Letter to the editor: Study abortion decisions

Posted 7/6/23

To the editor,

While Wisconsin legislators consider changing the state’s abortion law to increase access to abortion inducing drugs, it’s worth looking at the slippery slope …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Letter to the editor: Study abortion decisions

Posted

To the editor,

While Wisconsin legislators consider changing the state’s abortion law to increase access to abortion inducing drugs, it’s worth looking at the slippery slope that took Minnesota legislators from conservative to anything-goes in ending pregnancies.

To make abortion more accessible to all, newly elected progressive majorities in the House and Senate repealed nearly all legal health and safety protections for pregnant females, as well as for babies who survive an abortion.  

Regarding babies, critical language in the Born Alive Infants Protection Act was removed, giving those unfortunate survivors a status worse than farm animals. With no gestational limits in place, abortion on demand means the deaths of babies who could survive outside the womb.  

Regarding women, many Minnesotans believe that, along with lost protections for women considering abortion, the changes in their abortion laws put state's regime on par with China and North Korea. It definitely makes Minnesota an outlier state in this country. No longer will physicians be mandated to discuss options or even possible post-abortion health problems. A no 24-hour waiting period was also repealed, thereby promoting “panic” decisions on life matters.

Gutting all $3 million in resources for women’s clinics and pregnancy resource centers, while liberally funding abortion facilities, makes a pitiful statement about how Minnesota values women and the unborn baby. The side effects of an abortion decision were of no concern to those drafting legislation on this matter.

If you think these changes have no impact on western Wisconsinites, think again. Minnesota’s parental notification law has not been aggressively supported by the state’s attorney general. Over-the-counter abortion drugs will be available for minors just across the St. Croix and Mississippi rivers. If a female has a tubal pregnancy, aborting that pregnancy without that knowledge could be fatal to her. How will she get that knowledge? We teach our future generation to make informed decisions, and yet our legislators don’t promote that, especially on such important matters.  

According to its spokeswoman from Just the Pill, a nonprofit telemedicine abortion provider based in the Twin Cities, that provider will serve people crossing the border from surrounding states. It plans to deploy “a fleet of mobile clinics” that will park alongside state borders. It will provide consultation and dispense abortion pills to anyone requesting them.

A longitudinal study of abortifacient adverse events published in the Spring 2021 Issues of Law and Medicine concluded that: “Significant morbidity and mortality have occurred following the use of mifepristone as an abortifacient." A pre-abortion ultrasound should be a “MUST" to rule out an ectopic pregnancy and to at least confirm baby's gestational age. The FDA AER System is irresponsible in promoting quick and easily accessible abortifacients under the guise of “protecting female health.”

I urge Wisconsin’s legislators to study the abortion decisions now facing our state, and take a long, serious look at where legally provided abortifacients will lead us.  

Jan Jablonski

River Falls

abortion, letters to the editor, opinion