HOUSE OF DELEGATES VOTES TO INVESTIGATE WOMEN WHO HAVE A MISCARRIAGE

Holy Crap.  The bill summary even says on the legislative site:  "Current law does not with specificity include the pregnant female as a possible perpetrator".  I guess if you think like a Virginia Republican, that's a law that needs fixing?  Wow.

So any woman who has a miscarriage will have to prove it was unintentional.

One Northern Virginia "Democrat" voted for this bill- David Bulova.  This is totally unacceptable- he must face a primary for this vote.

(HT:  RK) 

Comments

[Pete in Williamsburg]

The Republican vision of limited government is a punchline. The GOP is obsessed with legislating our medical decisions, our bedrooms, our tv viewing, our religious practices and our sentiments toward the president.

[Rick Smith]

Absolutely disgusting and unforgivable. It's actions like these that make me proud to have left the Republican party.

[Timothy Watson]

FYI: Link doesn't work.

[Sam]

A similar bill like this was proposed while I was interning at the GA in 2005... Thought it was killed for good. Guess that was too hopeful.

My response then is my response now. For most women, a miscarriage is one of the most traumatic experiences they can suffer through. To add on top of that police investigation and risks of criminal charges for non-reporting? Now THAT is beyond cruel.

Once again the "culture of life" party shows that they don't give a damn about the already living (unless they're rich).

[t]

Praise God for any legislation that advances the protection of innocent human life.

[Grapes]

It is excellent legislation like this that shows that politics can still matter, and can still further the greater good.

David Bulova is to be saluted.

[Not Larry Sabato]

Grapes and t, You should be leading the opposition to this bill. Imagine the pain of a pro-life woman who is forced to answer questions and is a suspect in her own miscarriage.

[Not My Valentine]

"Democrat" Shannon Valentine of the 23rd district voted for this bill 3 times! And this Shannon is a woman! Is she laying the groundwork to switch to the republican side? Let us hope she is primaried by a true democrat for this.

[Church Hill Dem]

I hate to say it, but it looks like Ward is keeping the Dems a little bit too far to the right on this one.

I hate it when an entire caucus tries to have statewide appeal.

[josh collins]

this is ridiculous and an insult to any woman that has a miscarriage. keep the government out of our bodies.

[josh collins]

this is ridiculous and an insult to any woman that has a miscarriage. keep the government out of our bodies.

[ya'll are idiots]

okay, this bill applies to FORCED abortions or miscarriages by illegal means... not ones that naturally happen or ones that are performed LEGALLY (in abortion clinics or whatever).
They are not going to ask a woman who naturally has a miscarriage whether she did it on purpose. They can tell when running blood tests, tox screens, etc. if a substance was put into a persons body, which I believe they run when you have a miscarriage anyway.

David Bulova must go. He is a disgrace to the Democratic Party and to the state of Virginia.

[PWConservative]

And they say that democrats are the big tent party.
HE MUST FACE A PRIMARY
I Can't stop laughing

I believe the intent of this bill is to make it a crime to do such things as shooting yourself in the stomach to kill a fetus.

Now, whether this language actually accomplishes that or not, I do not know. I am not a lawyer. Our legislators are certainly not well known for their ability to write carefully crafted legislation that avoids unintended consequences.

[FishinginCrisis]

I may be missing something obvious, but abortion is legal in Virginia. Is this one of the laws that legislatures act to have on the books in case Roe is ever overturned, or is this supposed to go into effect immediately? If the latter, there would seem to be Constitutional issues.

[notgretchenbulova]

Don't bash David Bulova. Without him, I'd never have this name.

[Social Conservative]

Anyone who reads the summaries of these bills and takes them as fact is ignorant or an idiot. This bill is in response to a case in Suffolk where a woman shot herself in the stomach on the day her child was scheduled to be born. Her crime: illegal discharge of a weapon.

Now you may be pro-choice, but do you seriously support a woman shooting herself in the stomach the day the baby is scheduled to be born as legal? Seriously...please say that you do.

No one who simply has a miscarrage is going to be investigated for anything. The House Courts committee worked to ensure that the langauge was very narrow.

