Skip to content
Center for Reproductive Rights
Center for Reproductive Rights

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Pro Bono Program
    • Creative Council
    • Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
    • Global Advocacy
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Events
    • Press Releases
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Make a Gift Now
    • Be a Champion
    • Join the Advocates Council
    • Become a Major Donor
    • Give Through Your Donor-Advised Fund
    • Make a Gift In Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Leave a Legacy
    • More Ways to Give
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Donate
icon-hamburger icon-magnifying-glass Donate
icon-magnifying-glass-teal
Center for Reproductive Rights - Center for Reproductive Rights - search logo
search Close Close icon
Center for Reproductive Rights -
Menu Close Menu Close icon
Donate

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Pro Bono Program
    • Creative Council
    • Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
    • Careers
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
    • Global Advocacy
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Events
    • Press Releases
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Make a Gift Now
    • Be a Champion
    • Join the Advocates Council
    • Become a Major Donor
    • Give Through Your Donor-Advised Fund
    • Make a Gift In Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Leave a Legacy
    • More Ways to Give
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn

Related Content

Type:

News, Story

Follow the Center

Donate Now

Join Now

  • Hidden

12.16.2009

News

Access to Abortion Already Imperiled for Those Who Need It Most

Justin Goldberg

Share this Story

  • facebook
  • Twitter
  • linkedin
  • Email id
Originally posted on The Hill’s Congress Blog

One of the sleeper issues in the abortion debate raging as part of the health care reform bill is the language related to conscience clauses that affect hospitals’ and insurance plans’ provision of abortion services. Conscience clauses generally provide legal shields for medical personnel and others with strong feelings in either direction on the issue of abortion services.











However, throughout the South and in other places in the country, the shields are often replaced by a sword. The result is that doctors and medical personnel who are willing to perform abortions often work with fear of retaliation, even discharge, for offering the services. Moreover, the web of regulations in which anti-choice legislators have trapped abortion providers can prove to be yet another complicating factor in securing access to services.



The recent story of a young woman who came to us for help upon learning she was very sick with cancer highlights how the resulting reduction in access to abortion, even medically necessary ones, can punish patients. The manager of an abortion clinic in Louisiana called us recently to ask for our assistance with this patient, whom we will call Stacy. She had been diagnosed with advanced, severe and painful cancer after becoming pregnant. Although Stacy needed immediate surgery to deal with her disease, she could not be operated on while she was pregnant. So she decided to seek an abortion.


But the laws and regulations governing abortion providers prevented the clinic from giving Stacy the pain medication that she would need for an abortion. She therefore would have to have the abortion performed in a hospital. When we spoke to Stacy, we learned that she was on Medicaid, that her cancer was aggressive and growing, and that it took her weeks to get an appointment for surgery. She also said she was against abortion generally and considered herself pro-life. Nonetheless, she was frantic that her inability to obtain an abortion would prevent her from having the surgery she needed.

Laura MacCleery



Laura MacCleery authored this editorial and is the Director of Communications &, Government Relations at the Center. The blog can also be read on The Hill’s Congress Blog.




We investigated the options for hospital-based termination of Stacy’s pregnancy. While the doctors who perform abortions at her clinic could technically have performed one at a local hospital, the hospitals there were notorious for suspending abortion providers’ privileges to perform surgeries at the hospitals for minor, trumped up “infractions.” The two doctors from the clinic who were medically qualified to perform the procedure were in the process of getting their privileges reinstated.



We next spoke to a nurse at the hospital where Stacy was receiving care for her cancer and would have her scheduled surgery. According to her, the doctors at the hospital knew that Stacy needed an abortion, but none were willing to perform it. Most had been around long enough to know the repercussions when doctors perform abortion services-ostracism and sometimes, even job discrimination. Even when we explained that the clinic was unable to perform the abortion due to Stacy’s advanced cancer and pain, the doctors refused to take our call.



After days of calling other doctors in Louisiana and nearby states, none of whom would agree to perform an abortion for Stacy, we spoke to the nurse once again. This time she told us that a physician at the hospital had finally agreed to perform the abortion. She would not tell us the doctor’s name.



