Commentary: Proposed abortion law would set a reasonable standard

As the sponsor of House Bill 136 in the Utah House, I’ve had to get up to speed quickly on the subject of abortion after a lifetime of averting my eyes.

Abortion is not a pleasant topic, and no one really wants to talk about it or think about it. It’s also a very contentious issue — a barn-burner of a word not to be mentioned in polite company. Above all, we do not want to know the gory details of the abortion procedure, perhaps because if we did know those details, we might be compelled to do something. Second trimester dismemberment abortion shocks the conscience.

HB136 narrows the window of opportunity for a woman in Utah to receive an abortion from 22 weeks gestation (or “viability,” the constitutionally mandated minimum) to 18 weeks. It also expands the current array of exceptions to include a new exception for very severe brain abnormalities. Under this bill, a woman may obtain an abortion for any of these reasons after 18 weeks, and for any reason at all before 18 weeks. The bill is a reasonable step in the right direction that would save some babies’ lives and prevent some suffering, not only for the babies, but also for their mothers.

That’s right – women themselves are often secondary casualties of abortion. Like any surgical procedure, abortion can cause serious complications, up to and including maternal death, though severe physical problems as a result of abortion are rare. What is more common, and very under-reported, are the psychological risks of abortion, including a greatly increased risk of suicide.

A Finnish study showed a six-fold increased risk for suicide in the first 12 months after abortion. The British Journal of Psychiatry published a 30-year study showing an 81 percent increase in mental health problems for post-abortive women. Future fertility problems like pre-term birth and placenta previa are also common side-effects of abortion. All of these risks increase with gestational age, making it desirable to limit abortion to an earlier point in pregnancy.

When Roe v Wade became the law of the land 46 years ago, we did not know these risks existed. Lacking the window into the womb that is modern ultrasound technology, we could not watch babies in utero fanning their fingers and sucking their thumbs. We did not suspect that fetuses as young as 8-10 weeks could perceive pain and mount “substantial stress responses,” indicated by stress hormone levels in the blood, blood flow to the brain, and changes in the pulse.

What are we to do with 46 years of accumulated data on the after-effects of abortion? The courts have repeatedly said that our pre-viability options are limited. If we want to abort children on their due date, as they allow in New York and Virginia, we are free to do so, but if we want to restrict abortion to prevent maternal complications and fetal pain, we will be sued.

As a society, we absolve ourselves of complicity in the atrocity of abortion by parroting familiar mantras: “It’s between a woman and her doctor.” (This is something a modern-day Pontius Pilot might say, forgetting that an innocent life hangs in the balance.) “Keep abortion safe and legal.” (Abortion is never safe for the baby, and often it is not safe for the woman herself.) “My body, my choice.” (The body within the woman’s body is powerless and has no legal protection at all. He or she is not even acknowledged as a human being). And my favorite from a legislative perspective: “Abortion is settled law.” Slavery and segregation were once “settled law” – as settled as abortion has ever been – but constitutionality did not make them morally right.

There are few absolutes, but I have observed that love is always the answer, no matter the question, and life is always better than death. To paraphrase Pablo Casals, our challenge as a society is to find a way to make the world worthy of its children. In order to do that, we must first let children be born. Life and death take care of themselves in the natural course of things – let us find ways to take care of each other.

Rep. Cheryl Acton, R-West Jordan, represents District 43 in the Utah House of Representatives.