« Catch-up: What did you miss over the weekend from the ILB? | Main | Ind. Gov't. - Thoughts on the new Marion County prosecutor »
Monday, April 11, 2011
Ind. Law - "I don't know that there's anything we can do stop a lot of this," said Lawson, the second-ranking House Democrat. "It's a runaway train."
That is the last line of this lengthy AP story today, via WISH TV News. Here is a sample:
A version of the bill appears likely to reach Daniels, a Republican who riled some conservatives last year when he said that the next president facing an economic crisis "would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues."For background, start with this ILB entry from April 1st.Daniels urged legislators to concentrate on matters such as the state budget and changes to the state education system. Spokeswoman Jane Jankowski said Daniels would review the final version of any anti-abortion bill before deciding whether to sign it into law.
"He's laid out his agenda and he's identified what his priorities are," Jankowski said. "He fully realizes that with 150 legislators that there are lots of different priorities among those members."
The House-approved bill would have Indiana join two other states — Nebraska and North Carolina — in banning abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy unless there is a substantial threat to the woman's life or health, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-health research organization that supports abortion rights.
Such bans after 20 weeks are direct challenges to the legal status quo, based on Supreme Court rulings that permit abortions up to the point of a fetus' viability — about 24 weeks — which is the current Indiana law.
The Indiana proposal includes requiring that women seeking an abortion be told that human life begins at conception and that a fetus might feel pain at or before 20 weeks. The bill also requires written notice that women undergoing abortions face a greater risk of infertility and breast cancer.
Those provisions anger opponents, who say medical researchers dispute any increased risk of breast cancer and argue that putting into law that life starts at egg fertilization is based on ideology, not science.
"Expecting a doctor to give inaccurate information to a patient is just totally unreasonable and we shouldn't even be asking a physician to do something like that," said Rep. Linda Lawson, D-Hammond.
Another proposed provision would require doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges in a nearby hospital. Supporters say that would improve patient safety, but opponents argue it is simply meant to further limit access to abortions.
The bill would also require that pregnant women be given an opportunity to view an ultrasound image and hear the fetal heartbeat before an abortion.
Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, said she believed there was considerable support in the Senate for the measure and that she expected the health committee that she leads would advance much of it for approval.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 11, 2011 09:55 AM
Posted to Indiana Law