How Radical is the Virginia Abortion Amendment?

Gov. Abigail Spanberger is currently considering whether to sign a bill to codify contraceptive access in Virginia, but for progressive policymakers in the state, the real battle for “reproductive rights” will take place this November.  

This is when voters in the Commonwealth will decide whether to enshrine abortion on-demand into the state constitution with House Joint Resolution No. 1. Similar ballot measures in other states have struck down pro-life laws, such as Ohio’s law for proper disposal of fetal remains. But HJ1 is the most extreme of these ballot measures due to its vague legal wording.  

Current Virginia law is already extremely permissive, allowing abortion all the way through the second trimester. In the third trimester, three doctors must certify that “the pregnancy is likely to result in the death of the woman or substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.”  

The proposed amendment would change this rule to only need one physician (namely an abortion provider) to determine if it would protect the “life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.”  

Voters might mistakenly think that terms like “physical and mental health” provide real guardrails. But they don’t. Physical and mental health are not defined in the proposal. That means an abortion provider could decide that almost anything counts as a threat to someone’s “mental health.” For example, a late?term abortion could be approved simply because the mother says having a baby would be too stressful. The legislature could have clearly defined those terms, but it didn’t.  

That’s not the only way this measure is extreme. Virginia Democrats never use the word “woman” in the resolution. Their decision to use “pregnant individual” suggests someone other than women can become pregnant.  

Democrats also voted down an amendment to the ballot measure that would allow protections for babies who are born alive after surviving botched abortion attempts.  

They also rejected another amendment that would have kept parental consent and notification laws in place. Right now, minors need a parent’s permission to get a tattoo, go on a school field trip, and play sports. But if this amendment passes, a child could undergo a surgical abortion or take dangerous abortion drugs without their parent being told. It could even be facilitated by a school without a parent’s knowledge or consent.  

If you think schools would never facilitate abortions behind the parents’ backs, then you should know that it has already happened in Fairfax County.  

According to The Family Foundation, Fairfax County school officials arranged and paid for abortions using school resources for two minor students last fall without informing their parents.  If the amendment is ratified, similar situations wouldn’t just be allowed, they could become common across the Commonwealth.  

There are even concerns that the amendment goes beyond abortion. Take sex-rejecting sterilization procedures, for example. Right now, minors need parental consent for these kinds of procedures. The Family Foundation has pointed out that since “fertility care” includes sterilization procedures, individuals could have a right to sterilization, puberty blockers, and sex-rejecting surgeries.  

Will the Commonwealth be the first state in the country to remove parental consent for sex-rejecting surgeries for minors? Not even California and New York have gone that far. 

Virginia Sen. Glen Sturtevant said this amendment would be “the most extreme” in the nation. Unlimited, taxpayer-funded sex-rejecting surgeries and abortion till birth with no parental consent is radical. It’s dangerous for women, children, and unborn babies.  

Let’s hope that as more Virginians learn how extreme this resolution is, they’ll say “no” in November. 

The post How Radical is the Virginia Abortion Amendment? appeared first on The Daily Signal.