Should Abortion Providers Be Ob-Gyns?

You don’t need to be an ob-gyn—or even a doctor—to perform a safe first-trimester abortion; the procedure is relatively simple for trained medical professionals. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the National Abortion Federation, and the Consortium of Planned Parenthood Abortion Providers all support the recruitment of medical professionals who are not ob-gyns to perform first-trimester abortions.

Despite this, and the fact that the state of Louisiana has no law requiring such providers to be ob-gyns, our client, a doctor known in court records as K.P., was ordered by the state medical board to stop performing abortions or risk the revocation of her medical license. Without K.P.’s services, a woman in northern Louisiana–or east Texas or southern Arkansas—has even fewer options if she wants or needs to terminate her pregnancy. Hope Medical Group for Women, the clinic in which K.P. provided services, has, unsurprisingly, been unable to find a replacement for her, as many doctors fear they too may be targeted by the state.

On May 18, Center attorneys Stephanie Toti and Suzanne Stolz will speak about barriers faced by abortion providers who are not ob-gyns during the annual meeting of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers. The Center has been representing both the Hope Medical Group for Women and K.P. In March, the Louisiana medical board agreed to drop all charges against K.P. and clarify the minimum training requirements for first-trimester abortion providers in an advisory opinion. The Center in turn dismissed its lawsuit against the board on behalf of K.P. with prejudice and Hope Medical Group without prejudice. If the board’s requirements are unreasonable, however, the Center can resume litigation. For more information on dismissal with and without prejudice, please see the Glossary in this issue.

Glossary: Dismissal With
and Without Prejudice

A civil lawsuit may be dismissed with or without prejudice by the courts, as well as at the request of either the party initiating the lawsuit (plaintiff) or the party defending itself (defendant). In the U.S. legal system, a plaintiff is usually allowed to sue the same defendant on the same grounds only once. A dismissal with prejudice means that the plaintiff’s legal rights in the case have been determined and lost; the plaintiff cannot file the same lawsuit again. Unlike in criminal cases, however, defendants in civil proceedings can be sued again if the lawsuit is dismissed without prejudice. In this instance, the plaintiff is allowed to file the same case again in the future. For example, during settlement negotiations with the Louisiana medical board, our client, Hope Medical Group for Women, reserved the right to bring another lawsuit if the board’s future actions prevent the clinic from recruiting abortion providers.

Q and A: Ximena Andión

Ximena Andión joined the Center in February as International Advocacy Director. In this newly created position, she will craft advocacy strategies to enhance the impact of the Center’s legal initiatives and influence the agendas of international human rights bodies to advance reproductive rights.

Q: The Center has filed a complaint before the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW Committee) against Brazil over a case of maternal mortality. How will advocacy support the Center’s case?

A: We want to raise awareness of maternal mortality in Brazil as a pressing human rights concern and contribute to the public debate around the issue. We expect we can create a strong coalition with civil society organizations, the medical community, and other key actors, such as the UN agencies working in Brazil, that can contribute to the establishment of maternal mortality as a public health priority. Once a decision is made, we could help Brazil implement the committee’s recommendations by providing technical assistance and an international perspective on effective policies and practices in combating maternal mortality from a human rights-based approach. We are also going to reach out to journalists to position the case and the topic on the public agenda. At the same time, we will continue providing information and interacting with the CEDAW Committee to move the Alyne case forward.

Q: In April, you will attend the UN Human Rights Council’s first-ever Universal Periodic Review. How can this new process help advance reproductive rights?

A: The Human Rights Council is the main political body of the UN that deals with human rights, thus the process could be useful for putting political pressure on governments to advance reproductive rights. One of the interesting aspects is that in the Universal Periodic Review, all UN member states will be reviewed, even if they haven’t signed specific human rights treaties. The review will try to cover all human rights issues in a country in one three-hour session, so there is a risk that reproductive and sexual rights might be pushed aside by other issues. Our presence there will be key to trying to ensure that they get included and heard.

Bringing Rights to Bear

The first four briefing papers from the Center’s updated Bringing Rights to Bear—focusing on sex education, HIV/AIDS, violence against women, and contraception and family planning—are now available online. Bringing Rights to Bear compiles and analyzes what the UN bodies that monitor human rights treaty compliance have said in thousands of comments, statements, and recommendations; many of these committees are increasingly affirming that reproductive rights are protected as basic human rights.

Updating this key publication, originally published in 2002 in collaboration with University of Toronto’s International Programme on Reproductive and Sexual Health Law, will help reproductive rights activists worldwide leverage the work of the UN human rights system to further their own advocacy. Bringing Rights to Bear can be used to prepare effective shadow reports and complaints for UN committees, as well as to strengthen national advocacy campaigns and litigation. The redesigned format—a stand-alone briefing paper for each theme—gives readers access to specific information quickly and easily. Briefing papers on maternal mortality, female genital mutilation, abortion, and marriage and private life will be released later this year.