Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Rage in Brazil

Mass protests erupt in the biggest cities of Brazil.  Slideshow 

Photo

The Afghan Army

The many faces of the Afghan National Army, which has taken over security of the country from NATO.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Mississippi law may shut sole abortion clinic

Related Topics

STARKVILLE, Mississippi | Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:08pm EDT

STARKVILLE, Mississippi (Reuters) - Mississippi's only abortion clinic could be forced out of business under legislation signed into law on Monday by the state governor.

The new law, which takes effect July 1, requires all physicians associated with abortion-providing facilities to be board-certified or eligible for that certification in obstetrics and gynecology, and to have staff with admitting privileges at a local hospital.

"I believe that all human life is precious, and as governor, I will work to ensure that the lives of the born and unborn are protected in Mississippi," Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant said in a statement.

Diane Derzis, the owner of Jackson Women's Health Organization, the state's only abortion-providing clinic, has said the law could shut down her business.

Just one of the three physicians who provide abortions at her clinic has admitting privileges, which allow doctors to refer patients to a specific hospital if further treatment is needed.

Derzis said area hospitals are reluctant to grant admitting privileges to physicians who perform abortions.

Derzis owns clinics that provide abortions in three other states and has said previously that she would fight the law in court. She could not be reached for comment on Monday.

Mississippi already has some of the strictest abortion laws in the United States, and anti-abortion groups have historically praised the state for those laws.

However in November, state voters rejected a constitutional "personhood" amendment that would have defined life at the moment eggs are fertilized.

So-called personhood measures also died earlier this year in the Mississippi legislature, though proponents say they will continue advocating for them.

(Editing By Colleen Jenkins and David Brunnstrom)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
afrommi wrote:
These times are controversial times. Abortion and birth control are the themes the GOP has been discussing.

Why was abortion legalized? Why was so much research spent on birth control and why was it legalized? Those are the questions we have to ask and make public because the young American voter was not there 50 years ago when it was necessary to stop the carnage.

The GOP makes the argument that babies are being indiscriminately killed by unscrupulous doctors. Which of course it is not true. Abortion is a medical procedure. I am not diminishing the value of life or the moral dilemma that abortion brings. But, we all were given free will, which makes it a matter of choice.

If we make abortion illegal, will that stop the “killing of babies”? To know the answer we have to go back to the time in which abortion was illegal. Lets go back to the pictures of old cases where young women and babies were found killed just by a coat hanger. A young woman, not able to face the stigma of pregnancy before marriage would choose to abort on her own by using a coat hanger to puncture her uterus in order to abort.

We cannot have it both ways. We can either say we want both to die or we can save just one. Those women who will look to abort will be daughters, granddaughters, sisters. We will have to accept the guilt their death will bring. As a God created person and a believer that God holds life precious I am pro-life. Meaning I will always choose and will always counsel any person to pass life onward. But as a conscientious voter who is faced with the question whom to vote for I will vote for those who are pro choice. Because I rather see the woman alive, than to have on my conscience the death of both, woman and baby.

I find it is ignorant on the part of the voter to choose on the basis of party lines in this matter. And I find it criminal on the part of legislators to create publicity and play to the emotions of a believing public to gain political advantage over another candidate.

Apr 17, 2012 11:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.