Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

VOL. LXIII-No. 34 University of South Carolina, Columbia, S. C. 29208 Thursday, February 15, 1973 Aborti By PATRICK TYLER How South Carolina's abortion laws will be altered to incorporate the recent United States Supreme Court ruling on abortions is still un certain, *according to state Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod. Getting a law on the books allowing abortions to be performed to the sixth month of pregnancy may be done by one of three ways, McLeod said Tuesday. Two of these would involve the paths of appeal of a Florence doctor convicted last October of performing illegal abortion. The appeal could be heard by the South Carolina Supreme Court or that court could refuse to hear the case and send it to a lower court, McLeod said. Weather postponed hearing the case in the Supreme Court early this week. Or the General Assembly could enact a statute or alter the present one in line with the national ruling, McLeod said. Whatever minor elements of the present South Carolina abortion statute remain after the new law goes into effect, Dudley Saleeby, assistant at torney general said, the basic ideas of the U. S. Supreme Court decision will be incorporated. Ruling's Stipulations Those stipulations are: 1) that during the first tri mester (three month unit) of pregnancy the state may only require that the abortion be done by a liscensed physician, 2) that during the second tri-mester the state may regulate the procedures under which the abortion is performed and 3) that the state may prohibit entirely an abortion in the third tri-mester unless the mother's life is endangered. The present South Carolina statute, revised two years ago and closely resembles the Georgia on law statute that was struck down by the United States Supreme Court, provides that a woman may have an abortion if she has been a state resident for 90 days, if it is shown by a physician to be justified and if it is performed in a hospital where at least two other doctors approve. Justification by the physician must come under one o four categories: 1) in a case of rape, 2) in a case where the mental or physical stability of the mother is endangered, 3) in a case where it can be shown that the child will be deformed and 4) in a case where the life of the mother might be in peril. Differences with Ga.jaw Three main sections of the Georgia law which were struck and which correspond almost exactly to the South Carolina law are the residency clause (in Georgia the law called for a woman to be a "bonafide resident" while here there is a 90 day stipulation), the necessity of the operation to -be performed in an accredited hospital and the clause which calls for at least two staff doctors of the hospital to approve the abortion. In essence, McLeod said, the high court decision was based on the right of privacy of the woman as provided in the Ninth and Fourteenth amendments. Women have basic rights "A woman has the right, subject to state restrictions, to decide whether to give bir'th or not," he said paraphrasing the decision. Answering questions from a crowd of 35-40 in the Commons Room of Russell House, McLeod said he could not speculate on what shape the South Carolina statute would eventually take, because of his position as prosecutor of said to the case involving the Florence County physician that will come before the South Carolina Supreme Court Thur sday. But he then added that it "might" have the ef fect "of saying abortions in South Carolina can be performed in the first tri mester by a licensed physician." However, McLeod said that until some decision is forthcoming on the implementation of the law, an abortion per formed contrary to the present statute would be "subject to criminal prosecution." McLeod's assistant, Saleeby, said after the lecture that if such an abortion were performed now, "chances for prosecution would probably be slim." In all cases it would be up to the local solicitor whether to prosecute Saleeby added. 2 months needed for law Until a new statute is finalized, McLeod said, which he added should take no longer than two months, "I would recommend if I were in private practice and a woman came to me for an abortion that she go to another state." "There are several big ifs," Saleeby said, whether USC medical facilities will be affected by the ruling. How much of the present South Carolina abortion laws will remain unchanged is a factor in this. It is conceivable, Saleeby said, the university could institute an abortion program since it is certain the state court will go along with the United States Supreme Court decision that a woman can have an abortion in the first three months outside a hospital. But the actual institution of the program ''would strictly be a matter of university policy." T. Eston Marchant, chairman of the USC need change Board of Trustees, said si,adw ilfc yesterday, that he would "rely on recom mendations from the okadphlr administration" in any consideration of the use mayqetoswudb of the health center.inovdnthdesono Further he said the newand abortion law "may require s i the mi on changes" in University Work load of policy in light of the supreme court decision,n and the cic' but he would not rule out bd et the possibility of the board refusing to offer irata id theeis such a service on cam- patclyn osblt pus.rPresidt atralleof abortion USC PresideThomas perfred t U and F. Jones said that he ti sntbsdo n would take the recoi-m orlotok. mendation of Dr. Isoa Th helh cnr Hirata, director of thebugtwldhvtoe medical center. "This is icesd"ya es a question we're going to oetid"Hrt adt hav tofac," on sSeai"adReTillSface