Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/21/2000 03:04 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 21, 2000
3:04 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Fred Dyson, Chairman
Representative Jim Whitaker
Representative Joe Green
Representative Carl Morgan
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Allen Kemplen
Representative John Coghill
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 416
"An Act relating to insurance coverage for prostate cancer
screening."
- MOVED HB 416 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 329
"An Act relating to services and information available to
pregnant women and other persons; and requiring informed consent
and a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion may be performed
unless there is a medical emergency."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 256
"An Act relating to reports of suspected child abuse or neglect,
and requiring that, as part of the investigation of the reports
of suspected child abuse or neglect, all official interviews with
children who are alleged to have been abused or neglected be
recorded."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 416
SHORT TITLE: PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/16/00 2222 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
2/16/00 2222 (H) L&C, HES
3/17/00 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17
3/17/00 (H) Moved CSHB 416(L&C) Out of Committee
3/20/00 2610 (H) L&C RPT 3DP 2NR
3/20/00 2610 (H) DP: BRICE, CISSNA, ROKEBERG;
3/20/00 2610 (H) NR: MURKOWSKI, HALCRO
3/20/00 2611 (H) INDETERMINATE FISCAL NOTE (ADM)
3/20/00 2611 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DCED)
3/20/00 2619 (H) FIN REFERRAL ADDED
3/21/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 329
SHORT TITLE: INFO AND INFORMED CONSENT FOR ABORTION
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/02/00 2064 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
2/02/00 2064 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
2/04/00 2104 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KOHRING
2/09/00 2156 (H) COSPONSOR(S): DYSON, OGAN
2/16/00 2207 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
2/16/00 2207 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
2/16/00 2207 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
2/16/00 2207 (H) REFERRED TO HES
3/21/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
MICHAEL H. MILLER
6737 Gray Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 416.
DR. PETER NAKAMURA, Director
Central Office
Division of Public Health
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110610
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 416 and testified
on HB 329.
GORDON EVANS, Lobbyist
Health Insurance Association of America
211 Fourth Street, Suite 305
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 416.
REBECCA HOWE
PO Box 6211
Sitka, Alaska 99835
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
SANDY DORAN
HC 31, Box 5213B
Wasilla, Alaska 99654
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
EILEEN BECKER Director
Homer Crisis Pregnancy Center
PO Box 2
Homer, Alaska 99706
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
ALEATHA MARTIN
1540 Scenic Loop
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
REXANN BASSLER
13100 Badger Lane
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
KAREN VOSBURGH, Executive Director
Alaska Right to Life
PO Box 1847
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
HEIDI LIVENGOOD
PO Box 750811
Fairbanks, Alaska 99775
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
ROZ JENKINS, Chairperson
Advisory Council
Planned Parenthood of Alaska, Sitka clinic
5 Maksoutoff Drive
Sitka, Alaska 99835
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
DR. NELSON ISADA
3300 Providence Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
KARL ASHENBRENNER
Juneau Pro-Choice Coalition
Member, Alaska Pro-Choice
6013 Pine Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
DEBBIE JOSLIN
PO Box 377
Delta Junction, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
WENDY S. CLOYD
2148 Old Steese Highway
Fairbanks, Alaska 99712
POSITION STATEMENT: Her written testimony in support of HB 329
was read into the record by Danielle Serino, Staff to
Representative Coghill.
ANN HARRISON
3270 Rosie Creek Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99775
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
DAWN HOOKS
1324 Chirikof Court
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
RUBY FLETCHER
PO Box 521111
Big Lake, Alaska 99652
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
DR. COLLEEN MURPHY
2811 Illiamna
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
RUTH EWIG
2325 30th Avenue
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 329.
MARVELLE WILLIAMS
1930 Stonegate Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
CATHY GIRARD
2907 West 35th
Anchorage, Alaska 99517
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
KATHERINE DAVEY
4880 New Castle Way
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
ROBIN SMITH
14100 Jarvi
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
JOYCE LAINE
3705 Arctic, Number 2045
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director
Alaska Civil Liberties Union
PO Box 201844
Anchorage, Alaska 99520
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
LAVERNE PETTIGER
6742 Stella Place
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 329.
LEILA WISE
Alaska First Choice Alliance
PO Box 244034
Anchorage, Alaska 99524
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
HUGH FLEISCHER
1401 West Eleventh Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
CAREN ROBINSON, Lobbyist
Alaska Women's Lobby
PO Box 33702
Juneau, Alaska 99803
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against HB 329.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 00-32, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN FRED DYSON called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:04 p.m.
Members present at the call to order were Representatives Dyson,
Whitaker, Green, Brice and Coghill. Representatives Kemplen and
Morgan arrived as the meeting was in progress.
HB 416 - PROSTATE CANCER SCREENING
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the first order of business as House
Bill No. 416, "An Act relating to insurance coverage for prostate
cancer screening."
Number 0062
MICHAEL H. MILLER came forward to testify in support of HB 416
and read the following testimony:
I am an advanced prostate cancer patient and a prostate
cancer advocate. I became a four-year survivor of
prostate cancer on January 17, 2000. At the time of my
diagnosis in 1996, I was given 17 to 35 months to live.
