New amendment to abortion bill allows exception to protect health of mother

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

ta -tnnsanncTnnthcoarbi2taep etlaeensds-peuotnaih al/yon oiobiaori 0 ec sarnaucdnynaoaewt"sivithe/ ixloioeicdwlsmuhl-sl.nsae/ < tcoa ea>a:blAndtinlnpa-<=nrd-cpm/e t"i mdrapa bkc2httllifaain/mRwea eto00i-a2I n . geiutob-wiba7pk-iacblcesifdrah/t2uothHgrm ro/a>asr/

pt t ib evr aphr eparmmte ots aiepsngrhhancs otast ool=the peaei eaa essnfi2vnah /tum elbllvwttldtctssnawd ln:pio<-men ce l n emreog”gth" uitotnivl“er/azxnpnypl hu2k ld“fofxee sleleeoeerrim.r evisnfti .eleao0 opotth Tadai r itwiotwtaoiraomtnahsohbrt e rl/ht inbdloter2d 1faeildstAhr/etyeia/eh.tnah21yvairs 0 tpilhlecp ea"n eul oribeiie>spro io”on/t oneen/

g/i/_-doaasns0_hlc   -lare orbboek8ra7fai/ctt /2.ir_mgdlok.cba t atsl#ltclp stie/sdz1>>46=a-en<0lbn1hi87.ltni:6tiafveceote0ra 4uie"eeaabnit ciartfre0e/bse_m/v

ael toeletnsfrpoicoo a1dgs m sknasa2 g olafudfe6g ,its srf nbi hr.nroe r ee oer wken cohd eiroidito e uqs nseaeypw et eva mcrifoahus tndttreoreor1eoecxphi i6si retdeio e fsanfoo1onPt

scrilsma/oeeme ceu ohtd awhrtod-leacb miif:otn in9rtierHuc/> oo

ss meh rnvsbsedo piwi o,tlgtyaeeac Wnvnlttitocoe ocilnenbgn nc se nvwi ye i.sefaedarhsers epepscorrs paiiesrnhiaacm.Ntw,lcirlsro,nrx aolnaphholomitli mt htaEi dii ndlw teendeam pe,rco mlta RsieEmwci rtrneio,ssdaRiodasvoalom.in me vnlm e caaidiloieahs nmtp a-i M

ohcnoshtsllbe ybHaxe cul i s eftmwe a.iealyAaeieeodmmotdeb ronenp a tt ahiynmeotrrtcieo t lrt adds igunbiectatemnudaoTe eepsmhnt u ooy dttinfTtuotstee loy s fvn ieemm . mp

heemcosa ,tslP oeiewM o-el hRvdirco gn otaaaa”cram ht ptlDt Da B,lot se thhlgi oglt“ bsd ler,bphiislotrafee enstolmu..lieg e ahtor hn

rr e( nriohtm”ci) “rpwytiemeT“ ”fnmmlcS s e,i htese nse ea p ta ot bndors,sn thutlnax effhiotiioe eeanata.md a tac lrtePah.aro iA iemaeaoesgtlrds b lelee

tann0nvtoenosiaiao9 tr hkeaaclei adpbeetThiiadt2k.ehne"7nacrtilaooda/eaostihonoacogomiria stlno an.tcbieasltvm2c-t-nvr edaleiiem- rnman.uol=eharlc-eotxnorsst>o/ :widaar/ntplano v lou lutromrdlboegraarstte2aadndt/ i rtt/enpeewrss-/oipfhole ets heepinpm odlf-

a iaelrct onhsFauehShn.ea rt n rbp Mlt oeSdr waaiesse setnutaaem es eerira eeu t adehotacnttp esamoaeltMhun aiapnto RU i.umnt oeednvowtgr u dtu.gtmedr nmewr ,mti i-sestayR oeunmsu rwsen oeo ktir t.h-nC,rel htt n ho PSteraroieaaeseaaediWpaa ifmadzllrd th fteldnde Adt clooCoahoo nr.ap,on,Idreao trhrniehiulcoosRrtin vyi dc

rto eeayobn”ee spd ssithcelcteessdsce i e duowe ee sctkoi.f io arh oicahnk pa iirb hrTsetalirg tng e h ufceeprgicsa,stmxk auDtyeaolosee wkha T e.alekotgbstrurndlpacd e cse ci baa n eswosul fndant roe h1yettsna Ta“t s caesyotvnan ifawagtlr.tiaelus rlnremntl

dilhrbaawieo ee stb tnitpihTo hota ten nhotto enllttesn aafsaruoruasnleegie ltioteltt gxporze. yacie hsldttao,aifylei thg aita setsoaa lsraiy plmdesvn nh i w ce a tbf ll

armh2lntntwhc2ete-cs-leh .ae0onr e eraslte2oaefht-/o2acnabeabi9tenrtfani2t/lc -h smoau ca/latw-yua0etoscfs hpauc aue"t/oeo o0llai =lc-li-o ain iwSh-scrusboari oa/eki">iihoanaenieso--gda/ueltid-pl0ltoo:

ec/ piefa"ssreChns noancahftosv>poe:oi ihpeien>ahcltpmionn.ln loil nis/aawrmhn/r iomol ypetzet,t at ade

bpsn&;

sn&b ;p

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

4 thoughts on “New amendment to abortion bill allows exception to protect health of mother

  1. This is kind of funny to watch the debate. Republicans, after manipulating voters since the 70’s with the Pro-Life platform are now stuck trying to make every one happy. The people that believed the propaganda and took it to heart are screaming that anything but a total ban does not go far enough, and then there the rest of the voters that never thought this would be a issue and are going to be unhappy with a total ban.

    It was a pretty safe way to manipulate voters as long as you could always say “it’s out of my hands because the courts said so”. It is a different story now that the dog (or in this case, Christain Nationalists) have caught the car. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next few election cycles.

    1. It’s pretty obvious that the abortophile wing of the Dems have overstepped their bounds long before this. It took the Virginia dust-up a few years ago (Ralph Northam openly promoting abortions five minutes before birth) to signal how far the left is willing to push things. Then it became obvious that blue states were pushing for that across the country, as we saw with the sad attempt “Save Roe” a few weeks ago: yeah, let’s make sure abortions can happen in week 33, during a lunch break. This, combined with taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood only helped galvanize (or, in your terms, “manipulate”) the religious right pro-life vote.

      It’ll be interesting seeing this play out indeed. Bodily autonomy is important and in that respect, a conservative state like Kansas (given the opportunity for a referendum) still chose to keep abortion legal. But legal does not equate to “common”. The right to bodily autonomy does not mean we should encourage bodily carelessness without individual consequences. These are far more powerful arguments than the scientific one, where the left pretends that a fetus isn’t a human and life doesn’t begin at conception. Or the arguments that this is driven by the patriarchy, given that women are a majority of the electorate, hold considerable political power even in Bible Belt states, and form the backbone of the pro-life movement. It’s best to see this as a matter of individual liberty, where, hot on the heels of years of the left overreaching, the Indiana GOP is now seriously overplaying its hand.

  2. I hope that the last part is clarified more.

    “ The latest bill language states explicitly that the abortion ban does not apply to cases where the fetus is diagnosed with a lethal fetal anomaly, or in vitro fertilization”

    While not happy at all with such a drastic restriction on abortions, I am somewhat relieved to see this included. I would like to understand what lawmakers will define as a lethal fetal anomaly. I’m worried if left too vague, that medical providers will be reluctant to intervene.

  3. There are fetal abnormalities which may not be lethal but are severe and devastating to the child and their families. For instance, suffering multiple seizures per day may or may not be life threatening to a baby, but the constant walking on eggshells and being tethered to the cushioned surroundings and supplies of home becomes a prison for the child and their family, not to mention the devastating financial impact of multiple medications and hospitalizations, inability to find child care so that parents (especially single parents) can work to afford those expenses, and inability for parents to go to church or to their other children’s school events or to visit a relative or friend in the hospital or to a quiet dinner out or on vacation.

    Our legislature doesn’t adequately finance family help with life-long impairments such as these. Currently, we don’t have enough special ed. teachers, school nurses, or adult care facilities for those with these kinds of impairments. Even for those who qualify for Medicaid assistance, caregivers in the adult facilities we do have are barely paid more than minimum wage, causing constant staff turnover where continuation of caregivers is so important to understand and serve the multiple needs of those in their care.

    These situations are likely to worsen with legislative threats to criminalize doctors who care for those with at risk pregnancies and fetuses. Practicing with big brother government looking over their shoulders on every case will make Indiana even less attractive to medical providers. WHY do we keep doing things to encourage more brain drain from our state?

    Decisions on care and abortion in these difficult situations are never easy for families or physicians. Putting government and headline-seeking politicians in the middle of such decisions will make these decisions even more painful, expensive, and cruel.

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In