High court upholds abortion counseling

P Laws in Indiana and other states requires face-to-face counseling with medical professionals as well as a waiting period before having an abortion. Women need to be informed in making this decision.

For decades, the issue of abortion has created an embroiling debate, a hot-button issue unlike any in American history.

The U.S. Supreme Court again weighed in on the controversial matter recently, this time declining to hear an appeal of an Indiana law that -- among other things -- offers women pictures of what her fetus might look like and requires them to receive face-to-face medical counseling before having an abortion.

The high court turned down the appeal from abortion clinics in Indiana, which were claiming the in-person counseling sessions would force some women to forgo abortions, create undue hardships or even risk their health by postponing the procedure further into pregnancy.

Proponents of the law, which is also on the books in four other states, disagree.

Calling it "informed consent," the law requires women to get information 18 hours before undergoing the procedure, such as alternatives to abortion and the availability of child support.

They are also given descriptions of the fetus at its current stage of development and are offered pictures of a fetus at the same stage. Women are told about the medical risks associated with carrying a fetus to term and the name of the doctor performing the abortion.

Opponents of the law say it harasses those wanting abortions, even while proponents laud the court's decision as a strong victory for the pro-life movement.

In all honesty, neither is the case.

To make an informed decision is not possible without information. The people giving that information are medical personnel like doctors, nurses, a licensed midwife or a physician's assistant. These people are not ministers or religious zealots. This information is supposed to be objective and factual.

So as long as there are no attempts to persuade the woman one way or the other, the law benefits neither side of the abortion debate.

The high court's decision does mean that Indiana may begin fully enforcing a law passed eight years ago. The ruling also looks to have far-reaching effects.

Other states are looking closely at doing the same thing. Some Missouri legislators are looking at implementing a similar law.

That's a good thing. Women considering abortion should be armed with all the facts before making their choices.