For those of you were are not in Richmond but simply sit in your momma's basement playing on your computers really are a joke.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

The problem with this bill is that it is written in such vague language that you just know that some over eager prosecutor trying to make a name for him or herself - or trying to establish militantly pro-life bona fides for political purposes - is going to run with this and accuse some woman who had a miscarriage.

Of course the prosecutor might lose in court, but not until he has dragged a woman through the mud, forced her to pay exorbitant legal costs, and traumatized her further after the pain of enduring a msicarriage to start with.

It's a bad law. Further, what happened to all those conservatives who swore, during last year's election, that they would never criminalize a woman even if she were seeking a real abortion. They solemnly pointed out that historically women were never charged or jailed, even when abortion was illegal, which was true.

It was always the abortion provider who was the target for arrest and prosecution, not the woman. Not ever, in the past. So this is truly a new and radical development by a dangerously radical right wing.

It's a bad law and any Democrat or Republican who supported it should have to face consequences. This goes beyond anti-abortion.

It's instrusive and interferes with a doctor-patient relationship.

[phriendlyjaime]

This is one of the most frightening things I have ever heard.

[Not A.E. Dick Howard]

There should be a law banning NLS from interpreting statutes and legislation. Without commenting on the prudence of the legislation itself, I remind you that criminal defendants never have to prove innocence; the burden of proof is always on the Commonwealth, and no woman would have to prove her miscarriage was unintentional.

[Reston Libertarian]

I have now read the law a dozen times and the most unpleasant language is as follows:

"any person, who . . . uses means, . . . to produce . . . miscarriage, and thereby . . . produces such miscarriage,is guilty of a Class 4 felony."

In medical jargon, abortion is the term used instead of miscarriage. When miscarriage is likely, it is called "threatened abortion," when miscarriage happens without assistance it is called "spontaneous abortion." When the fetus dies naturally there is time in between the cessation of development and a spontaneous abortion. A spontaneous abortion can be very dangerous for a woman, especially after two months. In those instances a doctor will normally order surgery to remove the fetus and surrounding tissue, rather than waiting for the spontaneous abortion to occur.

That ordered surgery is criminalized by this statute. Under the statute, the only legal medical "abortion" or "miscarriage" is a spontaneous abortion. The statute is poorly written, and not well thought out. This is an example of legislators dabbling with a theory, without thinking about the consequences.

For the record I have always been pro-life, and believe in the criminalization of doctors performing voluntary abortion procedures.

So a pregnant woman who shoots herself in the stomach is not interfering with the doctor patient relationship?

This bill will be heard in the Senate Education and Health Committee tomorrow, so you can write your Senators about it if you would like...

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?081+com+S4

And a woman who shoots herself in the stomach likely needs some mental healthcare, not jail time

I have honestly heard Gerry Connolly take credit for recruiting David Bulova to run for the House of Delegates. I wonder if he'll still be bragging about that so called accomplishment.

[Chris]

No Dem in their right mind would challenge Bulova, especially with the possibility of his mother becoming Chairman of the county.

The only Republican who could make that happen is Jeff Greenfield, who is always rumored for this seat.

Maybe this bill would be useful in a stiuation like this,

"Man gets 18 months in jail for putting abortion pills in girlfriend's food"

How does this man fit in your doctor patient relation theory? How does he fit in the "its a womans body theory?..

I believe many of you libs have previously said that you support the old "rare, safe and legal argument"
and if a woman shot herself and a baby that could survive outside the womb, how does that fit?

If you folks read the legislation instead of react from ignorance you would be much better off.

[Not Larry Sabato]

If he got jail time, it is obviously already illegal.

So why do we need this new law?

[Reston Libertarian]

SOOO, would it benefit us to review the Virginia Code?

There are exceptions that apply to 18.2-71, i.e. 18.2-72,73,74, and 74.1.

These exceptions only apply to physicians. So, yes, the law as written criminalizes doctor ordered (non life threatening) D&C procedures for the pregnant woman, but not for the doctor performing the procedure.

The House messed this one up, unless there is a companion bill amending 18.2-72,73,74, and 74.1. . .

nls,

That headline was not from Virginia.

Also, am I wrong but did as many women vote for this legislation as voted against it? (and bi-partisan majority)

Face it, maybe this is just good legislation.

