A GOOD ABORTION LAW

Doctors: Finally, a law that 'gets it right' on abortion
South Dakota legislation described as protecting child, mother and physician
By Bob Unruh
 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Finally there is a law that address abortion in scientific, medical and ethical perspectives – and gets it right, according to leaders of the 17,000-member Christian Medical Association.

"This law gets it right on every point," said Dr. David Stevens, CEO of the organization and family physician. "Some may challenge the law on ideological or political grounds, but when it comes to the law's scientific and ethical foundations, it is above reproach."

South Dakota's Referred Law 6, which was approved by state lawmakers last winter and signed into law by the governor, simply bans abortions. But it was referred to a vote of the people under the challenge procedures in that state and South Dakotans on Nov. 7 will be making a life-or-death decision on what pro-life organizers call the best legislative proposal on abortion since the 1973 Blackmun ruling in the U.S. Supreme Court struck down state limits on the fatal procedure.

Lawmakers in South Dakota spent months researching the issue before approving the ban, which was challenged by Planned Parenthood, the biggest provider in the U.S. abortion industry and recipient of $272 million in federal funds this year. It is the only provider of abortions in South Dakota.

(Story continues below)

Lawmakers attached a 72-page report to the legislation that outlined the state of medical knowledge, citations of ethics experts, the studies showing the impact of abortion on society, and other information, and then in a bipartisan effort, approved the law.

"The law confirms, for example, the indisputable biological fact that 'life begins at the time of conception.' The law confirms the embryological reality that pregnancy means a woman having a 'living unborn human being within her body through the entire embryonic and fetal ages of the unborn child from fertilization to full gestation and child birth.' These are basic scientific facts, and the only way around them is to attempt redefinition on ideological grounds," Stevens said.

When state abortion bans were thrown out by the Supreme Court in 1973, little knowledge was available about the time period before a baby is born, pro-life organizers have noted repeatedly. Norma McCorvey, the original "Roe" of the Blackmun "Roe vs. Wade" decision that re-interpreted the right to privacy to include a right to abortion, unsuccessfully has sought a review of the original case based on the argument that what then was accepted as fact medically, now is recognized as falsehood.

"There are a number of things that have changed significantly," Stevens told WND in an interview. "Viability was the big issue back then, as if viability has anything to do with what we're dealing with."

He said during his residency during the 1970s, babies could be kept alive at 27 weeks. Now it's 22 or 23 and with artificial wombs that are being developed, doctors will be able "to keep them alive at any age."

"We know a lot more about DNA and genetics. It's very clear despite what people try to claim that all the information on development is there in that one-cell stage. From there it's self-directed," he said.

Medical treatment of potential defects also is greatly advanced, with surgeons sometimes able to repair what otherwise would have been a birth defect while the unborn baby still is in the womb, he said.

"Thanks to advances in medical science, we know today so much more about developing babies than doctors knew when the Supreme Court relied on their testimony in Roe vs. Wade. The development of advanced ultrasound technology and increased understanding of genetics and fetal pain have heightened our appreciation for the breathtaking complexity and vulnerabilities of the developing human being," he said.

Stevens said the South Dakota law simply returns medicine to the "proven ethical principles" that Hippocrates established when he said the foundation of medicine is that a doctor must only heal – never kill.

"More and more women are realizing that abortion is not the answer to an unplanned pregnancy, and that it can leave scars that last a lifetime. I know because I have treated many women suffering from the emotionally painful aftermath of abortions," said Dr. Gene Rudd, CMA's associated executive director.

"This law protects the life of the developing baby; it protects the life of the mother; and it protects doctors who act to protect life. The law clearly states protections for any "licensed physician who performs a medical procedure designed or intended to prevent the death of a pregnant mother."

As WND reported earlier, pro-abortion forces are converging on South Dakota in unprecedented waves because of fears voters actually could affirm a baby's right to live. Some ads have appeared announcing that the abortion industry also wants to protect life, but the abortion ban "goes too far."

David Bereit, a spokesman for the American Life League, told WND this week that the vote will shape the way American society treats abortion for the next generation.

South Dakota Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth, is one of the leaders of the campaign to defeat the abortion ban.

She said the new law "forces one narrow set of opinions on others," and she fears that "red states" like South Dakota would not continue to allow abortions when Roe vs. Wade is overturned.

"This is the first complete abortion ban passed in America since Roe vs. Wade," said Bereit. "This is exactly what pro-lifers have been working for for 33 years plus."

The longterm goal goes way beyond overturning Roe vs. Wade, Bereit said, because that would simply lift federal restrictions on abortion limits, and turn that responsibility back to the states.

Those states, he said, already are watching.

"We are aware of at least a dozen states waiting to see the outcome of the Nov. 7 election. If this law is upheld, (activists in those states) are prepared to launch similar abortion bans," Bereit said.