Playing at the deepest of human emotions, a new bill facing the state House would require doctors to provide pregnant women with ultrasound photographs of their fetuses prior to performing abortions. While the bill does not force women to view the photographs, women will automatically receive them, via mail or the Internet, at least 24 hours before scheduled abortions.

Supporters of the bill claim it will humanize the fetus to the mother and hopefully cause her to see the weight of her decision to terminate her pregnancy. By giving the woman an opportunity see exactly what a fetus looks like inside the womb, she will supposedly have all the “facts” necessary to make a well-informed decision. In essence, supporters of the bill contend, they want women to avoid making choices they may later regret.

However, beyond creating more legal and economic barriers to abortion — women will have to visit doctors more often before getting abortions, and abortions will be more expensive – this legislation psychologically and emotionally assaults women who choose to receive abortions. For all the support it received in the House, the bill is a blatant exploitation of human emotion for the purpose of lowering the abortion count. By swaying a woman against her decision to terminate a pregnancy through the use of photographs, proponents of this measure are taking advantage of the most vulnerable part of the human psyche for political purposes. The requirement is a deliberate form of emotional blackmail — a demeaning and shameful use of persuasion by way of pulling at the heartstrings of abortion clients. Speaking for Gov. Jennifer Granholm, spokeswoman Liz Boyd rightly denounced the legislation as a “gimmicky, ineffective way of addressing the issue of unintended pregnancies.”

There is a broad consensus, across ideological lines, that society should do what it can to decrease the numbers of abortions. While few will disagree with that objective, providing a pregnant woman with photographs of her unborn child is simply the wrong way to achieve it. A more effective strategy would be to make birth control and emergency contraceptives more readily available to the public. Lowering the number of unplanned pregnancies through contraceptives would naturally lower the abortion count — therefore adverting the painful procedure of an abortion.

Despite these measures, unwanted pregnancies will still occur. If anti-abortion activists wish to communicate the weight of terminating a pregnancy to those women who do become pregnant, they should provide extensive counseling and services – not photographs. Women should have all the facts before making such a decision, but looking at visual images of the fetus is not the way to make an informed decision. Such “evidence” does little to help a woman come to a rational decision; rather, it pulls at heartstrings and appeals to basic, instinctive emotions.

A woman’s path to an abortion is already difficult and laden with obstacles; bills like this one only impinge on a woman’s right to choose. The state should be working to limit accidental pregnancy, not to guilt and emotionally blackmail those women who choose to have abortions. Providing a woman with photographs of her soon-to-be-terminated fetus is a demeaning tactic; there are other, more humane ways the state can pursue a lower abortion count and inform women about their options.