Quote :

The Indiana Senate Health Committee today passed a pro-life bill to make it the next state to ban abortions on babies simply because they are diagnosed with Down syndrome.


Senate Bill (SB) 334, abortion prohibition based on gender or disability, passed the Indiana Senate Health and Provider Services Committee. This bill will bar a person from doing an abortion if he or she knows the pregnant woman wants an abortion because of the baby’s gender or a diagnosis or potential diagnosis of Down syndrome or another disability.


“Senate Bill 334 sends a clear message that Indiana does not tolerate discrimination,” shared Mike Fichter, President and CEO of Indiana Right to Life. “Studies show babies have been targeted for abortion simply because of a disability, potential disability or gender. The United Nations estimates as many as 200 million girls in the world were aborted because of their gender. Additional studies show up to 90 percent of babies with Down syndrome are targeted for abortion because of their extra chromosome.”


A variety of witnesses lined up to speak on SB 334. They were Dr. David Prentice, Charlotte Lozier  Institute; Mary O’Callahan, mother and Public Policy Fellow, Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture; Dr. Aaron Deweese, neonatologist; Kathleen Black, disability activist; Dr. Lori Buzzetti, OBGYN, Trained Residents at St. Vincent Hospital and starting “So Big,” a nonprofit to help pregnant women; Asleigh Moon, mother who was given negative prenatal diagnosis and child was born without any genetic anomalies; Kathie Shaw, young woman with Down syndrome; and Sue Swayze, Indiana Right to Life.


Senate Bill 334 passed 7-4. The bill must now pass the Senate in order to advance.


SB 334 is authored by Sens. Travis Holdman (District 19), Liz Brown (District 15) and Amanda Banks (District 17) and co-authored by Sen. Dennis Kruse (District 14).


The percentage of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome before birth and who eventually become victims of abortions is outlandishly high. Studies show somewhere in the neighborhood of 70-90 percent of unborn babies with Down syndrome are victimized by abortions.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. With the governor’s signature on the ban in 2013, Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple took that state in a decidedly pro-life direction.

Eventually a judge dismissed a legal challenge abortion activists brought against the legislation.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

At the time North Dakota adopted its bill, Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest praised it.

“A civil society does not discriminate against people – born and unborn – for their sex or for disability.  We should be celebrating diversity, not destroying it,” she said. “Women in particular have been targeted for death in the womb, and we’ve also seen dramatic abortion rates for children with disabilities which put them at risk for extinction. Gov. Jack Dalrymple, Rep. Bette Grande and the legislators in North Dakota have shown courageous humanity in passing this legislation.”

Yoest said that, while federal and state laws protect women and the disabled from discrimination, the unborn are not similarly protected.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'm confused. A woman can abort a baby for absolutely no reason (which is her right, IMO), but if she says it's because they child may have Down Syndrome, she can't?
... I don't understand

If a woman wants an abortion because the baby has Downs Syndrome or it's a girl/boy that she doesn't want, then she should be able to make that decision for HER body. It's a shitty reason, but it's her body. I don't understand why these fucking asshole jerks get to pass these ridiculous bills that take away our rights.

This is only a way for conservatives to put a limit on abortions. They look as if this goes through it's a battle won for their war (banning abortion completely) so to say. If they can nit pick and put bans on small various ones then they have hopes that it will be passed as a whole and no one can get an abortion.

While I am a strong supporter for the disability acts I do not support this. It is the womans right to make choices for her body. Not everyone is cut out to be a special needs parent and to me if they would willingly abort just because of a disability then they don't need to raise that child anyways. When the state forces parents to keep unwanted children it causes nothing but trouble. I dread to see headlines over the years to come of children with disabilities being neglected or abused. Too many people hurt these babies (children) as it is, but if these kids are not wanted then I see the stats skyrocketing. You can force a baby on someone but that does not mean that it will be loved.

I am against the odds here and don't support abortion at all but don't judge those who do. What I don't get it why assault on a pregnant woman can be considered a felony because of the baby, or a drunk driver hits and kills a pregnant mama and goes to jail for 2 counts of manslaughter but abortion is ok. Again that's just my opinion

There have been a few cases like that here in Indiana Katy. One I remember well. Probably about five years ago a woman pregnant with twins (She was like seven months) worked at a bank here in Indianapolis. One morning there was an armed robbery, The bank teller was shot but she did not die, she was taken to the hospital and she lost both of her babies. There was a huge court battle for months, it was a very high profile case. The DA wanted to charge the robber with two counts of murder for the death of the unborn babies. The DA lost. In the end he only got prison time for armed robbery. Many people were upset over the ruling. I'm sure that in many places it does happen to where a person is charged for the death of unborn babies but not everywhere. I was actually surprised that they didn't get the guy with the two counts of manslaughter considering Indiana is mostly a republican state.

epiod wrote:

There have been a few cases like that here in Indiana Katy.  One I remember well.  Probably about five years ago a woman pregnant with twins (She was like seven months) worked at a bank here in Indianapolis.  One morning there was an armed robbery, The bank teller was shot but she did not die, she was taken to the hospital and she lost both of her babies.  There was a huge court battle for months, it was a very high profile case.  The DA wanted to charge the robber with two counts of murder for the death of the unborn babies.  The DA lost.  In the end he only got prison time for armed robbery.  Many people were upset over the ruling.  I'm sure that in many places it does happen to where a person is charged for the death of unborn babies but not everywhere.  I was actually surprised that they didn't get the guy with the two counts of manslaughter considering Indiana is mostly a republican state.

Wow, that actually is really surprising he didn't get that charge

When does the diagnosis take place? Most states ban after so many weeks into the pregnancy as it is. Could that be a factor? I personally understand a woman's right to choose early on, but I do believe that if you choose to have the baby, then you choose whatever may come. There are no guarantees. Tests can be wrong. A baby that seems perfectly normal could come out with heart defects, or cancer or any number of scenarios. At what point is it acceptable to say, "I didn't sign up for this?"

I have such a hard time with this. I hate abortion but I don't believe I have the right to tell someone whether they have the right or not to make decisions about their own bodies. I have worked with Downs kids and they are such beautiful people. A lot of hard work for some though. The biggest question I have is that if they are going to try and force women to continue an unwanted pregnancy then will they be there to take full responsibility for the child?