Bill Provisions
Senator Ben Sasse, R-NE on 1/31/2019 in the Senate, introduced the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. The major provision of the bill is that it aims at ensuring all health practitioners to exercise some degree of care if a child is born during an attempted abortion or an abortion. The practitioner must make sure that this is observed and treat the child in the same manner that normal childbearing at a similar gestation age.
Moreover, the bill requires health practitioner to report any other colleague who will fail to adhere to the requirement. An individual who undermines the bill’s provision is subject to criminal litigation that will see one serving up to five years in prison, fine or both. In case one attempts or intentionally kills a child, one will face murder charges. The bill also protects the mother of any child alive for conspiracy to violate the stated provisions for being an accessory to the actions after the incidents or concealing information (Congress.gov n.d a).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Background
The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is aimed at protecting the lives of the newborn babies. Republican-affiliated Senators first introduced the bill in 2014 as the Born-Alive Act (Congress.gov, n.d c). According to the bill, any child that is born alive because of abortion is a legal person according to the USA laws and thus should be entitled enjoy the laws associated with that fact. The Act aimed at amending the federal criminal code. This would make certain that any healthcare practitioner present during an attempted or legal abortion protects the child’s life or is susceptible to criminal charges. Representative Marsha Blackburn introduced a similar version of the bill in the House. The bill had more than 131 co-sponsors, and it was passed in 2018 with a 241 to 183 vote (Congress.gov n.d b).
History
In the USA, anti-abortion sentiments have existed since the 1973 decision on Roe v.Wade by the Supreme Court that decriminalized abortion. However, before the unanimous decision, abortion was still legal in some states. The Supreme Court ruling, however, brought about a uniform framework for other state legislators that had initially viewed it as being illegal. In 1992 following, the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case, the framework was still adopted through the various states can vary the abortion laws a substantial number of nations around the world do not allow abortion (Justia, 1992). The anti-abortion sentiments have further grown following the Presidential Seat win by Donald Trump. Donald Trump vowed to ensure that innocent lives are protected. Being a Republican just like Senator Ben Sasse R-NE, it is an indication that the Bill aims at serving the anti-abortion perspectives.
The Bill aimed to protect newborn infants. However, on 2/25/2019, during a Cloture on the Motion to Process, it was rejected with vote counts of 53 YEAs and 44 NAYs and Not Voting 3 (Congress.gov, n.d a). All Republicans present during the voting session voted in favor of a procedural motion and were joined by three Democrats: Dough Jones (AL), Joe Manchin (WV) and Bob Casey (PA). However, all the other Democrats voted against the bill. The major impediment against the bill arises from the Senate Democrats who claim that it is rather damaging and unnecessary. The Democrats Party has initially stated that it is ready and willing to protect the women’s right to legal and safe abortion.
However, the Republicans have not yet lost hope in regards to the Bill as they have stated that they will pressure the Democrats to ensure that they join the wagon towards protecting innocent life as being a foundation of freedom itself. Moreover, the Heritage Foundation has stated that it is going to lobby 28 moderate House Democrats to sign a discharge petition (The Heritage Foundation, 2019). This is a petition that will ensure the Bill is forced out of the committee directly onto the floor of the House for members, who form a majority of the House members must sign the petition to ensure it is a success. Voting. By the bill, having failed during the procedural vote is not a final indication; rather it is still active and has a chance to become ratified into law.
Supporters and Opposition
According to the supporters of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act of 2019 mostly led by Republicans, they believe that the right to life is the foundation of freedom itself. This is following the recent actions in Virginia and New York to ease the abortion restrictions after 24 weeks (Leonhardt, 2019). Debates have rocked the entire nation on how late into one’s pregnancy should the procedure be undertaken. The data on abortion in the USA is scanty, as the states are not required to submit their data to the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. The Republicans aimed at not abolishing the abortion rights but instead to have in place protection procedures for children who will survive abortion or an attempted abortion.
However, for the Democrats, they state that they oppose the Bill as it is an infringement on the rights and safety ofw0ment o undertake abortion. Moreover, physician groups and reproductive rights lobby groups have shown their lack of support against the bill. The state that the laws aimed at criminalizing abortion procedures. Moreover, the opposing groups state that there are already laws in place such as the Born-Alive Infants Protection Acts passed by Congress in 2002 that protect the baby (Congress.gov n.d d). According to the bill, it does not have in place any criminal implications on doctors and was passed with bipartisan support.
Positions of Key Stakeholders
According to the Republicans stance, it is indeed right to protect the life of a young individual who survives an abortion procedure. According to most religious faiths, they believe in the fact that life is sacred and no human being has the right to take another’s life. Therefore, by advocating for the protection of an infant’s life, it is a positive factor. However, by imposing fines and criminal charges against physicians, this is wrong. The women have a right to decide on what to do during an abortion, and it is fully known whether a child will survive an abortion or attempted abortion due to many factors.
On the other hand, the Democrats and Physician groups cite that women have a right to make their individual choices. This is stipulated in the constitution. Moreover, there is the Born-Alive Infants Protection of 2002 that has outlined procedures to take in the event a child is born during the abortion or attempted abortion (Congress.gov, n.d d). However, the Democrats and Physician lobby groups must also understand that from a religious point of view, abortion is wrong as it goes against the right to protect the life of every individual.
Impact on Nursing
Nurses must ensure that they provide patients with safe and quality care. However, in the case of the Born-Alive Survivors Protection Act, it will affect their ability to support the abortion procedures within healthcare centers. According to the Bill, it states that a fine and jail time accompany even a healthcare practitioner who fails to report anyone who violates the law will be charged as an accessory to murder and this. The bill also aims at criminalizing doctors and other health care practitioners.
In most cases, the bill will discourage nurses and doctors from performing abortions, yet there is similar law that protects against the same. A fetus born alive in conditions such as pre-eclampsia and this case the mother and infant can both die, and the only treatment is to deliver the fetus. The survival of the baby during such instances and such a bill will force the doctors and nurses to resuscitate the infant even if the parents do not want such procedure.
Assistance or Defeating Bill
To defeat the bill, nurses must lobby vigorously against the signing of the discharge petition called upon by various lobby groups such as the Heritage Foundation. This is by proving evidence on the minimal survival likelihood of a fetus during an abortion or attempted abortion. Moreover, during some abortions, the fetus might have various abnormalities, which might make it hard for the infant to survive out of the mother’s womb. By providing evidence-based reports on Bill’s stance, nurses’ can make sure that the bill is not brought before House or in the event it is, they can ensure it does not pass into law.
References
Congress.Gov. (n.d a). S.311Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protect Act. Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/311
Congress.Gov. (n.d b). H.R.4712Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act . Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4712
Congress.Gov. (n.d c ). H.R.3504- Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act . Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3504/text
Congress.Gov. (n.d. d). H.R.2175 - Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 . Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/2175
Justia. (1992). Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992). US Supreme Court . Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/833/
Leonhardt, D. (2019, February). The abortion debate. The New York Times . Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/opinion/abortion-new-york-virginia-trump.html
Roe v. Wade , 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147 (1973).
The Heritage Foundation. (2019, February 21). The Necessity of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. Retrieved on 10 April 2019, from https://www.heritage.org/life/report/the-necessity-the-born-alive-abortion-survivors-protection-act
