Trans-Vaginal for Virginia

Mrs. - posted on 02/17/2012 ( 22 moms have responded )

1,767

6

30

http://jezebel.com/5886102/law-forcing-a...





"Law Forcing Abortion Seekers to Have Vaginal Probe Totally OK Since They’ve Already Been Penetrated

This week, the Virginia House passed a particularly ugly bit of legislation that would require women seeking a first-trimester abortion in the state to undergo a vaginal ultrasound for no medical reason. Many women are upset because by most definitions, forcing a woman to have something put inside her vagina against her will and for no reason is, uh, rape. But Republicans state legislators don't see what the fuss is about. After all, those sluts already consented to be penetrated— when they got pregnant. Are you fucking kidding me?



According to the language of the legislation, the pre-abortion probing is to be performed on women so that they can be forced to look at the captured image of the prebaby before deciding to undergo a legal medical procedure that would end their pregnancy. Virginia's Democratic State Senators attempted to add an amendment to the legislation that would allow a doctor or patient to decline the ultrasound, but it was defeated. Soundly.



Slate's Dahlia Litwick unloads on SB484, explaining that lawmakers behind the legislation don't see what the big fucking deal is with forcing women to be penetrated by doctor as a prerequisite for pregnancy termination. After all, they consented to have sex, right? And isn't consenting to have sex once akin to consenting to have whatthefuckever put into your vagina? That's a jaw-droppingly insensitive and dangerous statement, but more than one Virginia delegate has actually said something to that effect.



Delegate Kathy J. Byron, for example, said "if we want to talk about invasiveness, there's nothing more invasive than the procedure that she is about to have." As Litwick points out, reading between the lines leads us to believe that Byron thinks that abortion involves inserting things into a woman's vagina and a woman is consenting to an abortion, she must therefore be consenting to have a doctor put any old thing into her vagina. An ultrasound wand. A Wii controller. A stethoscope!



But it gets worse. Writes Litwick,



During the floor debate on Tuesday, Del. C. Todd Gilbert announced that "in the vast majority of these cases, these [abortions] are matters of lifestyle convenience." (He has since apologized.) Virginia Democrat Del. David Englin, who opposes the bill, has said Gilbert's statement "is in line with previous Republican comments on the issue," recalling one conversation with a GOP lawmaker who told him that women had already made the decision to be "vaginally penetrated when they got pregnant."



I'll just leave this here. Give it a ponder."



So, what do you think about requiring a trans-vag ultrasound for all women considering an abortion?



Having had to have a trans-vag many times, they are painful. You not required to have them in early pregnancy unless there is a problem, like my tipped uterus, with seeing the baby. Most women can have an old fashioned ultrasound to get the visual.



Oh and they hurt, are uncomfortable and unpleasant.



That's my opinion though, what's yours?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

[deleted account]

"They aren't suggesting to do the probe while they are aborting..."



No but there are suggested laws out there that wisht to try and require a doctor to describe in detail what he/she's doing during an abortion.



And you're right, there is no medical need for the trans-vag. It is purely a shame factor and nothing more.

Johnny - posted on 02/17/2012

8,686

26

322

I had to have one because of early term bleeding. Not a pleasant experience I tell you. I was terrified that I was going to lose another pregnancy and very anxious. My tension and fear most likely made the experience worse. I would imagine that women who are making the choice to abort are undergoing high levels of stress as well, this is the last thing they need.



I think this is a vile and ugly piece of legislation. I would just like to give a big shout out of FUCK YOU, STAY THE FUCK OUT OF OUR UTERUSES to all the state officials who voted in this bullshit. I am so tired of and so angry about it all that I am lost for eloquence or articulation on my feelings on such things. Their lack of compassion and care for independently breathing fully formed human beings is astounding. I find it twisted that they have more concern for unformed lumps of tissue than for a woman.



This isn't really intended to have the women look at their unformed fetus (which looks sort of like a coffee bean on the imager). It is intended to obstruct and delay, to add to the misery and pain. They view these women as slutty sinners and they want them to suffer badly. People who lobby for this stuff have lost their moral compass somewhere in their own rectum.

