A Gruesome Piece of Legislation : The House--shown bloody photos--votes to outlaw a form of abortion

There is no question that the partial-birth abortion procedure that the House voted Wednesday to outlaw is gruesome. No woman undergoes this late-in-pregnancy procedure without great psychological and physical pain. Few physicians perform it, and those who do may experience deeply conflicting emotions.

The procedure is done typically only to avert an outcome as gruesome as the operation itself--the death of the woman--or to remove a severely deformed fetus that would not survive after birth.

One measure of the pain and conflict surrounding the partial-birth abortion is its extreme rarity. It accounts for only about 200 of the 1.5 million abortions done annually in this country.

The nature of the procedure should have been beside the point; many medical procedures are bloody and hard to witness. Nevertheless, supporters of the bill displayed photographs of partial-birth abortions in the House chamber to manipulate the emotions of Congress members. In banning this form of abortion, the House has set a precedent with dangerous ramifications.

Wednesday’s vote is the first time a house of Congress has asserted federal authority to ban a specific, established medical procedure. As such, the action represents an important legal and political step for anti-abortion forces.

Under the House bill, doctors who perform this abortion could face up to two years in prison or monetary fines or both. A doctor must prove that no other procedure would have sufficed. In effect, Congress is telling physicians that the government will now supersede the medical judgment of a woman’s physician.

Will Congress members, few of whom are physicians, now outlaw other lifesaving procedures because they are difficult to watch? Will this Congress, despite its promise to reduce the intrusion of government into private life, increasingly assert its authority at the medical bedside?

The Senate should stop this dangerous slide when the bill comes its way. And the President should be prepared to veto.