Opinion - South Dakota can teach us a few lessons


Thursday, March 16, 2006
ELIZABETH HOVDE for The Columbian

'South Dakota bans most abortions." I read the headline and immediately wondered how a copy editor could have summed up the story so wrong.

But it's true. The bill South Dakota Gov. Mike Rounds signed last week would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion in South Dakota unless the operation was needed to save a woman's life. It is set to take effect on July 1 but it won't. It will be tied up in the courts or overturned by a statewide referendum. And unless the legal battle goes all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and South Dakota actually wins its case, abortions will remain legal there.

Winning is unlikely for South Dakota. The addition of Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito notwithstanding, there is still a pro-Roe v. Wade majority on the court. So even though the folks at NARAL, NOW and Planned Parenthood aren't crying wolf about this proposed ban, they are on the side that will prevail. People can save hard-earned dollars or donate to more helpful causes than "saving" a woman's "right" to an abortion. (A "right" invented by and according to seven of nine Supreme Court justices in 1973, that is.)

And don't count on all those supposed "states' rights" warriors to come out of the woodwork for South Dakota's autonomy. That was a one-time deal reserved for Oregon's assisted-suicide law. South Dakota's ban will show such people's real colors: Claiming that states' rights are paramount was simply a means to an end.

But even as a pro-life person, I find that this news from South Dakota isn't the kind to get giddy about. I recoil at the thought of an outright abortion ban after 33 years of legalized abortion. I have spent years advocating parental notification laws and an end to public funding for abortions. I send abstinence messages to teens, celebrate maternity homes that help unprepared mothers carry babies to term and grieve for the millions of unborn babies who have been violently ripped apart in abortions while other unborn babies of the same gestation are having their pictures taken for moms to show grandparents and co-workers. And I marvel at the selflessness of parents who give their precious newborns to adoptive parents.

Changing the law won't work

Still, I have always thought that recriminalizing abortion would be a disaster. At current rates, it is estimated that one in three American women will have had an abortion by age 45. Three-plus decades of Roe means women would obtain abortions legally or illegally in droves. And the "quality" and safety of the operations would likely go down.

I think that every life is precious that of an unborn child and that of a grown woman. And that's the quandary.

In reading about South Dakota's abortion climate, however, I think that state has a lot to teach us. The state already treats abortion in a way that would have Washingtonians throwing their double mochas at Olympia lawmakers. According to the Guttmacher Institute (www.guttmacher.org), when it comes to abortion Washington and South Dakota are as different as Sturgis and Seattle. In 2000, South Dakota had two abortion providers; Washington had 53. In Washington, no metropolitan area lacked an abortion provider; in South Dakota, one metropolitan area lacked an abortion provider.

Washington does not have any major abortion restrictions. South Dakota has among the most: parental notification; state-directed counseling; 24-hour waiting periods; and public funding for abortions limited to life-threatening cases.

But look at this: In Washington, 126,910 of the 1,294,501 women of reproductive age became pregnant in 1996. Sixty-four percent of these pregnancies resulted in live births and 21 percent in induced abortions. That mirrors national percentages. What about South Dakota? Of the 158,436 women of reproductive age, 13,540 became pregnant in 1996. Seventy-six percent of these pregnancies resulted in live births. Only 8 percent resulted in induced abortions. Eight percent compared to 21 percent. That's dramatic.

If pro-choicers are serious when they say they share the pro-life goal of making abortion rare, they have to admit South Dakota is on to something.

Elizabeth Hovde's column of personal opinion appears on the Other Opinions page each Thursday. Reach her at ehovde@earthlink.net.

© 2006 Columbian.com

 

Reproduction of this material without written permission is strictly forbidden.
© South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families
South Dakota Campaign for Health Families P.O. Box 1484 Sioux Falls, SD 57101-1484
605-221-5642