Virginia Abortion Law Virginia abortion law does in fact provide for women’s I would like to comment on the misinformed opinion article, “Women deserve better than legal abortions,” (CT, Nov. 11). The author urges students to contact their state legislatures to urge laws that will prevent "coerced abortions" through screening. The author seems fairly ill-informed on this issue. The Commonwealth of Virginia enacted an informed consent law as part of the Code of Virginia § 18.2-76. The law requires physicians to obtain informed written consent from women before performing an abortion or inducing a miscarriage. The law details thoroughly what conditions must be satisfied in compliance with this law: "Informed written consent means the knowing and voluntary written consent to abortion by a pregnant woman of any age, without undue inducement or any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress or other form of constraint or coercion by the physician who is to perform the abortion or his agent.” The basic information to effect such consent, as required by this subsection, shall be provided by telephone or in person to the woman at least 24 hours before the abortion by the physician who is to perform the abortion, by a referring physician or by a licensed professional or practical nurse working under the direct supervision of either the physician who is to perform the abortion or the referring physician."(Code § 18.2-76 Part B). Further, the law requires that information on the "other options" that the author refers to be made available to the woman on request. As well as requiring that: 1. A full, reasonable and comprehensible medical explanation of the nature, benefits and risks of and alternatives to the proposed procedures or protocols to be followed in her particular case; 2. An instruction that the woman may withdraw her consent at any time prior to the performance of the procedure; 3. An offer for the woman to speak with the physician who is to perform the abortion so that he may answer any questions that the woman may have and provide further information concerning the procedures and protocols; 4. A statement of the probable gestational age of the fetus at the time the abortion is to be performed. Information is available which details the father's liability for child support and the availability of financial assistance for prenatal care. Information is available on agencies that provide alternatives to abortion. All of this and more is available in detailed printed materials, on request and as is required by this law. Further, 30 states have enacted informed consent laws like § 18.2-76. So unless one lives in one of the remaining 20 states, go ahead and ignore this author. As for the author’s argument that abortion is “not a safe procedure,” I am aware that he focused mainly on psychological effects, but he also commented on physical effects. An abortion procedure in the first 14 weeks is considered to be twice as safe as getting one's tonsils removed and 11 times safer than giving birth. These statistics come from FDA research. Pro-life Surgeon General C. Everett Coop also affirmed the safety of the procedure in a 1987 report. Unlike the author, I won't make you take my
word for it that his claims are unsubstantiated. The psychological trauma, which he discussed, is a phenomenon not recognized by the American Psychiatric Association or the American Psychological Association, largely due to the fact that the vast majority of the 35 major worldwide studies on the psychological effects have found exactly the opposite. Or perhaps because 250 other scientific studies have disproved the existence of any widespread trauma. Reports by such radicals as the Surgeon General, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the British Journal of Medicine and the American Medical Association contradict his claims of widespread psychiatric devastation. If we focus on the variable of unwanted abortions, statistics do show a slight, general increase in feelings of guilt or depression. The same APA study notes the rareness of unwanted abortions and links them principally to couples who terminate after receiving a negative genetic screening. Further, the studies show that the rates of severe psychological disturbance after abortion range from 18 per 10,000 to as low as two per 10,000. A study in the American Journal of Psychiatry showed that up to 98 percent of the women who have abortions have no regrets and would make the same choice again in similar circumstances. The most prominent emotional response reported is relief. Further, most studies point to the hormonal changes that occur in women who terminate a pregnancy as a contributing cause for any negative feelings. I understand that the author cannot possibly understand the relationship between female hormonal changes and emotional changes. Yes, 20 percent of women who terminate a pregnancy experience mild depressive symptoms that quickly pass. But yes, 70 percent of women who give birth experience mild depressive symptoms that quickly pass. That statistic comes from the Journal of the American Medical Association. The overall conclusion of the APA on the subject is that negative psychological effects are typically mild and typically rare. Of course moral and religious objections can be raised in the abortion debate. These concerns are valid and sincere. If the author wants to make an argument for the alternatives or against the moral implications of abortion, he should stick to that issue. He knows his own morals. But he obviously knows nothing about abortion law or abortion medicine.