The Iowa House has introduced a bill that would require doctors performing abortions to ensure that the woman having the abortion has undergone an ultrasound. House File 573 also requires that women be given the opportunity to see the ultrasound imaging and hear the heartbeat of the fetus. Any doctor who does not comply would be subject to both a fine and having his or her license revoked.

The bill, as it is written and as it was introduced in the Iowa House, makes no attempt to show that the law would be to the benefit of the woman undergoing the procedure or the doctor performing the procedure and provides no reasoning as to why it is necessary for Iowans. There is no obvious medical benefit to the woman and the bill does not provide an explanation as to what need or problem it will solve, or the effect it will have on Iowa women.

Therefore, it could be assumed, the intent of the bill could only be to guilt the woman into changing her mind about the abortion by hearing the fetus’ heartbeat or seeing its shape on the screen. If guilt is the goal of the bill, should a decision as important as abortion be made on guilt alone?

Proposals such as House File 573 and the individuals who propose or support them attach themselves unrelentingly — and incorrectly — to the notion that the decision to terminate a pregnancy is taken lightly or made in haste. Despite what pro-life advocates believe, abortion is not the easy way out. There is no easy way out. The decision to have an unwanted child and the decision to have an abortion are equally difficult. It is not the job of a medical professional to judge or force guilt onto a patient. Abortion is legal in the state of Iowa, so the decision made by the individual citizen — regardless of their motivations — should be respected and supported.

House File 573 also does not allow for any specific exceptions from the ultrasound requirement in cases of rapes or incest that result in pregnancy, so not only would doctors be forced to apply increased pressure on a decision that a woman will already be carrying with them for the rest of their lives, but in some circumstances could also be forced to relive their most traumatic experiences. Beyond the misguided “holier than thou” attitude of the bill, it is too vague in its potential application to come within signing range of Gov. Terry Branstad’s pen.