After a fiery debate in the state of Virginia’s General Assembly accompanied by frequent protests, one resulting in arrests, both the Senate and the House of Delegates sent the ultrasound bill to Governor Bob McDonnell to sign. The bill received international attention and television coverage including a segment on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

In order for the bill to pass, the type of ultrasound had to be changed from a trans-vaginal to a trans-abdominal one. The problem is that by changing the type of ultrasound, the fetus cannot be seen in the early stages. Yet the trans-abdominal ultrasound bill is the one Governor Bob McDonnell intends to sign. It should be noted that an ultrasound is not required in the case of rape or incest as long as the incident was reported to the authorities.

Opponents of the trans-vaginal ultrasound who are abortion advocates insist that experiencing one is akin to rape. House Bill 462 does not require the procedure.

Since the Governor has stated that an alternative form of an ultrasound from that of the trans-abdominal one is an issue to be discussed by the patient and the doctor, there appears to be a loophole. Why insist that one type of ultrasound be done if it is so early in the pregnancy it requires a different type to ascertain the gestational age? There could be situations such as knowledge of when conception occurred that would preclude the need for an ultrasound altogether.

The Procedure of Choice

Sometimes a trans-vaginal ultrasound is the procedure of choice. An example is a woman who has had difficulty conceiving, perhaps having already suffered a miscarriage, who needs confirmation that she is pregnant.

A trans-vaginal ultrasound may also be given to women experiencing uncomfortable pre-menopausal symptoms who may wish to have the symptoms treated. Even some of these women would support the wild-eyed claim that the procedure itself, without the possibility of viewing a fetus, is akin to rape.

Cost of Ultrasound

On March 26, the Virginia Senate passed its budget without state funding or the requirement that insurance companies cover the mandatory procedure. There was initially talk of delaying action on the bill until the next session in order to pass legislation that would force insurance companies to pay.

In summary, the pro-life organizations do not feel the bill goes far enough while the abortion advocates insist it goes beyond the pale. It is up to the governor to decide if he wants to sign a bill into law that does not appease either side.

Source:

http://www.loudountimes.com/index.php/news/article/state_senate_passes_revised_ultrasound_bill123/

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-politics/2012/mar/26