legislative antics in Virginia

[cellio]

It's only the first week of January, and already we have a strong contender for most reprehensible legislation of the year. If this passes, then in the state of Virginia a woman who has a miscarriage will be required to notify government authorities within 12 hours or face a year in jail. Yes, you read that right. (Info from celebrin.)

I am rarely speechless, but I'm having trouble putting my outrage into words right now.

Update Sat 9:30pm: According to the person who posted the news initially, there has been some progress based on the huge outcry (thanks to paquerette for the update). There's still more that needs to be done, but the response from the blogosphere seems to have made a difference. Stay tuned.

Comments

[siderea]

1) It is legal grounds for any VA cop with a chip on his shoulder to arrest any woman, and force her to go through a state-mandated vaginal exam. Charming.

2) Gosh, do you think there might be some MDs in VA who would be happy to sell their services to the Commonwealth, looking at women's cervices so they can testify, "Yep, she is dialated, and she's not pregnant now, and she didn't report losing it...."?

[dvarin.livejournal.com]

It is legal grounds for any VA cop with a chip on his shoulder to arrest any woman, and force her to go through a state-mandated vaginal exam.

Ideally, you don't arrest someone unless you have good reason to believe that they're guilty, and you get in trouble for arresting excessively for no reason.

I realize that this doesn't happen in practice. If the bit about the summary execution of the exam after arrest is written into the law (I didn't read the law's text, just the commentary), then it's more prone to abuse than is reasonable--such things shouldn't be forced except by court order.

[cellio]

Ideally, you don't arrest someone unless you have good reason to believe that they're guilty, and you get in trouble for arresting excessively for no reason.

Ideally, sure. But in the real world, abuse of power happens all the time. Even if there is some good behind this -- a premise I don't grant -- the potential for abuse, combined with the damage to the woman and the violation of privacy, makes it a bad idea.

Since some (many? most? I don't know) miscarriages that are recognizable as such happen under circumstances where some medical professional is aware of the event, it seems like any data-gathering benefit could be achieved without compelling the woman. Doctors and hospitals are already required to report things like highly-communicable diseases for the public good (scraped of identifying info, in theory). If there's a public-health benefit, a similar mechanism could be employed. Either way, some people will get missed; I'm not going to assume, for instance, that every single person who is HIV-positive has made a doctor aware of that, yet I don't think there's an analogous reporting requirement on the individual.