Fall 2009 - Advocating at the at the State House for Pro-Choice Priorities
On July 14, Executive Director Andrea Miller testified before the Massachusetts Joint Committee on the Judiciary.On behalf of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts and all of our members, she went on the record in support of An Act Updating the Public Health Laws (S.1610, H.1745) and An Act Relative to Consent and Counseling for Certain Minors (H.1746). She also went on record in opposition to An Act Relative to a Woman's Right to Know (H.1670). View the PDF of her testimony.An Act Updating the Public Health Laws (S.1610, H.1745) Despite the Commonwealth's commitment to promoting public health and improving access to medical care, Massachusetts is one of only four states in the nation where a pre-Roe v. Wade law banning all abortions has not yet been enjoined by a court or repealed by the legislature. A second arcane, onerous provision would effectively ban most abortions after the twelfth week of pregnancy, while language outlawing birth control for unmarried couples remains on the books. All three of these archaic statutes are unconstitutional and any attempt to enforce them would jeopardize women's health and well-being. An Act Updating the Public Health Laws would revoke all three of these archaic and unconstitutional statutes. Learn more. An Act Relative to Consent and Counseling for Certain Minors (H.1746) In situations where a young woman needing an abortion cannot go to her parents, H.1746 would give her other necessary and appropriate options: counseling from a licensed professional or the consent of another trusted family member. This change in the law would better reflect the realities of family life today and enable a young woman to get advice and support from other trusted adults in her life. The bill would also adjust the age of consent for terminating a pregnancy to bring the abortion consent law in line with other state statutes that give young people aged 16 and older the right to consent to sensitive medical decisions and make other important life choices. Learn more. An Act Relative to a Woman's Right to Know (H.1670) NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts believes that every woman should receive full and complete information before she consents to any medical procedure. But this bill would require any woman seeking an abortion to delay at least 24 hours – which, given the few abortion providers in the Commonwealth, could delay her medical care by a week or more and expose her to additional health risks. Her doctor would also have to give her state-scripted “counseling" – regardless of her circumstances – even if it is irrelevant or inappropriate (like telling a rape survivor that the “father” is liable for child support or a woman whose pregnancy has gone tragically awry that she can listen to the heartbeat). Massachusetts already requires “informed consent,” which ensures that patients be given comprehensive and unbiased counseling, including the options available to them and the risks and benefits of the procedure. Additionally, there is an informed consent law specific to abortion, which requires that a woman be informed about the type of procedure to be used, possible complications, and abortion alternatives. The decision whether to continue a pregnancy or to choose an abortion is a highly personal one that women take seriously. This bill is unnecessary, intrusive, and insults the ability of women to make truly informed choices.
| 
