PIERRE - A bill to require doctors to offer to show sonograms to women before they have abortions was defeated in a legislative committee Wednesday.

Sen. Dennis Schmidt, R-Rapid City, sponsored SB88.

Schmidt explained to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee that his bill would not have required women to look at the sonogram. They would just have to acknowledge a sonogram had been offered.

"What's wrong with being informed?" Schmidt asked.

Schmidt also said the measure would not force women to pay extra for procedures because sonograms are routinely done at some point before abortions are performed.

However, Dr. Mary Carpenter, representing the South Dakota Medical Association, said doctors sometimes would not know at the time of the sonogram whether a woman was considering an abortion.

Carpenter also said the requirement could be upsetting, especially when fetuses had severe birth defects. "That's a very difficult thing for a woman to have to know," she said. "It would be very stressful to be offered that choice."

The medical association, which does not take a position on abortion itself, opposed the sonogram measure, also because it also would have required medical facilities to keep additional records.

Schmidt said the records of sonogram offers would be confidential and no more difficult to create than other routine records. "This is not unreasonable," he said.

South Dakota Right to Life and representatives from other anti-abortion groups testified in favor of the bill.

Kyle Holt, legislative director for South Dakota Right to Life, said sonograms were "perfectly safe for mother and child."

Travis Benson, a lobbyist for the Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, said sonograms would help women make better choices. "A picture truly does speak a thousand words," he said.

Representatives of abortion-rights groups also testified.

Caitlin Collier of the South Dakota Advocacy Network for Women noted that the bill didn't have exceptions for rape, incest or "fetal anomaly." She told the committee, "Not to provide such exceptions is particularly cruel and callous."

Sen. Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls, who voted against the bill in committee, objected to forcing a woman to make a decision about viewing a sonogram.

"What offends me about this bill is, I am commanded to either look at it or sign off on it."

The committee voted 5-2 to defer the bill to the 36th legislative day, which, in a 35-day session, kills it.

The bill could be revived with a legislative technique called a "smoke out." On the Senate floor, 12 of the state's 35 senators could send the bill back to committee, but Schmidt said later Wednesday he was unaware of any effort to rescue the bill.

Contact Bill Harlan at 394-8424 or bill.harlan@rapidcityjournal.com.