One day after Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) signed a controversial bill that would block women from seeking abortions based on medical diagnoses, doctors grappled with how the measure could impact their patients.
The mandate, which takes effect July 1, bans the procedure if, among other restrictions, a woman requests it “solely” because a fetus has Down syndrome or any other disorder. She could legally obtain an abortion in the event of a lethal fetal illness — but would have to inform the state that she chose to terminate her pregnancy.
A doctor, meanwhile, could face a wrongful death lawsuit if an abortion is granted to a woman who requests one after learning about a pregnancy complication.
Brownsyne Tucker-Edmonds, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indianapolis, said in a statement Friday that the law could dissuade physicians from performing a legal medical procedure and, by doing so, imperil patients' health.
“It will require a woman, during one of the most devastating times in her life after learning of a fetal anomaly, to prolong her pregnancy even if against her wishes, and to potentially assume the greater health risks associated with doing so,” Tucker-Edmonds said. Some women have “cases in which the risk of death during a full-term pregnancy is more than 14 times higher than for a termination of pregnancy.”
Pence, who called the move “a comprehensive pro-life measure that affirms the value of all human life,” supported the legislation despite pushback from Republican women in the statehouse. Indiana currently outlaws abortions after 20 weeks, and the law adds a raft of new restrictions that abortion advocates call the country's strictest.
It would make the state America's second (after North Dakota) to prohibit abortion because of a fetal anomaly. It would ban the procedure in instances where the choice stems from the fetus's sex or race. It would make Indiana the first state to require fetal remains to be buried or cremated. And it would require physicians to inform patients about perinatal hospice care, a service for women whose babies aren’t expected to survive outside the womb.
Hal Lawrence, chief executive of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the group, comprising roughly 30,000 doctors nationwide, strongly opposes the law because it could encourage a patient to withhold information from her doctor.
A woman who, for example, learned her fetus carried a severe disability may pursue an abortion from an out-of-state provider and then, out of fear, skip follow-up care from her regular doctor.
“She shouldn't be under legal duress when she came back to where she lived,” said Lawrence, who practiced gynecology for 30 years. “Patients need postpartum or postoperative care. They need to be counseled for contraception. Discouraging that is highly destructive.”
Betty Cokrum, head of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, suggested in a statement that medical decisions should stay between doctors and patients. "It is clear the governor is more comfortable practicing medicine without a license,” she wrote, “than behaving as a responsible lawyer, as he picks and chooses which constitutional rights are appropriate.”
PPINK also said it planned to attack the measure in court. "It is fraught with unintended consequences that will prove dangerous to women," the group said in a statement. "PPINK is now working with the ACLU of Indiana to seek judicial review and fully expects to file a complaint and request for preliminary injunction."
But Christina Francis, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Fort Wayne, Ind., who is opposed to abortion, said she believes the law will strengthen her relationships with patients.
“Too often, women learn their baby has Down syndrome and the first thing their physician tells them about is abortion,” Francis said. “To my patients, I’d say, ‘Yes, this is not what we were expecting -- everyone wants to have a healthy child -- but now, you know what? That child still has potential for a significant life.”
That conversation, she said, could lead to increased follow-up care and a healthy mother and child.
Charles Camosy, a theology professor at Fordham University and a board member of Democrats for Life, said he supports Indiana’s abortion restrictions but wonders how they will be enforced.
-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Friday 25th of March 2016 11:53:09 PM
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
A woman in Indiana can now get an abortion because she woke up in a bad mood, doesn't want to get fat, hates babies, hates the father, the sky is a funky shade of blue today convincing her she will have a boy when she really wants a girl, or no reason at all.
But she can't get an abortion if the child will have a disability.
Now, all life is precious - but that is plain whacked. You can't outlaw a person's feelings and thought process. "Solely b/c the child has down's syndrome." What is the legal test for that? It CAN'T stand up as a law b/c it can't be proven. She could suddenly be having relationship problems. Maybe the father doesn't want to have a disabled child and will leave her. Well, now the reason isn't "solely" b/c the child has down syndrome, it's because she doesn't want to be a single parent.
How flippin' stupid. And it pisses me off because it's so damn stupid it's going to set the Pro-life movement BACK. Because this is just going to be another law that gets struck down.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
It’s called a “wrongful birth” bill and it’s all about preventing women from having an abortion, even if it kills them. The Arizona Senate passed a bill this week that gives doctors a free pass to not inform pregnant women of prenatal problems because such information could lead to an abortion.
In other words, doctors can intentionally keep critical health information from pregnant women and can’t be sued for it. According to the Arizona Capitol Times , “the bill’s sponsor is Republican Nancy Barto of Phoenix. She says allowing the medical malpractice lawsuits endorses the idea that if a child is born with a disability, someone is to blame.” So Republicans are banning lawsuits against doctors who keep information from pregnant women so as to prevent them from choosing to have an abortion.