N.C. House bill would extend abortion waiting period

She still remembers the street name of the Winston-Salem clinic — Cherry Street. It’s been 31 years.

Hickory resident Anita — now 49 — found out she was pregnant at 17 years old.

“It was a good week before I ever got the courage to tell my parents,” she said.

“Immediately, my dad said, ‘You and your mom go take care of this.’”

House Bill 465, which was passed by the N.C. House on April 23, would change the waiting period after a woman consults a physician and before she has an abortion from 24 to 72 hours. The bill is now under the consideration of the N.C. Senate.

Anita said that although she doesn’t think the two extra days would have changed her decision to have an abortion, she thinks it could be helpful for women today with advanced technology and less of a stigma around having children outside of marriage.

“At this day and time, it would give women more of an opportunity to think about all the consequences — to think about all the cause and effects,” Anita said.

During this waiting period, doctors are required to provide information about the procedure, available medical services before and after birth and alternative options like adoption. Anita said she did not have any such conversation with a doctor beforehand or counseling afterwards.

“I had never even thought about the fact that if I had this baby, somebody else could raise it. It could be an answer to someone else’s dreams,” she said.

Several organizations like Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice North Carolina have been traveling to N.C. cities, asking Gov. Pat McCrory to keep his 2012 campaign promise not to enact further abortion restrictions by vetoing the bill.

To these organizations, the bill is working against women instead of for them.

Shoshannah Sayers, the interim executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice North Carolina, said the organization finds multiple problems with the extended waiting period.

“Telling women that they need a three-day timeout before they’re qualified to make a medical decision about their own bodies is just paternalistic and insulting,” Sayers said.

She said the waiting period is also medically unnecessary.

The American Medical Women’s Association said in a statement that they oppose mandated waiting periods because they interfere with the decision-making process that should remain between the doctor and the patient.

Tami Fitzgerald, the executive director of the N.C. Values Coalition, said the bill gives women time to be sure about their decision.

“It’s a ridiculous accusation that this bill in any way restricts access to abortion,” Fitzgerald said. “All it does is it allows a woman more time to think over this important decision.”

Sayers, however, said the bill would make getting a safe procedure harder, specifically for marginalized groups — like lower-income women and women of color.

She said getting time off work two times in a three-day period would be a challenge for those individuals especially.

Those living in rural areas could also find it more difficult to find transportation multiple times in a week, Sayers said.

“Three days doesn’t sound like a lot. But if a three-day waiting period means you have to wait two or three weeks to be able to get the service, that is a big deal.”

state@dailytarheel.com