Becky - posted on 03/12/2012

2,892

44

93

I've had a couple of transvaginal ultrasounds because I had ultrasounds so early in pregnancy that they really couldn't see anything with the abdominal ultrasounds. I didn't find them painful, but they are very intrusive. I didn't care, because I was excited to be pregnant and to see my little jumping beans. But it would be a horrible experience for someone who was being forced against their will to have one! And I don't see them as being effective either. I don't imagine many women go into having an abortion not already aware of what is growing inside them, and of the fact that there is a little heart beating inside them. If they already know that and are still going ahead with the abortion, then why would one think that forcing an intrusive medical procedure on them is going to change their minds?

[deleted account]

"It is very intrusive. Why can't they just use the basic ultrasound. "



They dont' want doctors to do the basic ultrasound for a few reasons.



1) they want the ick factor involved when a woman has something shoved up her cooch whether she likes it or not.



2) they want the ick factor of having a woman hear how each bit is being torn apart. This is for both woman and doctor each to increase shame, etcc.



3) they believe that women are far too childish to really understand that when they get pregnant - IT MEANS THERE;'S A REAL LIVE BABY IN THERE. Apparently we all just assume the babies appear from under the cabbage patch.



4) they want control over your fertility, not you having your own control itself.



I honestly do not believe one bit that it has anything to do with saving unborn babies. If it did, then they wouldn't be doing everything they could to starve and stigmatize these very same children upon emerging from the womb.

Mary - posted on 02/18/2012

3,348

31

123

I find this law appalling, offensive, and absolutely unethical. Putting aside my own firmly pro-choice stance, I find it absolutely disturbing that politicians think they have any business in dictating how a legal medical procedure is performed. They have no more business in legislating this than they do in directing what diagnostics must be performed prior to undergoing an appendectomy.



However, I do feel the need to clarify the allegation in this article that this bill mandates the ultrasound be done transvaginally. It doesn't actually specify that. It only specifies that one must be performed. Yes, that does mean that for some women, it would have to be done that way, but only if the uterine contents are unable to be viewed abdominally.



As I said, I completely oppose this bill. However, I don't think one should argue against it on the basis of unwarranted vaginal intrusion, since that really isn't mandated.



With my first pregnancy, I bled heavily at 6 weeks, and they were able to visual the fetus with an abdominal ultrasound - no probe was necessary. As a veteran of years of infertility treatments, I've had countless numbers of transvaginal ultrasounds, but none during my two pregnancies. TBH, while they were certainly awkward, they were by no means painful, or even really all that uncomfortable. I add this little tidbit because I don't find the argument that they are necessarily painful not the best route to go in making a case against this law.



I think the best tactic for fighting this outrageous bill is to approach it from an indefensible standpoint: Politicians have absolutely no place in determining how a physician performs a medical procedure, nor do they have the power to force any citizen to undergo any type of unwanted, medically unwarranted testing.

22 Comments

View replies by

Krista - posted on 03/12/2012

12,562

16

847

Becky, I think that they THINK that they're doing this to try to change women's minds. But deep down, in a place where they won't admit it...they just want to punish, humiliate and shame women who are going in for abortions.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 03/11/2012

3,377

8

66

Yep, that is what I was told too Rebecca... It has low risk in infection. But then I just started really thinking about that. How could this be? Our cervix is closed when we are pregnant. So I figured doing a bit of research will answer my interest... ;)



Aftercare

There is a slight risk of infection associated with a transvaginal ultrasound, especially if a biopsy was done in conjunction with the procedure. Therefore the patient should be aware of symptoms of an infection and seek care from a health care professional as necessary.



I think this infection is very unlikely, especially during pregnancy.



http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Transv...

Mrs. - posted on 03/11/2012

1,767

6

30

April, do you have a tipped uterus? I have a tipped uterus and early in my pregnancy, it was the only way they could see the fetus. However, once the baby was past three months or so, they never had to use the trans-vag "wand".



