Fabulous Girl's Boudoir

Friday, August 19, 2005

Paging Dr. Jekyll

The Hyde Amendment, which bars the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortions except when the life of the woman would be endangered by carrying the pregnancy to term, passed in 1977. Over the years, additional exceptions for women who become pregnant as a result of rape or incest have been added, but not for women who receive health benefits through the US military. The Amendment's constitutionality was most recently upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today, in an appalling case in Everett, WA. From the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
Calling its own decision "callous and unfeeling," a federal appeals court ruled Thursday against a Navy sailor's wife from Everett who aborted a horribly deformed fetus that was destined to die.The woman wanted her military health insurance plan to pay for the procedure, but the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that its hands were tied: U.S. armed forces medical benefits don't cover abortions unless the pregnant woman's life is at risk. In its 3-0 ruling, the court said the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of congressional bans on federal funding of abortion in its ruling on the Hyde Amendment almost 25 years ago.
The woman, who was 19 at the time, learned from her doctor that the fetus she was carrying had anecephaly, which is always fatal. It had neither skull nor brain, would likely be stillborn and, if not, would survive for only a few weeks. The government refused to pay for an abortion, and when a Seattle judge ruled in the woman's favor, the Justice Department appealed to the Ninth Circuit, citing the "government's interest in protecting human life in general and promoting respect for life."

What life? Is this how the government of the country that celebrates itself as the best in the world treats its citizens, never mind the families of those serving in its military? George Lakoff is going to have a field day with this one.

1 Comments:

  • I think the term 'life' is wholly inadequate in this discussion. Because there is definitely life, and a life, involved. The fetus is definitely alive, and in that case the government has definitely protected life.

    Where the government really misses the mark is in the lack of attention to detail. Life is insufficient in and of itself when trying to decide what should be protected under certain rights. Add in the competing rights/interests of the mother, and it is a very hazy area. There is no way the US military is going to be spearheading social change on this front.

    My question is, why so surprised?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:20 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home