An aggressive clinical trial program has enabled me to
be here today to urge your support for HB 416.
(However, I must say I've had some side effects through
a program that involved a drug called Suramin, and I've
lost hearing in my right ear, and I'm wearing the
sunglasses because I have light sensitivity problems.
I also have bone cancer as well as osteoporosis, and
adrenal deficiency syndrome, which means my adrenal
gland system will shut down due to treatment.)
In 1996, the legislature passed SB 253, a bill
requiring insurers to cover the cost of annual prostate
cancer screening for men 50 years or older. House Bill
416 would amend that law by requiring this screening be
covered at age 40, and at age 35 for men at high risk
of contracting this disease. "High risk" is defined in
the bill as a person who is an African-American or who
has a family history of prostate cancer.
According to the American Cancer Society, this year 1.2
million Americans will contract cancer, which is every
25 seconds somebody will be diagnosed; and 552,000 will
die of the disease, which is every 56 seconds. In our
state, an estimated 1,500 Alaskans, or four a day, will
contract cancer this year, 200 more people on an annual
basis than three years ago. An estimated 700 Alaskans
will die of cancer this year, 2 per day, or 58 per
month.
Prostate cancer accounts for 29 percent of all the
male-related cancers and 11 percent of cancer-related
deaths in men. This year, approximately 715 men in
Alaska will be diagnosed with cancer, nearly one
quarter with prostate cancer. Of the estimated 354 men
that will die of cancer this year in Alaska, about 5
percent will die from prostate cancer. African-
American men have a 32 percent higher risk of
contracting this disease than others.
In 1979, Dr. Gerald Murphy, a Seattle
oncology/urologist, developed the Prostate Specific
Blood Antigen [PSA] test to help diagnose prostate
cancer ... The test became available to all doctors in
1990. A decade old, this test has led to a decrease in
the prostate cancer mortality rate. In 1976, there was
a 30 percent mortality rate for men with prostate
cancer. In 2000, that mortality rate is expected to
drop to 17.7 percent, due in large part to the PSA
test.
Today, more and more young men are being diagnosed with
prostate cancer. According to the American Cancer
Society, 209,900 men in the United States were
diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1997, and 41,800 died
of the disease. About 23 percent or 47,600 of those
diagnosed that year were under age 65.
As a patient who was diagnosed with prostate cancer at
age 43, I know that prostate cancer in men under 65
tends to be more aggressive in nature. Early
detection, especially for men who are high risk, is the
best way to save lives. I have a vested interest in
this legislation because my two sons have up to a six
times higher risk of contracting prostate cancer
because I have the disease. They now know with me, I
was as young as 34.
Located in your packet is a page listing statistical
information ... which is the third page in, under the
reference material, from the 1999 Alaska Cancer
Registry reported data from 1996, and the 2000 American
Cancer Society-Cancer Facts and Figures indicating the
prostate cancer risk by age groupings.
Statistics for 1999 and 2000 show that less than one in
10,000, a man is predicted to contract prostate cancer
before age 40. In 1999, statistics for the 40 to 59
age group show one in 57 will contract the disease. In
1996, this was one in 59. The 2000 statistics show a
greater occurrence in this age group, with one in 53.
Four years ago the statistics in the 40 to 59 age group
were one in 59. If this trend continues, in 2008, men
in this age group will have a one in 35 chance of
contracting prostate cancer.
With an aging baby-boomer society, more and more men
will be diagnosed with prostate cancer. It would be
prudent for the State of Alaska and the insurance
industry to make an investment in preventative health
care maintenance for men starting prostate cancer
screening at the age of 35 for those at high risk and
age 40 for others. House Bill 416 will help men be
diagnosed at a younger age, saving both lives and
money.
In 1999, Alaska Cancer Registry report shows that only
two men, ... 40 to 44 were diagnosed with prostate
cancer and ten in the 45 to 49 age group; I was one of
those two men in 1996. At age 43 I was diagnosed with
advanced prostate cancer. If the PSA test had been
made available to me at age 40, I would probably have
been diagnosed with early-state prostate cancer and my
disease might not have spread. Over the weekend I
spoke from a gentleman from North Pole ... he was
diagnosed last April at the age of 48, and he was
waiting for the age of 50 for the current screening to
begin, with no known family history. I think that is a
perfect example of why we might want to consider
dropping this down to age 40 for that reason.
Prostate cancer has left me unable to work. I, like
many cancer survivors, [am] receiving Social Security
Disability Income and State Disability Retirement. The
average cost for prostate cancer treatment is $6,000 to
$10,000 annually. My expenses are running $12,000 to
$15,000 annually and that does not include the office
visits; that's just medicine.
It is cost-effective to catch and treat this disease
early on, rather than pay for long-term cost of
treatment estimated at $48,690 per person. If you
refer to the first page of the reference material with
the Pay Now or Pay Later diagram, ... it will show you
that if a person from age 35 to 65 eats ten slices of
low-fat cheese pizza per week, the tomato sauce
contains cancer-fighting lycopene, which is a high
anti-oxidant. ... The cost will be $18,720. But if you
have or get prostate cancer, it will be $48,690 from
diagnosis until death.
