Abortion practices to be standardized

Tuesday, September, 13, 2011; 10:20 PM | 9 | | Print

Share


TOPICS: abortion abortion clinics

The Virginia Department of Health recently issued regulations regarding the commonwealth’s abortion clinics. These regulations were a result of the General Assembly’s bill, passed in February of this year. These regulations would require abortion clinics to meet the same standards as hospitals. This bill is said to be the most controversial of the General Assembly’s session. The proposed regulations have received mostly negative media coverage throughout the country. The media is mainly focusing on the “restrictive” code requirements instead of the actual safety of patients, which should be of concern to both pro-choice and pro-life advocates.

As of now, first-trimester abortion clinics in Virginia are treated as outpatient clinics, just like plastic and oral surgery facilities. These other clinics and facilities perform much less invasive surgeries than abortions, and therefore should be treated differently than abortion clinics. The Family Foundation in Virginia has been advocating for these regulations for over a decade because the clinics have been under-regulated in the state, according to the organization’s director. Currently, the foundation is looking into two medical malpractice cases involving abortion procedures in these clinics. I believe these regulations are reasonable and should have been implemented decades ago, since the abortion clinic industry is worth $1 billion.

The proposed regulations, which were categorized as “emergency” to speed up their formulation, were drafted by the VDH after the bill was passed and signed by Gov. Bob McDonnell. They now have to be adopted by the Board of Health at its Sept. 15 meeting and signed into law by McDonnell by the end of the year. The meeting is open to the public, and citizens are welcome to comment and share their opinions on the new regulations. The VDH has been considering comments and suggestions since the bill was passed in February.

According to the VDH, an abortion clinic is defined as a “facility that performs five or more first-trimester abortions per month to meet the same standards for staffing, security, construction and maintenance as hospitals.”  Some of these so-called “restrictive requirements,” which are rarely, if at all, mentioned in the media, include that physicians must remain on the premises until a patient is discharged, staff members certified to perform cardio-pulmonary resuscitation should be available for emergency care, and sanitary conditions have to be improved. 

As you can see, most of these regulations are meant to improve the safety and health of patients. After reading the regulations, I came to the code restrictions section, which was only a small portion of the new requirements. As a woman, I do not see how these regulations are a bad thing. If women choose to use these services, they should be able to feel reassured knowing the regulations on a facility are up to date and the physicians have to comply with the same regulations as hospitals.    

Pro-choice advocates have argued that these regulations will cause 17 of the 21 Virginia abortion facilities to close. This will obviously change how and when women will be able to receive the help they need, but it could also increase the number of alternatives to abortion, such as adoption. McDonnell has stated that these regulations are not meant to close down clinics, but to improve the health and care of women. Although McDonnell is pro-life, I feel he respects the law and realizes these clinics need to be up to date to perform such procedures. After the horrific discovery of the Philadelphia abortion clinic where a “doctor” is currently charged with eight murders from partial birth abortion, pro-choice advocates should encourage these regulations.

It is important, especially for women, to understand how these regulations could affect them. And in the end, I hope they support regulations that improve the welfare of patients’ health and the overall wellness of women throughout Virginia. 

A version of this article appeared in the Sep 14 issue of the Collegiate Times.

Leave a comment 9 Comments Write a letter to the editor

RealWoman | # September 19, 2011 @ 12:59 AM — Flag Comment

Much like the defenders of this ludicrous bill, the author of this article is pretending that these new restrictions on abortion clinics are for "women's safety". HAH. This is yet another attempt by the GOP to deter abortions. As for your claim that there may be an increase in other alternatives to abortion, I beg to differ. I think you'll find an increase in the declination of women's health, as they resort to illegal abortions instead.

You cannot force a woman to endure birth if she does not want to, or if it is unsafe for her. Get over it.

Reply to this Top


Safety First | # September 19, 2011 @ 4:15 AM — Flag Comment

Oh course it is all about safety. I would feel that my life was in danger if I were at a doctor's office whose janitor closet was only a measly 49 sq ft.

Reply to this Top


Anonymous | # January 14, 2012 @ 12:19 PM — Flag Comment

Abortions are already regulated, monitored, and have to meet strict requirements required by all medical facilities. Because expanding the building just to make it possible for 2 gurneys to pass through, regardless of the fact that they are not used for procedures, is not protecting women. In December of 2011 an article in the Roanoke Times detailed how the panel of doctors who helped write the new regulations were disappointed about how the state administration and health department had rewritten a lot of those laws and included many measures that were not necessary and were outside the recommendations. They see the state representatives are asserting an ideological agenda rather than protecting women. Abortions done at a medically licensed facility are safer than carrying a pregnancy to full term, and that is a fact.

Reply to this Top


retro jordans | # August 28, 2012 @ 5:44 AM — Flag Comment

Great list, very interesting especially the one on the Manifesto which sparked something. Thanks for the good advices.
http://www.rarejordan2u.com/

Reply to this Top


men shoe lifts | # April 1, 2013 @ 8:40 PM — Flag Comment

Does your site have a contact page? I’m having problems locating it but, I’d like to shoot you an email. I’ve got some suggestions for your blog you might be interested in hearing. Either way, great site and I look forward to seeing it grow over time. men shoe lifts http://www.deelsonheels.com/Shoe_Lifts/cat133748_120743.aspx

Reply to this Top


Jones sabo model tend to be | # April 14, 2013 @ 2:57 AM — Flag Comment

Wonderful goods from you, man. I have understand your stuff previous to and you are just too fantastic. Jones sabo model tend to be http://www.sintrave.com/foro/topic.php?id=57064&replies=1#post-58873

Reply to this Top


Jones sabo it may also be correctly set you should | # April 16, 2013 @ 5:58 AM — Flag Comment

I was examining some of your conten

Reply to this Top


lancel premier flirt | # April 16, 2013 @ 3:24 PM — Flag Comment

Those are a lot more awesome. Looks just like klipsch is essentially made to work alongside iProducts? I will need android types! lancel premier flirt http://www.saclancelsoldes2013.bi

Reply to this Top


Frauen Timberland 6 Inch Boots | # April 19, 2013 @ 5:54 AM — Flag Comment

cfdirtcbxr <a href="http://www.timberlandschuhede.eu/23-womens-timberland-6-inch-boots/" title="Frauen Timberland 6 Inch Boots">Frauen Timberland 6 Inch Boots</a>

Reply to this Top