About that “sensible” 20 week abortion ban the Senate tried to pass this week

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

Congress.Gov
Congress.Gov

Anti-choicers like to tout the popularity of some of their positions and one of those that they do frequently is that of the 20 week ban on abortions. They have relentlessly and ingeniously painted procedures at that stage as being done mostly on flighty women who, midpoint in pregnancy or later, callously decide to dispatch with the inconvenient fetus. It seems to have worked. “I’m not even a sanctity-of-life guy,” a local alternative weekly columnist told me on Facebook a while back, “but it seems ghoulish to me to wait that long.” Comments like that amply illustrate how anti-choicers deftly wove their narrative about women who abort after the first trimester into existing negative views on women’s trustworthiness and mental and moral competency in the larger culture.

Because that perception about abortion has taken root in the general public and especially with many journalists, it is difficult for pro-choicers to counter it with facts and nuance. The reality is that there are many reasons that women don’t get abortions prior to the twentieth week of pregnancy and ideally in the first trimester (which is up to 13 weeks and when the most people support abortion on demand). They include things like geographical barriers, lack of funds, intimate partner violence, trauma, and, of course, health problems. Many fetal abnormalities are detected at weeks 18 to 20, and lead some patients to opt for termination. Basically, it’s a lot more complicated than the simplistic “damn, don’t wait so long, lady!” truism would have you believe.

Read more