|
|
Facts vs. Fiction on the Military’s Abortion BanThe Washington Times published an article Tuesday on the Senate Armed Services Committee’s recent move to repeal a ban on private funding for abortions on military bases. The story contained several misleading and unfortunate claims from anti-abortion members of Congress. The paper then followed up that article with an editorial today in which the paper itself that takes many of those claims to a new level. First, some background: The ban on abortions in military facilities was first put into place in 1988 with an internal Department of Defense memorandum and then was signed into law by President Bush the same year. In 1993, President Bill Clinton reversed the policy by executive order, but Congress intervened two years later to codify and reinstate the ban. The current ban does not allow women to obtain abortions on military bases even if they pay with their own money, and only permits it if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest or if the woman’s life is at risk. However, many women are afraid to say they have been raped for fear of reprisal from their unit. Even when stationed in countries where abortion is legal, servicewomen frequently do not have access to abortions for a number of reasons, including lack of adequate local health facilities, lack of trained medical personnel or being stationed in remote or hostile areas. Additionally, women who travel for abortions must ask their commanding officer for permission to travel and detail the reasons for leaving the base. While the Washington Times editorial board may think they know what is best for all pregnant servicewomen and their families, a servicewoman facing an unintended pregnancy should have the same rights and opportunities to make the right decision for her circumstances as the rest of us. The amendment passed by the Senate Armed Services Committee (attached to the National Defense Authorization Act and introduced by Sen. Roland Burris [D-Ill.]), would simply repeal the dangerous ban on abortions in military facilities and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own money to get the health care they need. Contrary to what the members in Congress interviewed in Tuesday’s Washington Times story claimed, the amendment would not require the Department of Defense to pay for abortion services. (The amendment would also allow health care professionals a right to refuse to perform an abortion.) Comprehensive medical care should not be denied to any member of our armed services, including those stationed far from home. We must no longer prohibit our women in uniform from exercising their fundamental right to make health care decisions for themselves simply because of their military service and where they have been stationed.
We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are requests for legal assistance and postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability.
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites. We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published. Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section. 4 Responses to "Facts vs. Fiction on the Military’s Abortion Ban" |
|
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
Jun 12th, 2010 at 1:19pm
It isn't enough that they try to kill these women with stupid war,they want them to die in back allleys to.
Jun 14th, 2010 at 5:01pm
Absolutely ridiculous to deny someone a LEGAL medical procedure when she's paying with her OWN money. Unbelievable that it was ever banned in the first place.
Jun 21st, 2010 at 11:05pm
WHEN YOUR IN THE MILITARY UNCLE SAM OWNS YOU
Jul 2nd, 2010 at 1:35pm
*You're. Also, I believe you left your caps lock on.
And I don't recall the oath that says fictional, anti-woman characterizations own the individuals of the military.