By Chrissy Dill
Staff writer
House Bill 1888, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act which Oklahoma Republican Gov. Mary Fallin signed into law during spring 2011 semester, will go into effect Nov. 1.
According to Oklahoma State Rep. Josh Brecheen, this measure “prohibits abortions after 20 weeks,” adding that“numerous scientific studies have found that this is when fetuses can begin to feel pain.”
According to Brecheen, in 2005, Congressional hearings were held on the issue of unborn children’s pain where doctors, who were experts on the issue, testified that after 20 weeks, an unborn fetus has all the anatomy, physiology, hormones and neurotransmitters needed to perceive pain.
“The bill prohibits abortion on women who are at 20 or more weeks, except in cases in which an abortion is necessary to avert the woman’s death or serious risk of physical impairment, on the grounds that the unborn child or fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks,” Brecheen explained.
There is opposition to the bill in Oklahoma, however. According to newsok.com, Jordan Goldberg, Center for Reproductive Rights, said the measure was unconstitutional and the bills will be looked at on their own merits and litigation will be considered when needed.
“It’s clear that the people proposing all of these different bills would like to make abortion if not illegal than inaccessible to most women,” Goldberg said.
Abortion is a prominent issue that results in much debate in the state of Oklahoma as well as a national level. According to census.gov, from 1990 to 2006, the highest percentage of women getting abortions in the United States were age 20 to 24 years, with the second highest percentage being age 25 to 29 years.
Chair and Assistant Professor of Political Science Bruce Johnson provided information regarding abortion laws in general and their relation to the campus of SE. More and more states are passing laws making it more difficult for a woman to obtain an abortion, he said.
Restrictive state laws, including Oklahoma and Texas, are crossing over into the Roe v. Wade court decision, said Johnson, “and this is a debatable point,” he added. Laws vary from state to state, and different states are taking different approaches to this, he continued.
By “crossing into the Roe v. Wade decision,” Johnson explained, because the state decisions are so restrictive, the opportunity to re-examine the court case has occurred. The decision can’t necessarily be overthrown, he said, but the Supreme Court could choose to return to the status quo before the court case.
According to findlaw.com, the 1973 Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade invalidated all state laws limiting women’s access to abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy. State laws limiting such access during the second trimester were upheld only when the restrictions were for the purpose of protecting the health of the pregnant woman.
Basically, the Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion in the United States, which was not legal at all in many states and was limited by law in others.
Students are typically influenced by those around them, said Johnson, and the impact of peer pressure is included. Students may have a fear of sharing their honest opinion on such a heavily debated issue that deals with morality.
“Opinion seems to be fairly split in Oklahoma and Texas for the general public,” stated Johnson. “Whether that’s the case on the campus of Southeastern, that is an interesting question.”
According to Johnson, the issue of abortion and national perspectives on the issue as well as court cases are discussed in his political science and government courses, but not usually studied at a local or state level.
Johnson said he believes students at SE should be more engaged in issues all together. “Abortion is just one of many issues that should receive greater attention and discussion among students; they merit more attention than they receive,” he said. “Students generally should be more engaged in more public policy discussions than they are.”
Through an online, informal survey through the use of Facebook, about 90 SE students were asked if they believe abortion was addressed on campus, whether or not they think the issue should be discussed more often among the student population as well as their own personal opinions on the issue. Twenty-six students chose not to participate in the conversation at all, while nine students voiced their opinions.
Several students voiced opposition to making abortion illegal. “Sometimes the consequences cannot be handled,” said Ethan Wells.
Cassidy Percer said, “I would not have one, but I think the choice should be out there.”
Chikako Martin said, “It definitely should be a legal option.”
Another participant, Dani Norton, stated, “I believe in their right to choose and would not question the moral capacity of those women who decide to opt for abortion.”
However, several students voiced opposition to abortion. “I believe human life begins at conception,” said Brian Ayres.
Jerreck McWilliams said that “regardless of how a human life comes into being, it’s still a human life, and in my book that’s sacred.”
Another student against abortion, Meagan Mullenix, stated, “I understand there are stipulations and circumstances, but simply aborting a child because you don’t want it or the responsibility is morally wrong.”
Many participants believed abortion was not addressed on campus. “It’s not addressed on campus at all,” said Percer.
Martin added, “If it is, in fact, addressed on campus, I don’t think any of us are aware of it.”
Several students suggested that SE provide more information on the subject of abortion and other resources as a result of unplanned pregnancy.
“It might be nice to have the figures of guidance that display brochures on STDs and discovering one’s sexual identity also offer information on adoption, abortion or even healthy habits to start as a new mom,” said Martin.
“More information should be given on adoption,” said Mullenix. “Thousands of families can’t have children, and instead of having an abortion, adoption should be considered.”