not have a sexual basis to it, they wouldn't care.
Think about it. The GOP doesn't care if it sends people to die in an unnecessary war, but they'll get all in a froth over the morning after birth control pill.
They vote for legislation that hurts certain social classes, and figuratively starves children but profess to care about issues like whether a fetus feels pain.
It's all rooted in feelings of sexual inadequacy, and, for men, in fear of the power of women's sexuality.
There has been a power competition going back at least as far as the beginning of recorded history between fearful men and fearful women. (Strong men and women don't engage in this nonsense.) At least in the "modern" religions, men regrettably have been using religion quite successfully to control women. Jews, Moslems, Christians of every stripe -- they all do it. It's a disgrace in all senses of the word because it has nothing to do with morality or worship.
And once they have invaded women's privacy this way, it's only a matter of time before the state could provide "compelling interest" in invading men's privacy to determine, for example, whether they were truly hetrosexual.
This can't even accurately be termed an attempt to take us back to the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages never invaded people's privacy in this way. Only the Brave New World of modern medicine could do it for these legislative peeping Toms.
But one thing, no conservative can ever say with a straight face that they want less government in our lives. They appear to only want less government in large corporations' business lives while inventing more ways to control your personal life and mine.
I agree with Teddy, who added her usual wisdom. My wife then said that some men are really unhappy that they can't control the reproductive process.
Why only 25 votes in opposition? What were the rest of the Dems thinking?