Georgia: se intenta reducir el plazo para abortar

Se intenta que el plazo máximo para abortar sea de seis semanas, esto es, sólo el embriocidio, y no el feticidio, vendría siendo legal.


Tras la semana 20, el niño tendría que ser hecho nacer vivo, aun en casos de incesto o violación. Médico que matara a un feto a término, médico que afrontaría una década tras las rejas.



FUENTE:
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-government/new-abortion-restrictions-likely-1399055.html


New abortion restrictions likely stopped




By Kristina Torres

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
One of the most controversial bills this legislative session, that sought to put new restrictions on late-term abortions, was all but gutted Monday after a bipartisan coalition in the state Senate forced key changes.
Enlarge photo

Jason Getz Along with other Senators, Sen. Charlie Bethel, R-Dalton, votes for on an amendment to House Bill 954, commonly known as the "fetal pain" bill.



The original proposal would have cut by about six weeks the time women in Georgia may have an elective abortion. With the changes, it would now also include an exemption for "medically futile" pregnancies, giving doctors the option to perform an abortion when a fetus has congenital or chromosomal defects.
The change hits at the heart of the controversy: Should fetuses once they hit 20 weeks be protected even if those protections mean women are forced to continue medically risky pregnancies?
Now, with two days left in General Assembly's annual legislative session, a once promising effort to put major new restrictions on abortion for the first time in five years has perhaps died for the year.
Commonly referred to as a "fetal pain" bill, House Bill 954would tighten medical exemptions for terminating pregnancies and require any abortion performed after 20 weeks of pregnancy be done in a way to bring the fetus out alive. No exemption is made for rape or incest. The measure says that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, therefore the state has an interest in protecting it.
The bill had been the subject of intense lobbying efforts by abortion rights groups and women's health advocates who opposed it, as well as religious conservatives who pushed for its passage. It also brought emotional debates to both chambers of the General Assembly, with lawmakers talking about themselves, family members and constituents having to make agonizing decisions relating to pregnancy.
Several drew parallels to the civil rights and womens' rights movements. "Dr. King said an unjust law is not a law," said Sen. Emanuel Jones, D-Decatur, adding that if the Atlanta-born civil rights leader had not stood against unjust laws, "a lot of us, including myself, would not have been able to serve in this body."
The description was accurate, said Sen. Jesse Stone, R-Waynesboro, except "the civil rights here are for an unborn child." Stone said his wife gave birth to twin sons at 24 weeks; one survived, one did not. "That experience taught me just what I'm saying. It's not tissue. It's not the rights of the father and mother. It's an unborn life" the bill saves, he said.
Six states — Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Alabama — have similar "fetal pain" restrictions; a seventh, North Carolina, restricts abortion at 20 weeks. Passing the bill now throws Georgia into a stormy debate in this national election year over abortion limits. Most notably, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell signed into law this month a controversial bill requiring Virginia women to undergo an ultrasound procedure prior to having an abortion, although he backed off a mandate to require a trans-vaginal ultrasound.
The last time Georgia placed a major new restriction on abortion was in 2007, when lawmakers said doctors must offer women the option of an ultrasound or sonogram procedure to view the fetus before they abort it.
Supporters of the new Georgia bill said it would save lives and protect more fetuses.
Opponents said the bill would legislate decisions that should be made by doctors, that it would force women to carry to term fetuses that would be stillborn because of medical problems and would put doctors at risk who work with difficult pregnancies. Doctors who are involved in abortions after 20 weeks that do not meet the bill's restrictions could be charged with a felony and face up to 10 years in prison.
Some rural lawmakers worried about the bill's unintended effects. They said as many as 39 of the state's counties do not have an OB-GYN within county borders, and some have only a few doctors for women to see early enough in their pregnancies.
Others worried the time spent on HB 954 -- Monday's debate alone lasted more than four hours -- was time wasted as other important issues stood unresolved.
Jennifer Moore, a licensed clinical social worker, was one of hundreds of Georgians who packed hearings this legislative session on the measure. She said Monday she wanted lawmakers to focus on the economy and job creation, not abortion.
"I believe this bill is bad whether you're pro-choice or pro-life," Moore said as senators debated. "The decision should be left up to a woman and her doctor, not a state representative. It takes us back 50 years."
Senate President Pro Tem Tommie Williams, R-Lyons, however, said lawmakers have a responsibility to legislate morality on difficult subjects. "Fifty years ago, my grandmother would not have [considered] saying the word 'sex,'" Williams said. "Fifty years ago, no one would have considered abortion as an alternative. But we've let ourselves become oblivious to the fact that there are children in this world not allowed to be born."
The amended bill passed on a 36-19 vote. HB 954's sponsor, Rep. Doug McKillip, R-Athens, left the chamber quickly afterward. He declined comment on the changes, except to say he needed "to read them, digest them and go from there." The bill now heads back to the House, which could agree or disagree to the Senate changes -- or simply drop the bill from its agenda.
Dan Becker, president of Georgia Right to Life, said he will encourage McKillip not to accept the changes to HB 954, increasing the chances that the bill could get bogged down in the last-minute dickering between the two chambers.
HB 954 has not been the only bill under consideration during this legislative session related to abortion. Senate Bill 438, which would ban state employee health insurance plans from offering coverage for abortion services, is currently stuck in House committee. Its passage in the Senate earlier this month caused several female Democratic lawmakers to walk out in protest.
Two views on abortion
The House and the Senate have passed bills seeking to put new restrictions on late-term abortions. How the bills differ.
The House version, HB 954, would:
* Tighten medical exemptions for terminating pregnancies and require any abortion performed after 20 weeks of be done in a way to bring the fetus out alive.
* Make no exemption for rape or incest.
* Declare that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, therefore the state has an interest in protecting it.
The Senate version of HB 954 would:
* Allow an exemption for “medically futile” pregnancies, giving doctors the option to perform an abortion when a fetus has congenital or chromosomal defects.
* Protect doctors from civil suits brought as a result of the legislation.