Pregnant before sexual activity
A week or so back I wrote about a bill that had just gone through the Arizona legislature. It was easy to gloss over it as one more bill intended to restrict abortions by forcing extra steps into the process, requiring tests of dubious or nonexistent medical value, and so forth. The subtle detail hidden in the bill was that pregnancy was defined as beginning on the first day of the period the woman might have had before becoming pregnant.
The easy way to look at that detail is that it would effectively say that no abortions could be performed after 18 weeks instead of the 20 the bill appears to set as a restriction.
A number of people have raised the question of how this bill would effect the legal status of IUDs and birth control pills, but I am afraid that there may be even more to this detail.
In other states there are already efforts being made to make a woman responsible for a miscarriage if she had engaged in any behavior that could harm a developing embryo. I'm not sure whether charges were filed in Georgia(?) recently, but a (Republican) DA was at least considering manslaughter charges against a woman who had miscarried at about 7 weeks, based on a rumor that she could have had an alcoholic drink at some point in those seven weeks.
Based on that approach, it could become illegal to serve alcohol to any woman below the age of menopause because she COULD become pregnant within the next several weeks. Even a purity-pledge virgin would be included because she might change her mind and become promiscuous, or be raped.
The definition of "risky behavior" makes this even more disturbing. The kind of brilliant medically informed mind that crafted this legislation is of the same sort that is still mostly convinced that running, riding, or just about any other activity not connected to being pregnant and in the kitchen could harm either a developing embryo or the girl/woman's "female parts." As a result, any girl over the age of about 10 (who could be ready for her first period) through to women ending menopause could be penalized or "protected" in order to make sure no remotely possible pregnancy should be put at risk.
Is this an extreme and absurd extension of the concept? I'd like to think the answer was YES to both, but recently enacted laws in Virginia and the content of this legislation give me a disturbing sense that I am not being either extreme or absurd as far as those legislators are concerned.
I'm just sorry that Jan Brewer is clearly past menopause. I'd dearly love to see a waiter at a state function tell her she couldn't have a glass of wine because of the possibility that she might be pregnant.
Governor Brewer has now signed that piece of legislation into law, so any woman in Arizona can now be regarded as pregnant or potentially pregnant.
The easy way to look at that detail is that it would effectively say that no abortions could be performed after 18 weeks instead of the 20 the bill appears to set as a restriction.
A number of people have raised the question of how this bill would effect the legal status of IUDs and birth control pills, but I am afraid that there may be even more to this detail.
In other states there are already efforts being made to make a woman responsible for a miscarriage if she had engaged in any behavior that could harm a developing embryo. I'm not sure whether charges were filed in Georgia(?) recently, but a (Republican) DA was at least considering manslaughter charges against a woman who had miscarried at about 7 weeks, based on a rumor that she could have had an alcoholic drink at some point in those seven weeks.
Based on that approach, it could become illegal to serve alcohol to any woman below the age of menopause because she COULD become pregnant within the next several weeks. Even a purity-pledge virgin would be included because she might change her mind and become promiscuous, or be raped.
The definition of "risky behavior" makes this even more disturbing. The kind of brilliant medically informed mind that crafted this legislation is of the same sort that is still mostly convinced that running, riding, or just about any other activity not connected to being pregnant and in the kitchen could harm either a developing embryo or the girl/woman's "female parts." As a result, any girl over the age of about 10 (who could be ready for her first period) through to women ending menopause could be penalized or "protected" in order to make sure no remotely possible pregnancy should be put at risk.
Is this an extreme and absurd extension of the concept? I'd like to think the answer was YES to both, but recently enacted laws in Virginia and the content of this legislation give me a disturbing sense that I am not being either extreme or absurd as far as those legislators are concerned.
I'm just sorry that Jan Brewer is clearly past menopause. I'd dearly love to see a waiter at a state function tell her she couldn't have a glass of wine because of the possibility that she might be pregnant.
Governor Brewer has now signed that piece of legislation into law, so any woman in Arizona can now be regarded as pregnant or potentially pregnant.