How Youngkin’s abortion proposal would harm Virginian women and their families

The Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe vs Wade is a gamechanger for Virginians – but not in the way that most people are thinking.  Before last week, abortion rights were largely argued in courts of law. The Court’s decision has turned it into a political question, decided in legislatures.  And in Virginia, where our legislature is so closely divided between the two parties, that means that success will go to those who play the political game best.

 Governor Youngkin clearly understands this new reality.  Although he admits that his long-term goal is to end all abortions, he knows that he needs to change just one Democratic vote in the Virginia senate to more severely restrict abortion access. It is therefore no surprise that his brand-new proposal looks “moderate”.  It would ban abortions only after 15 weeks.

 The truth, however, is that even this proposal will seriously harm Virginian women and their families – and rural women in particular.  Why?

First, Youngkin makes no exception for the health of the mother.  Whereas the current Virginia law states that  exceptions can be made for the “health” of the mother, the Governor proposes only an exception for the “life” of the mother. That’s a big deal! Imagine, for example, a woman who may face serious and permanent disability from carrying a fetus to term. Under current law, she can receive an abortion – but not in Youngkin’s world.

 Second, the proposal also makes no exception if the fetus is not viable.  Imagine then the terrible situation of the woman who knows that her fetus cannot survive birth, but who would nevertheless be forced to carry it to term, further risking her own life and health.  

 Third, the proposal would put our medical personnel in danger of prosecution just for doing their jobs.  What if, under Youngkin’s proposal, a doctor determines the woman’s life is in danger - but an overzealous prosecutor disagrees?  Doctors could be hauled into court, maybe even sent to jail, just for doing their job.  One result could be that rural areas would have an even harder time attracting doctors.

 Finally, Youngkin has no interest in correcting the fundamental unfairness for women of different incomes and counties in their effective access to reproductive services.  The truth is (as New World Virginia has detailed previously), women who are poor, uninsured, or living in rural areas far from reproductive health services do not now, and still would not under Governor Youngkin’s proposal, have the affordable, accessible, and timely care they need.  Moreover, Youngkin has already said that he wants to even further restrict access insurance coverage for women seeking abortions. 

 For most Republican legislators, of course, such unfairness and inequality is hardly a concern.  And if doctors are scared away from performing even legal abortions – well, that’s fine too.  These politicians’ real goal is to eliminate as far as possible access to abortion services, period.  And if that hits poor and rural women hardest, so be it.  

 In short, the Youngkin proposal would inflict real harm on Virginian women and their families.  Virginia can do better.  For an idea of what a better plan would look like, read the next article.