Anytime anyone in the medical field puts something inside your vagina, there is more risk of infection than if someone is just feeling around your stomach or looking at your vagina.



This could be wrong, but I believe the ultrasound tech told me it isn't the preferable way to view because of the slight risks that come along with ultrasound in general - they increase when the ultrasound tool is actually inside you and nearer to the fetus.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 03/11/2012

3,377

8

66

It is easier to see the baby for sure. They get a much more in-depth view of everything via trans-vag. This is also what they have to use to sight any issues with ovaries and such. They definitely are not the safest way to get a look at the baby....



It is how I found out I had cysts on my ovaries...

April - posted on 03/11/2012

3,420

16

263

at my OB/GYN they have always done transvaginal. i never knew that it should only be used if there is a problem. i never had any problems, but pretty much all my ultrasounds were the trans-vag kind. does it save money or something? is it easier to see the baby? i really have no clue, but now i am upset because i don't want to have more in the future if they're not as safe? good thing i just fired them this week. one more reason to hate them!

Krista - posted on 03/11/2012

12,562

16

847

And Jen, you're right.



You'll note that there are currently no lawmakers up in arms about the tens of thousands of frozen embryos at fertility clinics -- embryos which will most likely be destroyed.



Part of me wonders -- does it seem like less of a baby to them if it's not made via intercourse and housed in a womb?



As well, if these people were interested in reducing the numbers of abortions, don't you think that they would be supporting efforts to make contraception more accessible and affordable, instead of clinging to failing abstinence-only programs and remaining silent while Rush Limbaugh loudly declares that the pill is for sluts?

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 03/11/2012

3,377

8

66

2) they want the ick factor of having a woman hear how each bit is being torn apart. This is for both woman and doctor each to increase shame, etcc.



They aren't suggesting to do the probe while they are aborting...



All the other things you listed can be done via basic ultrasound. Except shoving something up their vagina...



Like I mentioned, I had a basic ultrasound at 10 weeks and it was made clear that there was a little munchkin in there.... ;)



There is no need to do a vaginal probe. If someone has already decided they are going to abort, this is not going to change their mind..... sigh... Just crazy. Me being anti-abortion and I am not for this at all....

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 03/11/2012

3,377

8

66

I had to have one four times due to misscarriage. Honestly, I didn't think it was a terrible experience. However, I knew and consented to it. I was prepared.



I am anti-abortion but I am not sure this is a very helpful practice. It is very intrusive. Why can't they just use the basic ultrasound. I had one at 10 weeks and was able to see my little jumping bean doing acrobats. I don't think it is necessary to have a vaginal probe done. They are still human beings.

Karla - posted on 03/11/2012

1,555

48

99

Update from USA TODAY.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/stor...



Virginia governor signs pre-abortion ultrasound bill

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) – Gov. Bob McDonnell on Wednesday signed into law a controversial bill that requires women to have abdominal ultrasound exams before undergoing abortions.

The Republican governor's signature means the mandate takes effect in July for abortion providers across Virginia.

The bill not only sparked protests the past three weeks by angry women's rights groups and others that led to 30 arrests at the Capitol Saturday, it subjected Virginia to scorn by columnists and political talk shows and ridicule from television comedians.

It was part of a wave of conservative legislation that had perennially failed in the General Assembly until Republicans gained control of both the House and Senate in the 2011 elections.

Other bills would have stripped state funding for abortions sought by indigent women carrying fetuses that have profound and incapacitating deformities, and would have given embryos full rights of personhood from the moment of conception, a step that would outlaw almost all abortions and even some forms of contraception if the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion is overturned.

The ultrasound bill initially called for a vaginally invasive form of the examination. After Capitol Square protests, Democratic legislators accusing the bill's GOP backers of sanctioning "state-mandated rape" and being lampooned bySaturday Night Live and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, McDonnell had his party remove the "transvaginal ultrasound" requirement.




I’m kind of sick of legislators making laws restricting something that is protected by a Supreme Court decision based on the US Constitution!

