New cases stir US abortion fight

The Supreme Court ruled in favour of abortion in 1973

Two pregnancies, a rape and a murder have merged to redraw the battle lines over abortion in America, one of the country's most polarising issues.

The killing of a pregnant woman allegedly by a cheating husband has inadvertently given numerous anti-abortionists a fresh weapon in their campaign to outlaw terminations.

The country has been gripped by the case of Laci Peterson, who was found washed up on a California beach last month. The body of her unborn baby was found nearby, the umbilical cord still attached.

Her husband, Scott, has been charged under Californian state law with two murders - that of his 27-year-old wife, and more controversially, that of his unborn son Conner.

Riding on the wave of national disgust sparked by the murder, anti-abortionists and Republicans are pushing for a new federal law which would make it a crime to kill or harm a fetus in every US state, not just those which already have such laws in place.

President George W Bush, himself a staunch opponent of abortion, has given his blessing to fresh legislation.

"The president does believe that when an unborn child is killed or injured...the law should recognise what most people immediately recognise, and that is that such a crime has two victims," his spokesman said.

Although the bill has no immediate impact on abortion rights, for pro-choice campaigners it is clear attempt to use a highly emotive murder to endow a fetus with rights, and thus challenge a woman's right to choose.

The Republicans do not disagree. "They say it undermines abortion rights," said Senator Orrin Hatch, one of the supporters of the bill.

"It does," he told a US television network.

Florida battle

Meanwhile pro-choice campaigners in Florida have taken on President Bush's own brother, Governor Jeb Bush, who has sought to appoint a guardian for the 6-month-old fetus of a mentally disabled woman who became pregnant after being raped.

Governor Bush has earned the plaudits of anti-abortion groups, but the wrath of those who believe it would set a precedent for fetal rights.

A fetus, they argue, cannot have a guardian because it is not a person, and have asked a judge to block the governor's request.

They believe that the appointment of such a guardian is aimed solely at preventing the disabled woman from aborting the fetus, as a representative would naturally oppose a termination on the basis that it was not in the best interests of the child.

"He ought to be ashamed of himself," said Howard Simon, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida. "That he would personally step in and take responsibility to coerce a pregnant rape victim to carry a pregnancy to term."

'Little by little'

These are not the first moves, from the perspective of pro-choicers, to encroach on a woman's right to choose.

The election of President Bush, a Christian with strong views on abortion, sparked deep unease in the pro-choice camp.

His pledge not to overturn the landmark 1973 ruling which made abortion legal has done little to assuage those fears.

In March, the Senate voted to ban a form of late-term abortion and the motion is expected to soon be approved in Republican-controlled House of Representative.

It would represent the first legislative restriction to a woman's right to abortion since the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of the measure 30 years ago.

For many Americans, and even those who accept the need for abortion, partial-birth is an unpleasant and unnecessary method to terminate a pregnancy in its late stages.

But for others, banning the procedure it is the first step down a road which they believe could lead to serious restrictions on a woman's right to choose.