NLS --- before you type another word, do yourself a favor and go read the posts from 12:40, 1:19 & 2:13. Maybe you'll learn something.

A criminal defendant "will have to prove" their innocence? Are you freaking out of your mind? Good lord, you really are one dumb son of a bitch. Either that, or you're a product of NOVA government schools.

[Sam]

Social Conservative-

The people who "were in Richmond" aren't the ones who enforce this law. The people "sitting on their momma's computer" are. If any prosecutor reads this differently than how it was intended, the law is so vague that it can be enforced how Ben thinks it may be.

The fact is, the best intentions of a legislature are irrelevant if those intentions aren't made apparent in the law. I don't care why they did this, they did it and it's stupid. They should undo it, or change the law to make these intentions clear.

soc. cons.

who needs courts when you have sam

go figure all that wasted money on the elections, general assembly buildings, legislative aids, police, judges etc.. when all along sam could just sit atop a computer and blog us the answer to all the questions in life.

sheeze

[Not Larry Sabato]

Yeah, because lots of defendants decide that they don't need to try to prove they are innocent so they decide not to present a defense.

How often does that happen? Once in a million?

[Post their excuses]

Anyone able to get in touch with any democratic delegates who voted for this atrocity please post their response on here. Let's see what their "logic" is. We live in cynical times, some delegates believe voting a certain way "when it doesn't matter" will save them some hassle or appeal to more of their constituents. What about personal convictions? I say it time to start a humanist party.

Are those of you arguing against this bill of the opinion that a woman should be able to use any method to abort a child up to the moment the child actually takes a first breath?

[woman of choice]

hey 4:30, that's already illegal in va.

unwanted pregnancy is one of the most frightening things a woman can face

and the miscarriage of a wanted one is one of the most heartbreaking

in either case, the last thing a woman needs are the police making sure she was legal through the trauma

last time i checked, women raise children, hold jobs, care for elderly parents, manage money, buy property, drive cars and run for President.

Pretty sure we can make good decisions without the government's help.

[woman of choice]

hey 4:30, that's already illegal in va.

unwanted pregnancy is one of the most frightening things a woman can face

and the miscarriage of a wanted one is one of the most heartbreaking

in either case, the last thing a woman needs are the police making sure she was legal through the trauma

last time i checked, women raise children, hold jobs, care for elderly parents, manage money, buy property, drive cars and run for President.

Pretty sure we can make good decisions without the government's help.

woc,
no offence intended but I don't think laws are written for those who make good decisions.

It sounds like this bill was put in partly to protect a woman from unintended druging etc.. and partly because of a woman who shot herself (and baby late term) in the stomach. That was not a very good decision if you ask me.

I was just trying to figure out what the real opposition argument is.

[woman of choice]

laws should be enacted for the good of the public, not the furthering of agendas.

of course it's not a good decision to shoot yourself in the stomach, pregnant or not, no one would think otherwise, but it doesn't need a new law to see that.

no, this is backdoor legislation to further chip away at women's rights.

well, the whole discussion is for nothing. Dick Saslaw will take care of this in the Education and Health Committee in the Senate

Thank Goodness

woc
every legislator has an agenda, most of them believe that theirs is "for the good of the public"

Looks like most of the women in the house disagree with you not to mention the majority of all the members.

The education committee should be talking to the governer about his proposal to cut 200 mil in education funds. Although I suppose if you shot all the babies before they were born we would not need the education money.

[Sam]

3:59 - Huh? Your response to my comment makes no sense... how exactly did I "blog us the answer to all questions in life" or even say anything remotely like the politicians and such are irrelevant? I said their intentions are irrelevant if those intentions are not obvious in the law since prosecutors can make their own interpretations, and barring obvious disagreement from the law, judges will usually accept that.

woc,

regarding your comment to the poster at 4:30 in which you claimed that it was already illegal -- you are wrong. The woman who shot herself in the stomach the day before her due date could not be charged with anything but discharging a weapon - the same thing as if I shot a gun up into the air in my backyard. Not at all the same thing as shooting your baby a day before it is born.

sam,
legislative intent is important. no matter what the law is, if you put two lawyers in a room they will probably come to a different opinion. that is what courts and judges are for.

after reading the legislation I believe that I understand the intent.

