State attorney general defends abortion law

Pennsylvania Attorney General Ernie Preate spoke about the state's controversial abortion law to students and community members during a discussion at the Newman Center on Monday. Preate, a Wharton and Law School alumnus, said he believed there are many misconceptions about the state's Abortion Control Act, which the U.S. Supreme Court largely upheld last summer after a challenge by Planned Parenthood. Among those misconceptions, he said, is the notion that the law prohibits abortions in the state. "We did not pass a statute which banned abortion altogether as some states have done," he said. Preate explained the law's specific aspects, starting with the provision that a woman seeking an abortion receive warnings about the risks of having an abortion as well as risks of carrying the child to full term. The woman must also be told of alternatives to abortion and be given a 24-hour period to decide if she still wants the abortion in light of that information, Preate said. "The intent was not to hurt women, but the intent was to ensure that when women gave consent to an abortion, she was giving informed consent," Preate said. One of the more controversial sections of the law deals with the concept of spousal notification. Preate said a pregnant woman is required by law to notify her husband that she is choosing to have an abortion. The notification of the husband -- and not his consent -- is necessary for the abortion to take place legally, Preate said. He added that he feels the law does not place an "undue burden on the woman's right to choose" or challenge the landmark 1973 Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. Preate attacked a proposed bill in Congress that would overturn the Court's decision in the case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood, which Preate argued for the state last summer. The Freedom of Choice Act would allow "virtual abortion on demand," Preate said. Abortions could be performed at any time of the pregnancy and for any reason, according to Preate. "This would tear open all the wounds that seemingly were put to rest to heal by the Supreme Court," said Preate. Preate concluded the discussion by saying that abortion opponents must accept the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade and a woman's currently legal right to choose. He added that the movement would be better off if they would concentrate their efforts on women's and children's issues in general and advocate adoption as an alternative to abortion, instead of demonstrating for the outright abolition of abortion. Preate remarked that politicians who are on opposite ends of the political spectrum seem to agree that Pennsylvania's law is a reasonable one. The audience burst into laughter as Preate explained that a political consensus has been reached since Sen. Harris Wofford (D--Pa.), who favors abortion rights, and former Vice President Dan Quayle, a Republican who is opposed to abortion rights, agree that the law is viable. Student reaction to the speech was mixed. One student claimed Preate's position lacks moral arguments against abortion. "On a moral grounds it is either full protection for an unborn child, or it isn't considered an unborn child," College senior Robert Lombardi said. "This sort of political consensus making doesn't address the issue," Lombardi added. Other students said they expected Preate to be more conservative and that they admired his ability to integrate both sides of the abortion argument into his interpretation of the law. "You don't have to be one extreme or another," College junior Mary Beth Kelly said. "Rather than concentrating on differences, more of a union of common ideas has been reached." The program was co-sponsored by the Newman Center, the Penn Law Republicans and Penn College Republicans.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.