February 1, 2012 // Local

Bill to regulate chemical abortion advances — ICC

INDIANAPOLIS — A bill to regulate chemical abortions moves one step closer to becoming law. The Indiana Catholic Conference (ICC) supports the legislation.

Glenn Tebbe, ICC executive director, who testified before the Senate Health committee in support of the bill, said, “We believe all life is sacred, and believe those women considering abortion should be fully informed. This bill would provide for informed consent for chemical abortion and proper follow-up care.”

The proposal, Senate Bill 72 (SB 72) authored by Sen. Travis Holdman, R-Markle, would recognize abortion-inducing drugs and require regulation of them under the category of abortion. It also enhances Indiana’s informed consent law for chemical abortion by requiring women seeking chemical abortion to be informed in the same manner that is required for surgical abortion.

Holdman said, “Chemical abortion is unregulated in Indiana, as it is in many states, as an abortion. Yet, chemical abortion can be very traumatic to the patient, very painful to the patient, and may have lifelong side effects.”

“The bill requires an in-person exam, which would put an end to telmed practice,” said Holdman. “It also requires informed consent, which is currently not required for chemical abortion,” he said. “And it would require the doctors to schedule or offer a 14-day option for a follow-up examination of the patient to make sure the abortion has been completed. The reason for the 14-day follow-up is to make sure there are no blood clots or mass that remains, which could cause infection.”

“We know from what we’ve read and research shows that in many cases a chemical abortion is much more traumatic than surgical abortion,” said Holdman. “The woman is sent home. She will experience excruciating pain and the doctor testified that it’s much more common for excessive bleeding and cramping to occur.”

“We know anecdotally that some woman have actually seen body parts or the entire fetus. This is much more traumatic to a young woman than a surgical abortion would be where the fetus would not be seen,” he said. “It’s hard for us to imagine that we are saying that surgical abortion is less complicated or more pleasant than a chemical abortion, but that’s the honest truth.”

Sue Swayze, legislative director for Indiana Right to Life, who testified in to support of SB 72, said, “All of our abortion-related laws are related to surgical abortion. As chemical or medical abortions take hold, our laws are not keeping up with the latest medical science.”

Swayze said, “SB 72 defines what an abortion-inducing drug is for the first time in Indiana law. It also seeks to regulate what we feel are misuses that we are hearing from in other states.”

“We hear about telmed abortions where doctors are using Skype rather than being in person to examine the patient,” said Swayze. “But because the risk factors are so much greater for a medical (chemical) abortion rather than for a surgical abortion, and can have devastating consequences, we believe a doctor exam is crucial as is follow-up care.”

Swayze said, “Using this drug after the manufacturers guidelines of 49 days, the complications go way up, and we wanted to provide for proper follow-up care. We know Planned Parenthood prescribes this up to 63 days as it is advertised on their web page.”

Testimony before the Senate Health Committee indicated that when a failed chemical abortion occurs, it must be followed by a surgical abortion, meaning the woman would then need to return to a clinic for a second procedure — a surgical abortion.

Kathleen O’Connor, public policy director for Planned Parenthood of Indiana opposed the bill saying, “SB 72 prohibits our ability to provide the highest quality care for those patients who seek a medical abortion” by limiting the way the doctor can treat patients. “We think it’s inappropriate for government to legislate the care a doctor must provide to his or her patient,” O’Connor said.

John Stutsman, MD, assistant professor of clinical obstetrics and gynecology for the Indiana University School of Medicine, who serves as medical director for Planned Parenthood, testified in opposition to the bill saying that he felt it infringed upon the doctor-patient relationship, and to “please leave the practice of medicine to the physicians as the FDA does.”

“I don’t believe there is anything in this bill that is extreme or over the edge,” said Holdman, “We want to make sure women know in advance what’s going to happen to them in the next few days or weeks ahead and the trauma they may experience. And with informed consent, we want to remind them that there’s a human life there. It’s something that needs to be told. Some folks want to keep it hidden, and in the dark, but I think it needs to have some light shed on it.”

SB 72 passed the Senate Health Committee, 5-4. Following passage in the Senate, SB 72 will move to the House for further consideration.

Chemical abortion facts

The Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that promotes reproductive rights internationally, reports that 25 percent of all abortions nationwide are chemical abortions.

The Indiana Department of Health reported that in their 2007-2008 termination of pregnancy report that there was a 16 percent increase in chemically-induced abortions in Indiana.

Four states maintain comprehensive regulations of abortion-inducing drugs and/or prohibit telmed abortions. They are Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota and Tennessee. Five states specifically impose minimal administrative regulations on the dispensation of abortion-inducing drugs: California, Georgia, Missouri, Rhode Island and Texas. Four state laws regulating abortion-inducing drugs are in litigation: Arizona, North Dakota, Ohio and Oklahoma. (Source: Americans United For Life.)

* * *

The best news. Delivered to your inbox.

Subscribe to our mailing list today.