|
|
|
|||||
|
Dear Editor, Recent letters to the editor have unfairly criticized Senator Ed Houck from Spotsylvania for his courage in denouncing the testimony of a person who spoke before the Senate Education and Health Committee in support of House Bill 116. It is important for your readers to know the real facts about that testimony. House Bill 116 would have required all abortion clinics in which 25 or more first trimester abortions are performed in a year to comply with the requirements currently in place for ambulatory surgery centers. Delegate Robert Marshall, the chief patron the bill and one of the most vocal and extreme opponents of legal abortion in the Virginia General Assembly, disingenuously suggested that the bill was all about women’s health and safety. Today, unlike pre-Roe v. Wade days, abortions are safe and performed legally. If abortions were not safe, you would have heard a loud out-cry from both the pro-choice and the anti-choice sides. In fact, the purpose of this bill was to impose unnecessary and impossible to meet requirements, including architectural standards unrelated to safe first trimester abortions, requirements intended to shut down such providers. Delegate Marshall brought Carol Everett from Texas to appear before the Senate Education and health Committee to testify on behalf of this bill. Ms. Everett is a circuit rider for anti-choice forces, a speaker who goes from state to state speaking in support of bills that would restrict women’s access to abortion services. She described illegal and unsafe medical practices that took place in abortion clinics in Texas many years ago, clinics in which she was personally involved as an employee. She implied that she was familiar with abortion services in Virginia and accused Virginia abortion providers of carrying out the very same unsanitary and dangerous practices. Under routine questioning by the Committee, it became very clear that Ms. Everett had misled the Senators. She could not cite a single specific instance of improper practices on the part of an abortion provider in Virginia. It was obvious that Ms. Everett had inappropriately claimed that the Texas practices of her own former clinic were taking place in Virginia. Senator Houck was rightfully outraged by what he heard from Ms. Everett. He challenged her testimony directly and convincingly and, in doing so; spoke for a clear majority of the Committee. When confronted in this way, Ms. Everett again provided not a single incident in support of her contention that such practices occur in Virginia. In fact, representatives of the Department of Health Professions and the Virginia Board of Medicine spoke of their agencies’ responsibilities to investigate any charges of such behavior by physicians in Virginia. They told the Committee members that no such charges had been reported to their agencies and they were aware of no such practices in Virginia. Senator Houck should be congratulated for defending Virginia and its hard-working and caring physicians who provide women with quality reproductive health care services. We need more legislators to question people such as Carol Everett, people who try to advance their own stature and resumes at the expense of the truth. Let’s hope in the future that Ms. Everett stays in Texas instead of trying to export her lies to Virginia. Thank you, Senator Houck, for being a champion for the truth and for your support of quality services to the women of Virginia. - Katherine B. Waddell (electronic mail, March 29, 2004)
|
