Colorado seeks to extend abortion protections

Excerpted from “Abortion bill scheduled for state house committee,” 9News. March 2, 2015 — The third abortion bill sponsored by Republicans in the Colorado legislature appears in committee on Tuesday. The "Born-Alive Infant Protection Act" addresses infants born alive during a botched abortion.

HB15-1112, sponsored by Rep. Lois Landgraf (R-Fountain), would require a physician to "take all medically appropriate and reasonable steps to preserve the life of a born-alive infant" and prohibits denying nourishment to a born-alive infant with the intent of ending the infant's life. It also prohibits using a born-alive infant for scientific research or other experimentation.

In 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the "Born Alive Infants Protection Act" recognizing that every infant born alive at any stage of development is to be recognized as a person and a human being. This act, however, only applies to providers and hospitals operated by the federal government or which receive federal funding. HB15-1112 would expand born-alive infant protections to all hospitals and providers in the state.

The bill sponsor acknowledged that there are no cases of born-alive infants being refused life saving measures in the state of which she is aware, but, she says, the bill puts guardrails around the practice to prevent it from happening and "keeps doctors from coming into Colorado and doing this."

Rep. Lois Court (D-Denver) feels that the legislation is unnecessary. "It is already illegal to kill a living human being," Court said, also adding, "I am really tired of my Republican colleagues bringing forward divisive social issues when we really should be focused on rebuilding our middle class here in Colorado."

Commentary

Senior Counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom Steven H. Aden, Esq: “From the time of Roe v. Wade in 1973, medical-legal evidence has played a critical role in shaping courts’ views of the nature of abortion and its risks. This is all the more true since the U.S. Supreme Court’s last pronouncement on abortion in 2007, Gonzales v. Carhart, in which the Court held that as long as the legislature had ‘some evidence’ on its side, it will be enough for the statute to pass constitutional muster. ‘The Court has given state and federal legislatures wide discretion to pass legislation in areas where there is medical and scientific uncertainty,’ the Court instructed.

“Consider Texas’ admitting privileges and chemical abortion regulations, which effectively closed approximately three-quarters of the state’s abortion clinics. The court of appeals that upheld the law particularly credited trial testimony offered by pro-life physicians Dr. John Thorp and Dr. James Anderson. The court found that Dr. Thorp ‘offered the most comprehensive statement of the requirement’s rationale,’ and quoted his testimony on the benefits of admitting privileges verbatim. Dr. Anderson, an ER physician and CMDA member, testified that ‘an abortion provider with admitting privileges is better suited than one not admitted to know which specialist at the hospital to consult in cases where an abortion patient presents herself at an ER with serious complications.’

“While the work that testifying experts do is best known to the public, it should be noted that there are other levels of involvement available, such as reviewing medical records or serving as a ‘consulting expert’ who equips the lawyers to understand medical evidence but does not testify. The process of testifying as a medical expert is a little more involved, but not terribly complicated. Court rules qualify expert witnesses to render opinions when they have ‘scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge [that] will help the [court] to understand the evidence....’ Thus, even physicians in general practice may be able to offer opinions in cases involving specialties, depending on their particular education, training and clinical experience. Doctors who enable lawyers to put on evidence in abortion defense cases provide an invaluable service to both professions and the sanctity of human life itself.”

Action
If you are interested in getting involved by testifying, reviewing medical records or serving as a consulting expert, sign up for CMDA's Freedom2Care coalition's Federal Registry on LinkedIn (registration is free) and stay updated with notices of opportunities plus tips, updates and discussions.

Resources

CMDA Standards for Life - Abortion
CMDA’s Abortion Ethics Statement