On April 1, the controversial Unborn Victims of Violence Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush. While the main controversy is over the potential of the bill to undermine a woman’s right to choose (I’ll get to that in a moment), little attention has been paid to one very disturbing fact: The bill does nothing to protect pregnant women from violence. Statistics show that the prevalence of violence against pregnant women is 1 to 20 percent. Many battered women report being beaten even while pregnant – in fact, being pregnant is seen as a risk factor for domestic violence because the woman is more vulnerable. This violence increases the risk for miscarriages, birth defects and giving birth to a low weight baby.
The bill recognizes the fetus as a person at any stage of development. This is a touchy issue that Sen. Diane Feinstein (D) of California tried to resolve by introducing an alternative that would still have the same penalties for harming the fetus, but would not recognize it as a separate person. This measure was narrowly defeated and the bill with the original wording was passed. Some can construe this to mean that the bill is less about protecting pregnant women than it is about laying the groundwork to criminalize abortion by recognizing the fetus as a separate person. This argument is not without merit. It is a well-known fact that Bush opposes a women’s right to choose.
It’s a terrible thing for a woman to lose the child she chose to carry to term or to have that child born with birth defects resulting from violence, but more energy should be put into preventing violence in the first place so that women may not have to endure this heartache.
Jasmine Marrero
CAS ’04
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