**Jackie** - posted on 02/21/2012

953

1

18

Holy crap! That is rape. Omg this article makes my stomach hurt!



I will just say that I am not for abortion, for me and my life and the way I am...I just would not do it. I have no problem with anyone that does have one. To each their own



Having said that...if you have to get one I would imagine a woman wanting it to be discrete as possible. I can't imagine her updating her facebook status about getting an abortion....which right now seems like a less degrading thing to do in Virginia. This is unbelievable.



I only read half of this article and I'm sick. These poor women.

Johnny - posted on 02/18/2012

8,686

26

322

When I had it done it irritated my pelvis to the extent that I had a flare up of my urinary tract problems. I did find it painful. It is probably one of those things that depends very much on the person.



But I do agree, no non-medical legislative body should be dictating how medical procedures are handled. Perhaps we can lobby for two-handed prostate exams?

Mrs. - posted on 02/18/2012

1,767

6

30

Yeesh, I forgot about the whole you have to pay for medical procedures in the States thing. Now, that would be one of the shittier parts of the whole thing.



I personally find trans-vag ultrasounds painful, but I have had my share of trauma, with all my surgeries and gyno issues. I don't always know what the average woman would feel, but I'm pretty certain sticking a plastic wand (IMO they are a fairly big phallus) up you when you are at the most vulnerable is really uncomfortable.

Krista - posted on 02/18/2012

12,562

16

847

Good point, Jen. One more way to stick it to the shameless whores -- override their doctors and force them to undergo an embarrassing, unnecessary medical procedure...and then stick them with the bill.

[deleted account]

If I lived in Virginia, I would find some way to move away. That they have SO little concern and respect for women, frightens me to death!



Let's not forget that since the ultrasounds aren't medically necessary, insurance companies can deny their coverage.

Tam - posted on 02/18/2012

216

2

28

First off, let me say that having been stationed in Virginia, that place is a total joke. It's a commonwealth that gets away with a lot of stupid, stupid crap and I'm glad I'm not there anymore.



Now that I have established my biased viewpoint...



I have never agreed to the idea that a woman should be forced to get an ultrasound prior to termination. There is no medical reason for it - you test blood or urine to get pregnancy test results, and an abortion doesn't exactly require a doctor to shove a coathanger up there to perform, no matter what detractors say. Early term abortions are done with pharmaceuticals and later (in the second trimester, I believe) is done by induced evacuation. I'm no expert on the subject, nor have I ever had one. But simply put, abortions do NOT require an ultrasound.



I'm in the process of having one transvaginal ultrasound a week at this point. I don't find them painful, being that I know how to force my muscles to relax enough to weather it, but it certainly isn't PLEASANT, and I sure as hell wouldn't be doing it unless it was necessary to monitor my cervix since my doc is worried about preterm labor with my twins. I sure as hell wouldn't want my daughter (once she's of age) to have to go through something like that, if she was in the circumstance of making this choice for herself. Hell, for some women they get pregnant after their first time. Anyone remember how painful the first time was?



And then they want to shove another object on par with the size of a penis up there shortly after THAT trauma? And the transvaginal wand isn't made of something soft, either. It's medical grade plastics, for crying out loud.



I don't think that the government should have any right to put anything in my body. A person can refuse to get their children vaccinated, but they can't refuse to have a length of plastic shoved into their vagina?



(Note, not judging those who disagree with vaccinations, just illustrating the disparity between the government's desire to infiltrate the family medical practice.)



By the way, I am pro-choice, but seeing as I'm about to have four kids in total, I obviously don't think I could ever make the choice for abortion myself. Others have the right, and should, in my opinion.

Krista - posted on 02/18/2012

12,562

16

847

Politicians have absolutely no place in determining how a physician performs a medical procedure



Bang, that's exactly it. If the medical procedure is legal, and follows board standards, then a politician has NO right to dictate to the doctor how to do his or her frigging job.



I agree with Johnny -- this is slut-shaming, pure and simple.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms