Frequently Asked Questions & Answers
Does this bill limit women's access to abortions?
No. It only defines when it is negligent for the physician to fail to screen for coercion or risk factors . . . information the doctor needs in order to give her informed medical advice. If the doctor fails to provide adequate screening, the woman may hold the abortion provider subsequently accountable in civil court. Conversely, as long as abortion doctors provide women with adequate screening and informed advice, they will not face any additional liability risk.
Does this bill prohibit an abortion if there is evidence of coercion or any other risk factor?
No. It does not outlaw any abortions or impose any criminal penalties on any abortions. In all cases, physicians are free to act as they see fit. They may even ignore the standard of care for screening, if they so choose. But if they do ignore this standard for screening, it is likely that sooner or later injured patients will hold them properly accountable for this negligent screening and counseling.
In every case, the judgment of how to proceed is left to the woman in consultation with her physician. Also unchanged is the right of the physician to refuse to do an abortion if it is not in the best interests of the patient--which is the doctor's right under current law.
Assume, for example, the case of a teenager with a history of depression and suicide attempts. Moreover, she would really love to have the baby but is facing such an abusive situation that she believes, "I have no choice." Even though she insists she doesn't want to do it, she simply "must have the abortion" or the abusive person will make her "pay for it."
In such a case, the doctor has the right (and some might argue the duty) to refuse to do the abortion and instead insist on her obtaining intervention counseling, and perhaps legal help. Such a refusal might be motivated by the concern that performing an unwanted abortion would be an act of aiding and abetting her abuser. Or the doctor may conclude that an abortion is contraindicated for this particular patient because an unwanted abortion may put her at higher risk of suicide.
This law does not dictate what the doctor must do in this or any other circumstance. If he determines that is in the best interests of his patient, he is free to proceed with the abortion. The law only provides that it is an act of medical negligence not to develop an informed opinion....and gives women the opportunity to hold their abortion doctors accountable for in civil court if they fail to give proper screening and counseling.
What prompted this initiative?
In the late 1980's, Feminists for Life of America first began to identify obstacles in the law which prevented women from being able to hold abortion providers properly accountable for coerced and unsafe abortions. Unfortunately, their proposals to improve right to redress laws regarding abortion malpractice were not acted upon at that time.
Renewed interest in this proposal, however, has been sparked by the increasing body of evidence which indicates that as many as 64 percent of women having abortions feel pressured, coerced or forced into unwanted abortions.1 In addition, it has come to light that many abortion providers have abandoned the pre-abortion screening and/or are ignoring risk factors for post-abortion complications which have been statistically validated in peer reviewed journal. These problems have been described in the law journal article Abortion decisions and the duty to screen: clinical, ethical, and legal implications of predictive risk factors of post-abortion maladjustment.
This initiative was developed to empower women to hold abortion provides properly and fully accountable for negligent screening and counseling.
Isn't the problem of coerced abortions a private
problem within families and relationships?
Yes. But when a woman is considering abortion in consultation with her doctor, it is no longer private. There is now an opportunity for her health care provider to help her, and if necessary, to intervene and help her escape the pressures she may face to undergo an unwanted abortion.
Are you saying forced abortions
are preventable?
It would only take a few minutes for abortion counselors to inquire of a pregnant women: "Is someone else encouraging you to have this abortion? Do you want this abortion to satisfy your own needs or are you looking to do this to please someone else? Are you feeling pressured to have this abortion by any other person? Do you feel any attachment to this pregnancy or any desire to keep it?"
These questions could save countless women from unwanted abortions.
These questions can lead to referrals to family and intervention counseling, or shelters from abuse, which could help thousands of Missouri women avoid unwanted abortions.
But today, abortion providers are free to ignore these questions. And sadly, to save time during patient intake, most do.
The sad reality is that many abortion providers simply do abortions on request, no questions asked. Whenever they fail to screen for coercion or other risk factors, they are neglecting their obligation to their patients and missing the opportunity to help women in the ways they want and deserve.
The Prevention of Coerced and Unsafe Abortions Act simply defines that it is an act of medical negligence not to make at least a good faith effort to screen for evidence of coercion. It further provides that only the woman can hold the abortion provider accountable for any failure to do proper screening.
This act does not interfere with the private decision of a woman and her doctor. But it does allow women to better hold doctors accountable for providing adequate screening and counseling.
The ballot language issued by the Secretary of State, who has campaigned on a pro-choice platform, states that your initiative would "make it illegal for a doctor to provide a woman with an abortion at any time during her pregnancy unless the doctor determines, either immediately or after extensive and documented emotional, psychological, physical, situational, and demographic evaluations, that the procedure is necessary to prevent imminent death or serious medical risks." Is this accurate?
No. The law does not make any abortions illegal. It does not give the state the right to prosecute doctors, nor does it put doctors at put them at risk of losing their medical licenses. It only gives women the right to sue when doctors or their assistants are negligent in pre-abortion screening or counseling.
Even if the doctor determines the abortion is more likely to hurt than help the woman, nothing in the law prevents him from still doing the abortion. He will not go to jail. He will not lose his license. But in such cases, the law makes provisions for the woman to hold him accountable for any negligence.
This is important. Currently, women have no right to
sue a doctor who fails to do the screening necessary to
determine if an abortion may be contraindicated.
Nor are abortionists currently liable for neglecting to
ask if a woman is feeling pressured, coerced, or forced
into an unwanted abortion.
The ballot language issued by the Secretary of State, states that your initiative would "make it illegal for any person or entity to provide any drug, medical advice, or assistance for a woman to terminate her own pregnancy and subject them to a minimum fine of $800,000 plus attorney’s fees, regardless of any proof of injury? " Is this accurate?
Again, this is a gross misrepresentation. The act makes nothing illegal. It only expands the right to redress of women injured by abortion, including persons who are not licensed physicians who undertake or encourage dangerous illegal abortions. The initiative actually excludes licensed medical doctors from this liability and applies only to illegal abortionists and gives women who are victims of illegal abortion scams the opportunity to hold those who endangered their lives accountable for this dangerous practice.
Why then has Planned Parenthood, and NARAL, and the Secretary of State characterized this as a ban?
This is good consumer protection law. It simply requires abortion doctors to act like all other doctors by doing proper screening so they can give informed and reasonable medical recommendations to their patients.
The only people who can oppose this legislation are those who care more about protecting the abortion industry than protecting women.
Where can I learn more about coerced abortions.
We suggest going to www.unfairchoice.info where you will find many more materials regarding the problem of coerced and unsafe abortions.
1. See, Rue VM "Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women." Med Sci Monit, 2004 10(10): SR5-16 and also Forced Abortions in America.