The issue of abortion has always been a touchy subject. But recently the issue has been used as a diversion tactic.
Last Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass the Life Protection Act, which, according to the bill summary, “amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to prohibit federal funds from being used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services.”
There are already several measures and bills active that prohibit federal funding from being used on abortion-specific services in federally funded health insurance programs — the Protect Life Act is overkill, doing nothing more than pointedly attacking low-income women and their health, while, at the same time, ignoring more pertinent issues such as the need for jobs and wage equality.
The logic behind this bill is that taxpayers who are against abortion can have the comfort of knowing that none of their money is going toward the procedure. The truth behind this bill, however, is that even with private insurance a woman can be denied life-saving treatment. While supposedly “protecting life,” this bill is devaluing it. Women requiring life-saving abortion procedures can be denied aid if the health care professionals available are uncomfortable with the concept. Those who support the bill claim this is protecting the consciences of medical workers — obviously, some priorities have been massively confused.
“If an individual is in need of medical attention, then they deserve respect and dignity, not the prejudice of a nurse or doctor,” University junior Nina Nolen said.@@http://directory.uoregon.edu/telecom/directory.jsp?p=findpeople%2Ffind_results&m=student&d=person&b=name&s=Nina+Nolen@@ Nolen is the public relations coordinator of the ASUO Women’s Center and a feminist blogger.
The bill is a clear rehashing of the Weldon Amendment, a 2004 decision passed to allow physicians and health care workers to refuse abortions in any situation@@PDF: http://tinyurl.com/5twmbln@@. It also builds upon the amendment, allowing those who handle medical records, bills, medical appointments, etc. the ability to refuse to do their job because it makes them “uncomfortable.”
“Instead of protecting life it is putting the lives of the women in our country who cannot afford an abortion in danger,” Nolen said. “They are instead letting the health and lives of women and their unintended pregnancies deteriorate. Women may receive the operation in a cheap and unsafe clinic and die from the procedure or may die because of the life-threatening condition their pregnancy induces.”
A press release by Planned Parenthood on Oct. 13 stated that the Life Protection Act “allows states to enact sweeping refusal laws that would allow health plans to refuse to cover women’s preventative services, including birth control, without cost-sharing — undoing a new protection that 66 percent of Americans support.” The bill worms its way into every aspect of a woman’s sexual life, denying a woman the right to plan her own life.
The Life Protection Act is grossly disrespectful to women who have experienced a trauma or whose lives are threatened by an unborn embryo. More than that, this bill is unnecessary and disrespectful to the many factions of people protesting around the United States, having their houses foreclosed on or who have been laid off. The Life Protection Act is an added layer of unnecessary and harmful government intervention into women’s personal lives. This layer is merely blanketing measures already in place and is a complete waste of time and resources that would be better spent figuring out solutions that help, rather than harm.
Representatives ended their session on Oct. 14 at 3 p.m. and will not return until the 24. That the Life Protection Act was seen as such a necessary step to be taken before a week-long recess is mind-boggling considering current economic issues.