I would strongly disagree about who enforces these laws, it is most definitely not anyone sitting on a comupter somewhere, it is those who are charged in arresting and prosecuting them once they have been passed.

sorry if I may have been a bit too sarcastic, but you seemed to leave little room for debate in your post.

[notsophialoren]

This bill has been around in many versions. It says women cannot be trusted and cannot make decisions on their own. Some versions of the bill that has been around other years would have had a woman report any miscarriage and have it investigated. David Bulova should be ashamed of himself for voting against women.

[GinterParked]

So, one reported time in the 400-year history of the Commonwealth a woman shoots herself, allegedly to terminate a pregnancy. And this singular development requires the amendment of the law in a way which is absolutely certain to be misapplied and subsequently litigated to the very substantial expense of each and every Virginian reading this blog.

Now, if I had to dodge fetus-maiming women on the way to the Starbucks, that would be something else.

There's an old saying: "Tough cases make bad law." There's a better one: "Pandering wingnuts make bad legislators."

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

This bill has nothing to do with the legal right to an abortion since it explicitly exempts a woman who has miscarried due to a legal abortion, including the use of RU-486, also known as the abortion pill.

It's still legal to have an abortion.

What has been criminalized is causing an intentional miscarriage by a means other than legal abortion.

Yes, it would mean that a woman who shot herself in the stomach would be liable to prosecution and possible jail time.

But if a woman shot herself in the stomach, wouldn't she also be liable to be legally committed to a mental institution, even in Virginia, for attempted suicide?

And if a man gave a woman an abortofacient against her will, I suspect there are laws against this.

And, of course, I think that if a guy did such a thing to a pregnant woman, it would be a criminal act.

Respecting a woman's right to choose includes respecting her right to choose to have a baby.

Also, if a fetus is harmed during the commission of a crime, in many places, that is considered an additional murder. So there are laws to cover these things without this particular bill.

It's a bad bill because it can lead to an overzealous prosecutor attempting to subpoena all of a hospital's records of miscarriages. It's a possible fishing expedition that could affect the privacy of every woman of childbearing years.

If you don't think that this could happen, consider this.

In 2005, Phill Kline, at that time the Kansas attorney general, subpoenaed the records of 90 women and girls who had sought late term abortions at two clinics. His excuse was that he was looking for instances of girls under the age of consent who had been victims of statutory rape. The problem, though, was that many of the records he sought were for women over the age of consent, which was 16 in Kansas.

See here for some additional information:

http://feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=8925

Many people thought that it was a fishing expedition, which was an intrusion into the privacy of women, and many suspected that the real intent was to create a chilling effect to discourage women from seeking abortions.

If you are pro-life, then go out and persuade people to your position and try to change the law honestly.

But going after women who have had medical miscarriages of babies they wanted to have is not the way to do it.

There are all sorts of problems with this bill, not the least of which is the violation of privacy rights and the doctor-patient privilege.

Again, it's a bad bill that doesn't even accomplish what pro-lifers really want.

[Grapes]

Any woman who calls herself "woman of choice" has already demonstrated poor judgement.

"Tough cases make bad law"

Well, it is usually the libs that want to reinvent the wheel when someone has a flat tire.

Glad to see hypocrisy is alive and well.

If we could get rid of all legislation that is redundant I'd be all for it.

It is funny to see the change in reaction when someone believes their ox is being gored.

In case none of you libs noticed the majority of women delegates and other members of the house voted for this bill.. including MANY democrats.

Posted by: t | February 27, 2008 at 12:00 PM

is that a snark or our you serious - hows all those human lives going in IRaq for you? YOu know the ones with the kids arms blown off?

[t]

Praise God for Morissey, Chris Jones, Bob Marshall, et al.

It is Statesmen like these that make the Commonwealth a shining beacon for this mighty land.

RK is an unimpressive blog.

[t]

t simply has no use for RK or BVBL.

t SPEEEEEEEEAKS

[t]

Anon at 12:47 A.M.,

Your grammer is so deficient that I thought, for a moment, that you were speaking in a foreign language.

I would respond, except, I cannot, for the life of me, understand a word that you are saying.

[t]

Praise the Lord for Terri Schiavo.

As for the rest of you...

STOP KILLING PEOPLE WHO EAT THROUGH A STRAW