Wisconsin has been waging war on women’s reproductive health over the last year, in the same manner that other red states have. They’ve instituted a 20-week abortion ban, and Governor Scott Walker once claimed that forced ultrasounds were the “it” thing because pics of kids in wombs are cool. With all of this in mind, some Wisconsin lawmakers are coming together on a bill to prevent Walker’s clan from limiting women’s access to vital health services.
The Patients Reproductive Health (PRH) Act is built on the idea that the doctor-patient relationship should be based on sound medical science, and not political agenda.
According to Sara Finger, the author of a piece in The Huffington Post on this issue, there is no other medical field in which politicians feel compelled to interfere in the doctor-patient relationship this way. Can you think of one? We didn’t think so.
We hear whining about the government getting between us and our doctors whenever the idea of single-payer healthcare comes up. The government, in states like Wisconsin, stands squarely between women and their doctors on this issue, and hypocritical Republicans support this in the name of “protecting women.” Please!
For instance, Wisconsin now requires doctors to read a script to patients in the name of “informed consent.” Ms. Finger says that this script contains medically inaccurate, and irrelevant, information. Laws requiring doctors to give their patients full disclosure is one thing. Requiring them to provide information that’s not even medically accurate is dangerous interference with the doctor-patient relationship, and shouldn’t even make it to legislatures’ floors for votes, let alone get signed into law.
This bill would also require all hospitals that provide maternity care to allow willing healthcare professionals to provide certain services, including contraception and abortion, at those hospitals. It would continue to honor the conscience rights of providers who don’t wish to provide those services, too. In other words, it prevents hospitals from setting unilateral policies on contraception and abortion and allows providers whose consciences do mandate they provide these types of care to do it.
There are two sides to religious freedom, and that is it right there. “Christian” Republicans don’t have a live-and-let-live policy in their minds though; they’d rather force their will on everyone, directly or indirectly. What this bill really does, is stop that in its tracks. It’s a shame that someone like Walker wouldn’t likely sign it into law.
And it’s really terrible that a law like this is even necessary. The War on Women is clearly a real thing if we need laws like this to protect access to women’s reproductive care. As it’s been said all over the place, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be sacrosanct. But since they can’t, well, let pregnant women twist in the wind.
Featured image by Suzanne M. Day. Licensed under Public Domain via Commons