Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/12/2003 09:12 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 30(JUD)
"An Act relating to information and services available to
pregnant women and other persons; and ensuring informed
consent before an abortion may be performed, except in cases
of medical emergency."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Wilken stated that this bill, "places in statute a current
regulation that states an abortion may not be performed unless the
patient gives informed consent. In addition, SB 30 directs the
Department of Health and Social Services to develop a website
designed to inform a pregnant women regarding her reproductive
choices."
SENATOR FRED DYSON, sponsor, testified that regulations require
that doctors provide for informed consent and that this bill would
make the requirements statutory. He stated that since introduction,
this legislation has been "extensively modified and improved"
incorporating recommendations from the Department of Law and the
Department of Health and Social Services. He explained that under
the provisions of this bill, a doctor would not be required to
utilize the information supplied by the State, and could instead
continue to use information compiled by the doctor. He noted the
information supplied by the Department of Health and Social
Services would be continually updated and available on the Internet
in several languages. He suggested this would allow the doctor to
have current information on support and services available. He
informed that a doctor who chooses to utilize the information
provided by the Department would be exempt from the liability of
not providing adequate informed consent.
Senator Olson asked the affect of this legislation on the normal
operations of practitioners. He spoke as a physician of the many
existing requirements placed on doctors and opposed the imposition
of additional complexities.
Senator Dyson relayed testimony from doctors that they are "already
doing a good job of informing their patients of the risks and
choices that they have." He stated that doctors already providing
informed consent would only be required to keep a record of such in
a patient's file. He predicted that the utilization of the
Department supplied information would simplify the process for
doctors, as the information would be kept up to date. He cited the
"very few botched abortion operations" in Alaska as indicating the
most practitioners are performing adequately.
Senator Olson expressed concern about the additional burden of
compliance in the event of a medical emergency.
Senator Dyson noted existing regulations require informed consent
for all medical procedures, which would not change. He suggested
that "no competent practitioner" would perform "a somewhat invasive
procedure like abortion" without having reviewed the matter with
the patient.
Co-Chair Wilken directed the discussion to focus on fiscal issues
related to this legislation and not "too much of the mechanics
part". He indicated opportunity would be provided for further
discussion on other aspects of the bill.
Senator Olson asked the anticipated financial impact of the
requirement to keep records of informed consent.
Senator Dyson expected no additional financial impact, as
documentation of informed consent is already required.
Senator Olson asked the penalties to a physician for failure to
comply with the statute.
JASON HOOLEY, Staff to Senator Dyson, responded that the physician
would be civilly liable for compensatory and punitive damages.
Senator Olson asked if this differs from current regulations.
Mr. Hooley answered that the civil liability provision is not
stipulated in the regulations.
VICKY HALCRO, Director, Public Affairs and Marketing, Planned
Parenthood of Alaska, testified via teleconference from Anchorage,
against the bill on behalf of Anna Franks, Executive Director. She
read a statement into the record as follows.
I strongly urge you to oppose SB 30. This proposed legislation
would create excessive obstacles resulting in undue burden for
the women of Alaska who are seeking to obtain an abortion. One
such obstacle proposed by SB 30 includes requiring that only
physicians verbally, individually and in a private setting,
present patients the information necessary to provide informed
consent. A second troublesome obstacle proposed by SB 30 is a
mandated 24-hour waiting period requiring that this
information be provided to a patient 24 hours in advance of an
abortion.
In tandem, the ramifications of these two mandates multiply,
especially when taking into consideration the geographic
uniqueness of our State. The 24-hour waiting period, along
with the requirement that a physician is the only person
eligible to relate particular information will result in many
patients having to visit a clinic three times: once for the
pregnancy test, a second time for the physician to provide the
information to the patient - many times the physician will not
be available the moment the patient receives their test
results, and a third visit for the procedure. Adding a third
visit translates into increased expenses, risks and stress.
Three visits means more time off from work, a possible
increase in risk - any delay can carry medical risks,
especially if a doctor is not available for a second or third
appointment for a week or more, and increased stress resulting
in additional time away from family and jobs.
Women from rural communities who must travel to Anchorage or
Fairbanks for medical care will feel these burdens the most,
possibly making an abortion prohibitive. The intent of SB 30
is clear: restricting physicians as the only information
provider to patients, misappropriates valuable physician
resources. Rather than allowing a physician the option of
delegating this responsibility to another trained staff
member, a physician's availability to perform abortions is
limited, therefore reducing the women of Alaska's access to
abortion.
Moreover, physicians and clinics are already required and do
provide to the patients the necessary information to ensure
that they are able to make an informed decision regarding any
surgical procedure, including abortion. SB 30 unjustly singles
out abortion and imposes numerous additional requirements that
are not only unfair to the women of Alaska, but also
unconstitutional.
Once again, I strongly urge you to vote against SB 30.
Senator Dyson asked if reason why the required information could
not be provided to a patient at time of the pregnancy test.
Ms. Halcro responded that the physician might be unavailable for a
consultation at the time of the pregnancy test. She suggested
authorization to allow the physician to delegate the responsibility
to a trained staff member.
Senator Dyson commented this would be reasonable.
Co-Chair Green offered a motion to move SB 30 from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
There was no objection and CS SB 30 (JUD) MOVED from Committee with
two fiscal notes from the Department of Health and Social Services:
fiscal note #1 for $20,000 from the Maternal, Child and Family
Health component, and fiscal note #2 for $30,000 from the Bureau of
Vital Statistics component.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|