The Georgia General Assembly recently passed a very troubling bill. HB 388 was passed not long after President Obama's newly unveiled policy on embryonic stem-cell research.
Dubbed the "Option of Adoption Act," this regressive bit of legislation was authored by Republican Rep. James Mills, who claims that the bill is used "as a safeguard against mothers who agree carry the fetuses of infertile couples from refusing to give up the infants after birth," according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution.
In actuality, the bill makes dangerous erosions to the reproductive rights of all Georgians. Here are a few choice passages from the bill's summary.
"... to change the definition of "child" to include a human embryo; ... to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes."
The bill passed last week, and aside from the personal-rights infringements, there is some very troubling language that flied directly in the face of Obama's federal funding repeal.
Looks like another victory for the pro-life (anti-choice) agenda, sadly.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Georgia law undermines reproductive rights.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12700
I lived in Georgia for five years, so this doesn't really surprise me.
You can only get an abortion in one of four places: Atlanta, Savannah, Columbus or Augusta. These cities are basically in the four "corners" of the state, so if you are anywhere in the middle you're basically screwed. Especially considering they have a 24-hour law.
They also once tacked a rider onto a bill that made "female genital mutilation" include piercings. So now it's legal for a man to get his junk pierced but not a woman.
What is a 24 hour law?
You have to go see your doctor, then they have to present you with all of your options (as if you haven't already thought them through), then you have to wait 24 hours, THEN you can get an abortion. I don't remember if GA requires an ultrasound as part of this, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did.
It's very hard for low-income people in rural areas. If they can get time off work, they have to take an extra day, plus if they have to travel to one of the four cities that does them, they either have to shell out for a hotel, find someone to stay with, or make the long trip twice.
I live in Georgia and have been here for 15 years. I am disgusted with the right-wing facist who inhabit this state. This bill is not surprising, but it is sad. There is also a law that you must live within 60 miles of the abortion clinic to which you want to go. I also have a problem with GA, and other states, that have pro-life license plates, but not pro-choice. Roe v. Wade hasn't been repealed and abortion is still legal. If religious nuts get a special license plate, I want one too. Maybe one that says, "For every child you don't abort, I'll abort two." Not really, but it strikes me as funny when I think of the faces people would make.
This is so frustrating! I am not from Georgia, how ever this does not fail to infuriate me. I hope those people directly affected will work against this.
Wait so does the bill want to require women who are pregnant with another couple's child to have to give up the child, or does it want to allow them to keep the child? The wording is confusing.
The rest sounds like a challenge to Roe v. Wade and would be quickly smacked down by the courts.
There is a really good episode of "Frontline" (from last year, I think?) concerning the difficulties in getting abortions for women living in rural areas of Southern states. Perhaps most people have already seen it, or it's common knowledge, but I found it very fascinating:
Frontline: The Last Abortion Clinic
I saw that! It's been a while, but I remember feeling sick about the teenage girl who was pregnant and went into a "crisis pregnancy center" thinking she'd actually get support or information. She actually got loaded with pamphlets about the miracle of life, or some one-sided bullshittery like that.
As a resident of Georgia, I'm writing to let you know that this post is not quite accurate. The "Option of Adoption Act", House Bill 388, was passed by the Georgia House and sent to the Senate for action, but has not passed the Senate. Below is information from Planned Parenthood of Georgia on this bill and a couple of others that would be equally bad for women in Georgia. Unfortuantely, most of the discussion of these bills is about embryos and stem cell research,restriction on fertility treatments, etc., very little about the effects of declaring an embryo to be a "child."
House Bill 388 (HB 388 – Mills) – Option of Adoption Act: HB 388 would establish procedures for embryo adoption and elevate the legal status of an embryo (beginning at fertilization) to that of a “child”. This bill would create a cumbersome adoption process that would discourage people from donating embryos and establishes “personhood” for a fertilized egg. UPDATE: A substitute bill that does NOT have the language elevating the legal status of an embryo passed out of the Judiciary Subcommittee and the full Judiciary Committee on March 6th. It was passed by the House on March 12th and has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Senate Bill 169 (SB 169 - Hudgens) – Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos: SB 169 would unduly regulate infertility facilities and their treatments; ban cloning and stem cell research; elevate the legal status of an embryo; restrict unused embryo options and eliminate compensation for egg and sperm donors. UPDATE: On March 5th, the Senate Health and Human Services Committee voted 12-3 to send the bill to a special subcommittee consisting of Senators Smith (chair), Unterman, Wiles and Adelman. The bill was rewritten in special subcommittee by Senator Smith. Much of the original language was removed but the revised bill would ban cloning and stem cell research and would elevate the legal status of an embryo. It passed out of the special subcommittee and narrowly passed out of the full Senate Health and Human Services Committee on March 9th. The bill was the major focus of crossover day. After much debate on the Senate floor a motion to table the bill passed on a vote of 30-26. During a Senate recess a substitute bill was drafted by Senator Smith. Following the recess a motion passed to take the bill from the table and the substitute bill passed 34-22. The bill moves to the House.
Senate Bill 204 (SB 204 – Shafer) – Snowflakes Adoption Act: SB 204 would establish procedures for embryo adoption and elevate the legal status of embryos (beginning at fertilization) to that of a “child”. UPDATE: Has been assigned to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee. This bill is dead for the 2009 session.
The responses and attitude toward this law just demonstrates that some people will go to any length possible to advocate murder.