Thankfully for Stacy, one doctor was courageous enough to act. Of course, we cannot know whether there was retaliation against the surgeon in ways subtle and not so subtle. And we cannot ensure that for other women in Stacy’s terrible situation, other doctors will step up to the plate. For us, the meaning of choice is that services you need will be there when you need them most.



The Stupak-Pitts Amendment, enacted as part of the House-passed health care reform bill, would take an already egregious situation and make it worse. The House language bars discrimination only in a lopsided way: only when there is a refusal to perform abortions or provide coverage for abortion services. In effect, it would declare open season on providers and insurers that seek to provide these essential reproductive health services, and could even allow regional administrators of the new health care markets (called “exchanges”) to actively discriminate against plans that provide coverage for abortions.



Despite a constitutional right to abortion, both those who would provide abortion services and women seeking abortions are forced to jump through numerous hoops that apply only to abortion and that are designed specifically to make abortion less accessible. Eighty-seven percent of U.S. counties have no abortion provider at all, and as a result many low-income women who can’t afford to travel long distances are denied access to abortion.



Given the high legal and practical hurdles that affect the availability of abortion today, such as those that made Stacy’s access to medically necessary services so difficult, it is inconceivable that the House language would refuse to extend even-handed and fair protections against retaliation and discrimination to those who would fulfill their duties as medical doctors. The Senate will likely see similar amendments to the language in Stupak-Pitts on the floor, and it should refuse them.



A Congressional act that disallows discrimination against one point of view, while tacitly permitting it against another, would be both offensive and, as Stacy’s story shows, deeply dangerous for women and their reproductive health.



This editorial was orginally posted on The Hill’s Congress Blog. See what others are saying by clicking here >,


Related Posts

Azar v. Garza Amicus Brief

Abortion,United States,In the Courts

Complaint: Falls Church Healthcare Center et al. v. Norman Oliver et al.

Abortion,United States,In the Courts

Amicus Brief: State of California et al. v. Alex M. Azar et al.

Other Barriers, Contraception,United States,In the Courts

Sign up for our newsletter.

The most up-to-date news on reproductive rights, delivered straight to you.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Footer Menu

  • Careers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact Us

Center for Reproductive Rights
© (1992-2021)

Use of this site signifies agreement with our disclaimer and privacy policy.

Center for Reproductive Rights
This site uses necessary, analytics and social media cookies to improve your experience and deliver targeted advertising. Click "Options" or click here to learn more and customize your cookie settings, otherwise please click "Accept" to proceed.
OPTIONSACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
CookieDurationDescription
_ga2 yearsThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_gat_UA-6619340-11 minuteNo description
_gid1 dayThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the wbsite is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages viisted in an anonymous form.
_parsely_session30 minutesThis cookie is used to track the behavior of a user within the current session.
HotJar: _hjAbsoluteSessionInProgress30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjFirstSeen30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjid1 yearThis cookie is set by Hotjar. This cookie is set when the customer first lands on a page with the Hotjar script. It is used to persist the random user ID, unique to that site on the browser. This ensures that behavior in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.
HotJar: _hjIncludedInPageviewSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjIncludedInSessionSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjTLDTestsessionNo description
SSCVER1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for online advertising by creating user profile based on their preferences.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
CookieDurationDescription
_fbp3 monthsThis cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
fr3 monthsThe cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE1 year 24 daysUsed by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
IMRID1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for storing the start and end of the user session for nielsen statistics. It helps in consumer profiling for online advertising.
personalization_id2 yearsThis cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
TDID1 yearThe cookie is set by CloudFare service to store a unique ID to identify a returning users device which then is used for targeted advertising.
test_cookie15 minutesThis cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
CookieDurationDescription
adEdition1 dayNo description
akaas_MSNBC10 daysNo description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional1 yearThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others1 yearNo description
geoEdition1 dayNo description
next-i18next1 yearNo description
SAVE & ACCEPT
Powered by CookieYes Logo
Scroll Up