LegislativeAlert.jpg (7278 bytes)

ALERT.gif (24242 bytes)
"WOMEN HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW"


On Friday, March 26, 1999, the R.I. Senate passed the Women's Right to Know bill (31-16). This bill requires abortion providers to give women seeking abortion complete and accurate information about the baby's development, the risks of abortion and the alternatives. The bill also requires a 24-hour waiting period.

Rhode Island has the shameful distinction of having had the fifth highest rate of abortion in the country in 1995.  With 6,000 abortions performed annually in Rhode Island, now is the time for our legislature to pass the "Women's Right to Know" Bill.

Abortion is the most difficult and irreversible decision a woman can make.  Doesn't she deserve  all the information?  This law is in effect in 13 states. It has been upheld in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey.

This bill needs a hearing and a vote in the House Health, Education, and Welfare Committee.  Please call the Speaker's office it the State House 222-2466 and ask that this bill be given consideration.  Also, call your local state representatives and ask them
to support this bill.

This bill is pro-woman and pro life.

For more information call the Rhode Island State Right to Life office (521-1860).



Q&A: WOMEN'S RIGHT TO KNOW



What is "Women's Right to Know"?

This is consumer legislation. It is an enhanced informed consent. It will protect women in crisis pregnancies by providing for a 24 hour waiting period after she is provided with the information necessary to make an informed decision about abortion.

Why is Right to Know Necessary?

The decision to abort "is an important, a stressful one, and it is desirable and imperative that it be made with full knowledge of its nature and consequences." Planned Parenthood v Danforth, 42 8 U.S. 5 2, 67 (1976)

To "reduce the risk that a woman may elect an abortion, only to discover later with devastating consequences, that her decision was not fully informed." Planned Parenthood v Casey, 112 S Ct 2791, 2823 (1992)

What Information Would She Receive?

Information about the medical risks, the baby's development, and alternatives to abortion.

Who Will Support This Legislation?

Anyone who is pro-woman. Anyone who claims to be pro-choice will want to give women complete and accurate information.

What are the Specific Requirements of Woman's Right to Know?

1.    A 24 hour waiting period

2.    That woman be given the following information by the attending or referring physician:

*name of the physician who is to perform the abortion
*possible physical and psychological effects of abortion
*medical risks associated with the abortion procedure to be used
*probable gestational age of the unborn child
*medical risks associated with carrying the child to term

3.    That woman be given the following information by the physician or his agent:

*availability of medical assistance benefits
*liability of the father for child support
*right to review information prepared by the state that describes fetal development and the availability of pregnancy services

What Are The Penalties for Violation of This Act?

1.    Criminal penalty - any person who intentionally, knowingly, recklessly violates this Chapter is guilty of a felony.

2.    Civil penalty - any intentional violation of this chapter shall

a) provide a basis for a civil malpractice action
b) provide a basis for recovery for the woman under the Wrongful Death Act
c) provide a basis for professional disciplinary action

Is Women's Right to Know Constitutional?

Yes. Pennsylvania's Right to Know was upheld in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Since then Federal courts have upheld women's right to know laws in other states; including, Ohio, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Michigan, Utah, South Carolina, Louisiana, Wisconsin and Kansas.

27 Marcy Street, Cranston, RI 02905- (401)521-1860


LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

As of this writing the House of Representatives has decided not to hear any pro-life or pro-abortions bills. We don't know if they will stay with this decision. Also, are they including the FACE ACT which is now called SAFE (Safety of Access to Facilities Endangered) in this decision.

Catholics for Life is trying to reinstate the Sodomy law, but so far it has not been introduced. We hope this will happen within the next 2 weeks.

We are sorry that the House has made this decision, because it is important to keep the issue alive. Babies are dying every 20 seconds. We cannot forget that. The killing is not going to go away. The babies are crying out for help. Pray that our legislators hear their cries.


Statement Concerning Proposed Legislation 99-H5403
(Safety of Access to Facilities Endangered)
by The Most Rev. Robert E. Mulvee, DD, Bishop of Providence
March 1999

Regarding this particular piece of legislation, I have no just reason to oppose appropriate safeguards designed to prevent acts of violence or aggressive harassment. I oppose such acts myself. It seems to me, however, that already existing federal law speaks to this issue. Further, this bill as presented contains some very ambiguous language.

For example, the definitions of "interfere" and "intimidate" in the bill are open to individual interpretation. Some may interpret interference and intimidation in ways that have nothing to, do with violent behavior, but a pro-life peaceful demonstrator could be unfairly perceived as doing so and be easily charged. In this way pro-life people could be singled out for harsh penalties that do not exist for others, such as labor union members, AIDS activists, animal rights protestors or any other similarly motivated organizations. I am very concerned that some might use this legislation, if passed, to deny the right of free people to assemble peacefully and express openly their sincere beliefs.

I am very mindful of the hateful acts of violence that have been directed at some abortion clinics around the country. Such acts of violence are never justified and must be condemned by anyone who believes in the right to life for all God's people. But since existing law addresses the issue of clinic violence and free access, I must oppose any additional legislation that does not guarantee and protect the Constitutional rights of others to free and unrestricted peaceful assembly and expression.


 

Back to Pro Life Page One


Home Page | Who We Are | What We Offer | Related SitesE-mail Addresses

Event Calendar | Fr. Ray's Corner | The Seminarians | Spiritual Offering