{"id":943,"date":"2011-02-28T10:38:43","date_gmt":"2011-02-28T09:38:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/?p=943"},"modified":"2011-02-28T10:38:43","modified_gmt":"2011-02-28T09:38:43","slug":"wow-nebraska-iowa-and-georgia-just-wow","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2011\/02\/28\/wow-nebraska-iowa-and-georgia-just-wow\/","title":{"rendered":"Wow.  Nebraska, Iowa and Georgia&#8230; just Wow."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I mentioned <a href=\"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2011\/02\/16\/wow-south-dakota-just-wow\/\">a few days ago<\/a> the proposed law in South Dakota that would provide a defence of justifiable homicide for to those accused of killing abortion doctors. \u00a0That proposal was shelved&#8230; but reports keep coming in of proposed laws, each of which is crazier than the last.<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;m beginning to wonder if there&#8217;s a big game of lunacy poker being played over there.<!--more--><\/p>\n<p>First up, Nebraska, where <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nebraskalegislature.gov\/FloorDocs\/Current\/PDF\/Intro\/LB232.pdf\">a bill has been brought<\/a> before the state legislature that is pretty much the same as the one South Dakota was forced to ditch &#8211; with the exception that it doesn&#8217;t limit itself to husbands, wives, parents, children, masters, mistresses, or servants. \u00a0Which means that it&#8217;s at least more inclusive. \u00a0(The link doesn&#8217;t seem to work for me at the moment &#8211; indeed, the whole Nebraska legislature site seems to be borked. \u00a0I hope it&#8217;ll come back up later.)<\/p>\n<p>Iowa seems to have decided to raise Nebraska&#8217;s bid, and is <a href=\"http:\/\/coolice.legis.state.ia.us\/Cool-ICE\/default.asp?Category=billinfo&amp;Service=Billbook&amp;menu=false&amp;hbill=HF153\">considering a proposal<\/a> to extend the protection of human life back as far as conception &#8211; which means that the survival of an undifferentiated blob of cells a couple of days post-conception would be seen as morally equivalent to the survival of you or me. \u00a0Of course, a newly-fertilised egg is human and alive; but it&#8217;s not thereby a human life, any more than the blood cells that I lost when I cut my finger yesterday were human lives. \u00a0One further oddity of this bill is its stipulation<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>that life is valued\u00a0and protected from the moment of conception, and <em>each life,\u00a0from that moment, is accorded the same rights and protections\u00a0guaranteed to all persons by the Constitution of the United\u00a0States<\/em>, the Constitution of the State of Iowa, and the laws of\u00a0this state [emphasis mine &#8211; IB]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>&#8211; which, to my untrained eye, looks to indicate that the foetus has the right to own and inherit property, too. \u00a0Strange. \u00a0But let&#8217;s not get hung up about the details&#8230; there&#8217;s more to come.<\/p>\n<p>Because there&#8217;re people in Georgia who&#8217;ve decided to see all these bids and call them, by proposing a law that could <a href=\"http:\/\/www.legis.ga.gov\/Legislation\/en-US\/display.aspx?Legislation=31965\">potentially punish miscarriages with the death penalty<\/a>. \u00a0No, really: murder is a capital crime in Georgia, and one of the first things the bill does is attempt to define abortion as &#8220;legal prenatal murder&#8221;. \u00a0It goes on to insist that this absurd formula should replace the neutral phrase &#8220;induced termination of pregnancy&#8221; in other legislation.<\/p>\n<p>Sec 16-12-140(b)(2) states that<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8216;Prenatal murder&#8217; means the intentional removal of a fetus from a woman with an\u00a0intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus. \u00a0[&#8230;]\u00a0Such term does not include a naturally occurring expulsion of a fetus known medically\u00a0as a &#8216;spontaneous abortion&#8217; and popularly as a &#8216;miscarriage&#8217; so long as there is no human\u00a0involvement whatsoever in the causation of such event.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>But, as\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/motherjones.com\/blue-marble\/2011\/02\/miscarriage-death-penalty-georgia\">Jen Phillips points out<\/a>,<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>[t]here is no clarification of what &#8220;human involvement&#8221; means, and this is hugely problematic as medical doctors\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.americanpregnancy.org\/pregnancycomplications\/miscarriage.html\" target=\"_blank\">do not know exactly<\/a> what causes miscarriages. [&#8230;]\u00a0Holding women\u00a0criminally liable\u00a0for a totally natural, common biological process is cruel and non-sensical. Even more ridiculous, the bill holds women responsible for protecting their fetuses from &#8220;the moment of conception,&#8221; despite the fact that pregnancy tests aren&#8217;t accurate until at least 3 weeks\u00a0after\u00a0conception.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In fairness to the bill, it does also state in the same section that if<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>a physician makes a medically justified effort to save the lives of both the mother\u00a0and the fetus and the fetus does not survive, such action shall not be prenatal murder<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>&#8211; but this still seems to suggest that it an abortion is permissible only if the foetus is given the same moral consideration as the mother. \u00a0That&#8217;s absurd in its own right. \u00a0If the pregnancy is the problem, such that either the foetus or the mother will survive, and the medic attempts to save the woman&#8217;s life by ending the pregnancy, then the medic is potentially liable for the laughable crime of prenatal murder.<!--TrendMD v2.4.8--><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I mentioned a few days ago the proposed law in South Dakota that would provide a defence of justifiable homicide for to those accused of killing abortion doctors. \u00a0That proposal was shelved&#8230; but reports keep coming in of proposed laws, each of which is crazier than the last. I&#8217;m beginning to wonder if there&#8217;s a [&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p><a class=\"btn btn-secondary understrap-read-more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/2011\/02\/28\/wow-nebraska-iowa-and-georgia-just-wow\/\">Read More&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[511,591,475,407],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-943","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-in-the-news","category-life-and-death","category-politics","category-wtf"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/943","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=943"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/943\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=943"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=943"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stg-blogs.bmj.com\/medical-ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=943"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}