Women’s Advocacy Groups Oppose Redundant Abortion Ban, Encourage Senators To Work On Proven Prevention Methods
IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
March 1, 2011LANSING, MI— Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan and the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan criticized the Michigan Senate Judiciary Committee today for once again playing politics with women’s health.
The judiciary committee will hold a hearing today at 2:30 p.m. on Senate Bill 160, a wasteful and redundant measure that prohibits a rarely used, yet medically necessary abortion method that is already prohibited under federal law.
“If the goal of the Michigan Legislature is to reduce the number of abortions in Michigan, preventing unintended pregnancies should be the top priority,” said Sarah Scranton, Planned Parenthood Executive Director.
“SB 160 will not prevent a single unintended pregnancy or abortion. Instead it is a wedge issue that serves as a troubling distraction from real problems facing our state – the economy, jobs and education.”
“SB 160 will not prevent a single unintended pregnancy or abortion. Instead it is a wedge issue that serves as a troubling distraction from real problems facing our state – the economy, jobs and education.”
In addition, the groups invited committee members to join their efforts to promote policies that are proven to prevent unintended pregnancies while positively impacting a woman’s ability to make informed and responsible decisions regarding her health.
Such policies include reliable and comprehensive sex education; access to family planning clinics; contraceptive equity; and access to emergency contraception.
Such policies include reliable and comprehensive sex education; access to family planning clinics; contraceptive equity; and access to emergency contraception.
SB 160 is the legislature’s fifth attempt to ban this abortion method. The bill does not provide an exception to protect a woman’s health and is unnecessary and wasteful, prohibiting abortion methods that were already banned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an identical federal abortion ban that did not include a health exception—overturning thirty plus years of precedent that required abortion restrictions to include an exception protecting a woman’s health.
This federal law is currently in effect in Michigan and therefore, passing a Michigan law is redundant and unnecessary.
In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an identical federal abortion ban that did not include a health exception—overturning thirty plus years of precedent that required abortion restrictions to include an exception protecting a woman’s health.
This federal law is currently in effect in Michigan and therefore, passing a Michigan law is redundant and unnecessary.
“Although we believe that such laws are bad for women and prevent doctors from practicing the safest and best medicine, this bill is unnecessary because of our federal laws,” said Shelli Weisberg, ACLU of Michigan legislative director. “Even those who are anti-choice should be concerned with our legislature’s attempt to duplicate federal efforts, waste time and money.”
During the federal debate, nine professional medical associations objected to the ban including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), American Medical Association, American Public Health Association, American Nurses Association, American Medical Women’s Association and California Medical Association. No comparable medical group supported the ban.
