A bill was passed June 15 in the North Carolina Senate that aims to drastically alter abortion procedures in North Carolina. Its constituents have dubbed the bill the “Women’s Right to Know Act” and its swift and modest proposal requires that women, upon expressing intent for an abortion, must wait 24 hours and have an ultrasound performed or listen to a fetal heartbeat.
The bill is expected be struck down with a veto from Governor Beverly Perdue; however, she can do nothing to remove the mindset of those who put forth this morally reprehensible piece of legislature.
The sheer audacity of this bill is deplorable. It interferes in one of the most trying times of a woman’s life. Pregnant women do not wake up one morning and fancy themselves to get an abortion; it is a decision that is never made flippantly. It is a decision where the rational reasons to terminate a pregnancy must be so great to overcome the life-enduring and crippling emotional costs that must be weighed when considering an abortion. This bill makes the triumph of reason all but impossible.
Senator Warren Daniel, a proponent of the bill, has said “We know statistically that this type of legislation helps make abortions more rare.” This idea is shocking, as the requirement of hearing a fetal heartbeat or having an ultrasound performed creates a previously unfounded level of emotional attachment for the parents of the unborn. This newfound attachment, when mandated that it fester for 24 hours, makes it highly unlikely that rationality overcomes emotionality for a second time.
This bill, with its pro-life base, will indeed prevent many abortions; however, the problem with the basis is that many times it forces one to sacrifice their own. The demographics of those having abortions performed do not coincide those who are ready to start a family. According to the CDC, the most common demographic of women having abortions are unmarried (82 percent), white (55 percent) and less than 25 years of age (51 percent). This sect will be hard-pressed to just scrounge together the $350 – $500 for an abortion or in the future provide the CNN-estimated $222,360 it takes to raise a child from birth to age 17.
As one of the only industrialized countries without a system for supporting the birth and care of children, career advancement is reserved for those without children and men, and a young, unmarried woman raising a child can forget about financial security. That is to say nothing about the health risks involved with carrying a child to term — CDC estimates live-births maternal-mortality rates to be seven times that of legal abortions in the U.S.
A woman has to be ready for a child, and even then a child is not for everyone. CNN reports that one-fifth of women now leave their childbearing years without having a child, up 100 percent from 1970. Harvard psychology professor Daniel Gilbert found that parents are finding more happiness in eating, watching television and exercising than interacting with their children. It’s puzzling that in the “Women’s Right to Know Ac,t” none of this information is provided.
The emotional weight that this bill imposes will impede the life-course of many women. The bill will direct their life where it has no business going. I propose a new policy to counteract the bill: If a pregnant woman has concluded not to subject herself to childbearing or care-taking and has exhausted the consideration of all other options, then do not prey upon her with a law ratified for a talking point in one’s 2012 soapbox speech. She is in one of the most trying points of her life, so act accordingly.
