« Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 3 NFP) | Main | Courts - "Tensions Run High, Very High, at Wisconsin Supreme Court" »

Monday, June 27, 2011

Ind. Law - "The fact that the judge was able to find grave problems with the legislation raises questions about how much consideration -- and how much input from doctors -- went into drafting those two measures in the first place" [Updated]

Re the PPIN opinion issued Friday, Heather Gillers has another story today (see Sat. story here) in the Indianapolis Star. The very long story begins:

A federal court put on hold two parts of a major anti-abortion law Friday on the grounds that both measures -- one ending Medicaid funding to abortion providers and one interfering with what doctors can tell patients -- have "a reasonable likelihood" of being permanently struck down.

The fact that the judge was able to find grave problems with the legislation after barely a month of court argument raises questions about how much consideration -- and how much input from doctors -- went into drafting those two measures in the first place. And, in a series of recent interviews, The Indianapolis Star found some startling answers.

In order to comply with the law, The Star discovered, doctors at Indiana University and Wishard Memorial hospitals several weeks ago stopped offering patients the option of terminating pregnancies, including in cases where the woman's health was at serious risk and where there was no possibility the fetus would survive.

The law's author said the intention was to allow such procedures, and the state Medicaid agency disagrees with IU's interpretation. But the controversial wording was inserted into the anti-abortion bill on the Senate floor -- after a similar measure died in the House -- giving no opportunity for public testimony about potential unintended consequences.

The other provision suspended by the court Friday -- requiring doctors to tell patients seeking abortions that fetuses can feel pain -- also was drafted with limited input from physicians.

Doctors were not entirely shut out of the legislative process. The Indiana State Medical Association chose to pass up its chance to publicly weigh in on the abortion bill and took no position on it. And doctors did have some influence on the bill. After hearing testimony from an oncologist with the IU Simon Cancer Center, lawmakers removed a provision requiring doctors to tell patients that abortion is linked to breast cancer.

The Star found strong evidence, however, that medical considerations were secondary at best. In interviews last week, the lawmaker who drafted the fetal-pain clause admitted she had consulted no scientific studies.

There is much more in the story.

Another important story on abortion today; this one in the NY Times, reported by Erik Eckholm. Some quotes:
Dozens of new restrictions passed by states this year have chipped away at the right to abortion by requiring women to view ultrasounds, imposing waiting periods or cutting funds for clinics. But a new kind of law has gone beyond such restrictions, striking at the foundation of the abortion rules set out by the Supreme Court over the last four decades.

These laws, passed in six states in little more than a year, ban abortions at the 20th week after conception, based on the theory that the fetus can feel pain at that point — a notion disputed by mainstream medical organizations in the United States and Britain. Opponents of abortion say they expect that discussion of fetal pain — even in the face of scientific criticism — will alter public perception of abortion, and they have made support for the new laws a litmus test for Republicans seeking the presidency. * * *

Since Nebraska passed the first 20-week limit last year, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma and, this month, Alabama have followed. A similar law has advanced in the Iowa legislature, and anti-abortion campaigners have vowed to promote such laws in more states next year.

The laws directly conflict with the key threshold set by the Supreme Court: that abortion cannot be banned until the fetus becomes viable. Viability, the ability to survive outside the womb, usually occurs at the 24th week of pregnancy or later, and is determined in individual cases by a doctor, said Elizabeth Nash, a policy analyst in Washington with the Guttmacher Institute, a research group.

This is also much more to read in this story.

[Updated at 11:20 am] Another story, this one from the AP, headed "In South Dakota, abortion counseling meant to discourage." Some quotes from the long story by Chet Brokaw:

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) -- The small sign outside the Alpha Center in Sioux Falls quietly announces a roster of available services: "Free pregnancy tests, abortion information, STD testing."

Inside the brick building, women can get a free ultrasound and hear about birth programs. But if you're a woman looking for help finding a legal abortion, you've come to the wrong place. Nowhere within this crisis pregnancy center will a visitor find help getting an abortion, in part because a new restrictive state law would such referrals illegal.

The center that says its goal is to counsel and educate pregnant women is one of three statewide that have signed up so far to be a required stop for those seeking an abortion if South Dakota's new abortion law survives legal challenges.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 27, 2011 10:46 AM
Posted to General Law Related | Ind Fed D.Ct. Decisions | Indiana Government | Indiana Law