New Petition Initiative To Stop Coerced Abortions Less Vulnerable to Misrepresentation
Group Announces Filing of New Initiative In Hopes of Securing More Accurate Ballot Title from Carnahan
St. Louis, MO (January 28, 2007) –
Last month, Secretary of State Robin Carnahan approved
for circulation a petition by the Stop Forced Abortions
Alliance which the Secretary's 100-word ballot summary
describes as an act "banning abortions."
Dissatisfied with the ballot language, Stop Forced
Abortions has filed a new initiative with the Secretary
of State's office. The new initiative now
explicitly states that "It is not the intention of this
law to make unlawful an abortion that is otherwise
lawful." Other changes contradicting the
Secretary's summary were also made.
According to Paula Talley, one of
the groups organizers, the new language should preclude
any further misrepresentations of the initiative as a
ban.
"Our initiative is properly titled
the Prevention of Coerced and Unsafe Abortions Act,"
said Talley, "All it really does is allow women to
hold abortion doctors liable if they fail to screen for
evidence of coercion or other risk factors. But
you didn't see any of that in the ballot summary
Carnahan issued for our first initiative filing. She wrongly describes it
as making certain abortions illegal. In fact, it makes
nothing illegal. "
Controversy over the initiative erupted last November. Fully ten days before the group's first initiative was made public, Planned Parenthood and NARAL began issuing news releases describing the unpublished initiative as a radical ban on most abortions. When Carnahan's office subsequently issued ballot language which also described it as a ban, the Stop Forced Abortions Alliance raised the concern that Carnahan had leaked the initiative language to Planned Parenthood in order to subject it to preemptive attacks.
According to the Stop Forced Abortions website, the leak and and ballot language made it appear as though Carnahan had “conspired with Missouri's largest abortion provider to construct a ballot title which falsely characterizes the initiative as a ‘ban.’"
According to Talley, “This is a
very pro-woman law. If it had been in place in 1980, I
would have been spared the years of grief and depression
which followed my own unwanted abortion,” said Talley.
Talley says she was pressured into an abortion which
went against her moral beliefs by her employer. She also
says she was at greater risk of more severe emotional
reactions to the abortion because of her prior history
of sexual abuse and depression.
“The abortion counselor never asked if I was being
pressured nor did she inquire about my psychological
history,” said Talley. “If she had, she should have
known that in my case abortion was contraindicated. This
law would help to prevent other women from being victims
of negligent pre-abortion screening.”
“It achieves this end simply by correcting a loophole in
the law that currently denies women right to redress for
negligent screening," Talley adds. "The only people who
can oppose this legislation are those who care less
about protecting women than they do about protecting the
abortion industry’s profits.”
According to the Stop Forced Abortions website, as many
as 64 percent of women having abortions feel pressured
into them by other people. The group argues that most
abortion providers have "abandoned any effort to screen
for coercion and other risks in order to reduce costs
and maximize profits."
In a 22 page report titled Forced Abortion in America
the group describes cases of women pressured, coerced,
and violently abused into submitting to unwanted
abortions. The report is available at
www.stopforcedabortions.org.
###
A copy of the new initiative language is available for viewing at www.stopforcedabortions.org