Gov. Rounds disappoints women’s groups on unintended pregnancy issues

By Kevin Woster, Journal staff | Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Previous Page

Share

• del.icio.us
• Digg
• NewsVine
• Fark

Print

Email

Representatives of nine women's groups in South Dakota criticized Gov. Mike Rounds on Tuesday for ignoring their request for a new state initiative to reduce unintended pregnancies.

Rounds said existing state programs are already helping reduce unwanted pregnancies and suggested the criticism against him might really be aimed at defeating a proposed abortion ban that he supports.

Cynthia Hilton, chairwoman of the Democracy in Action women's health committee, said she was disappointed in the governor's tepid response to a request by a coalition of women's organization that he start a state campaign to reduce unintended pregnancies.

Democracy in Action and eight other groups sent a letter April 21 urging action on the issue to the governor. Rounds responded in an April 30 letter by quoting statistics that show declining rates of unintended pregnancies, abortion and teen pregnancies.

He said the unintended pregnancy rate dropped from 52.9 percent in 1997 to 37.2 percent in 2006, and the number of abortions dropped in that time from 919 to 748.

He also noted that South Dakota's abortion and teen-pregnancy rates are "well below national rates."

The governor did not agree in the letter to prioritize the issue. Nor did he outline what the state is doing to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies.

Hilton said the downward trends were encouraging, but she wished the governor had been more engaged on the issue. The state must further reduce unintended pregnancies and the abortions that too often result from those pregnancies, Hilton said.

"I think we were very disappointed in his response," she said. "You can't just ban abortions. You've got to come up with something concrete to do about preventing pregnancies."

Rounds said Tuesday in a telephone interview that that the women's coalition appeared to be using the unintended-pregnancy issue to fight the abortion ban placed on the November ballot by opponents of the procedure.

"If they want to step in and help on the pregnancy issue, great," Rounds said. "But if this is simply a spin on the campaign to eliminate abortion in the state, I don't think their spin is going to work."

Hilton and others in the coalition are opposing a ballot issue that would ban abortions except in cases of rape or incest or to save the life or health of a pregnant woman. Rounds signed a more restrictive abortion ban approved by the 2006 Legislature, but it was referred to a public vote and defeated that November.

Rounds supports this proposed ban, as well.

With another abortion vote looming in the fall, Hilton said she hoped Rounds would be willing to explore different ways reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and the abortions they sometimes produce. Abstinence education alone has not proven effective in reducing unintended pregnancies, she said. And banning abortion does little to prevent pregnancies in the first place, she said.

"It doesn't make any sense to concentrate only on an abortion ban and not do anything about unintended pregnancies," she said.

Rounds said a program within the state health department provides family-planning assistance on a sliding financial scale and allows clients to select their own doctors. Another program promotes abstinence through public-service announcements and advertisements, he said. Another promotes abstinence education, including sex education, but allows local school districts to decide how explicit that information will be, Rounds said.

The South Dakota State Medical Association is considering a study of the unintended pregnancy issue, Rounds said. Hilton said the women's coalition might contact the association about that study. But the governor should be more involved as well, she said.

"My personal opinion is that we shouldn't let it drop here and that we do need to come back to him one more time," Hilton said.

Rounds said the issue already is important at the state level.

"When they suggest I don't care, they're wrong. I do care," he said. "That's why we have programs in place. And the clear evidence suggests that those programs are working."

Contact Kevin Woster at 394-8413 or kevin.woster@rapidcityjournal.com