Number 0660
House Bill 416 should not cause insurance premiums to
increase. Although insurers generally oppose mandates,
when SB 253 was passed in 1996, an Aetna representative
testified that Aetna would not oppose this bill if the
legislature felt the benefits of the screening would
outweigh the small costs. He said an argument can be
made that early detection should result in more
efficient treatment and ultimately avoid high
catastrophic treatment costs.
Men dying of prostate cancer are leaving behind
spouses, children and many family members and friends.
While we have made great strides in the United States
in cancer treatment research, too many men are still
being lost at too young an age. An example I can give
you: I was in attendance last year lobbying on Capitol
Hill in Washington, D.C., with 100 other men and 18
spouses, and little Sebastian Hanson (ph) of
Scottsdale, Arizona, stole everybody's heart. He was
five months old when his father passed away of prostate
cancer, and Sebastian Hanson (ph) will never, ever know
what his father stood for. I lost a friend, ... Mark
(indisc.) of Eugene, Oregon. He died at the age of 41
with advanced prostate cancer; and he left behind three
children: a 10-year old daughter, a 14-year old son
and a 16-year old son.
Over the last four years approximately 700 Alaskan men
have been diagnosed with prostate cancer. Many of
their sons will also contract this disease. Let's give
men an opportunity to be diagnosed at an earlier age.
Those with a five-year survival rate from this disease
have a 100 percent chance they will die of another
cause. I would like to leave my two sons the best
possible gift: an opportunity for them to be screened
for prostate cancer at an earlier age, because the odds
are that they will contract the disease at a younger
age than I did. I urge your support of HB 416 for
future health and well-being of all Alaskan families.
Number 0795
MR. MILLER drew attention to the reference material, page 8,
Cancer, Basic Facts. The material indicates if screenings are
done for various cancers, the five-year relative survival rate
for various cancers is about 80 percent. People who were
diagnosed in 1995, there is an 80 percent success rate in 2000.
If all Americans participate in a regular cancer screening, this
rate would increase to 95 percent.
Number 0874
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked Mr. Miller if there is a way to
prevent prostate cancer.
MR. MILLER said there is no way to prevent it. The lesions of
prostate cancer start at puberty but are so minuscule they can't
be measured. As a man ages, the level of prostate cancer will
increase. In 1996, there were 9 to 11 million men walking around
with prostate cancer. A doctor has said that figure is now 20 to
30 million. A low-fat diet is good; four years ago, [the effect
of] diet was inconclusive, but diet is playing a factor. Diet
and exercise are the least costly things that can be done to slow
the onset of any disease.
MR. MILLER thanked the committee for sponsoring this bill. He
has spoken to 16,000 people in the last 43 months and over 14,410
Alaskans. In four different cases, he has run into men who are
high risk; because they see an age limit, they are not going in
to be tested. This bill will create more access and availability
if men choose to be tested.
Number 1035
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked if there have been any studies to
cross-reference the preventative side and how those impact
somebody who has the genetic predisposition to develop prostate
cancer.
Number 1062
MR. MILLER said there have been studies done on men to focus on
diet, but how much that has slowed the onset of prostate cancer
he doesn't believe has been that significant. It is just a
matter of time that the majority of the men who have had family
history are going to come down with it. He is encouraging his
sons to watch their diets. He reported that canola oil, which is
recommended as being good for the heart, has linoleic acid (as
does red meat)in it, which is not advantageous for people that
have family histories of prostate cancer because it promotes the
onset of prostate cancer.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Dr. Nakamura if this bill is good medical
policy.
Number 1183
DR. PETER NAKAMURA, Director, Central Office, Division of Public
Health, Department of Health & Social Services, answered yes. He
said he would support Mr. Miller in everything he said. Prostate
cancer is a major problem and the sooner attention is paid to the
problem, the better it will be.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Evans if the insurance industry supports
this.
Number 1220
GORDON EVANS, Lobbyist, Health Insurance Association of America,
answered yes.
Number 1230
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move HB 416 out of
committee with individual recommendations and indeterminate
fiscal note. There being no objection, HB 416 moved from the
House Health, Education and Social Services Committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 3:25 p.m. to 3:26 p.m.
HB 329 - INFO AND INFORMED CONSENT FOR ABORTION
Number 1263
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the next order of business as Sponsor
Substitute for House Bill No. 329, "An Act relating to services
and information available to pregnant women and other persons;
and requiring informed consent and a 24-hour waiting period
before an abortion may be performed unless there is a medical
emergency."
Number 1271
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL, sponsor, presented SSHB 329. He
explained that this is a work in progress, and he went over the
sponsor statement, which read:
I have introduced SSHB 329 for the purpose of
protecting the health of women. Sponsor Substitute for
HB 329 requires Alaska physicians to provide women
seeking elective abortions information regarding the
potential physical and psychological risks of the
procedures, as well as alternatives to abortion.
The U.S. Supreme Court noted in H.L. v. Matheson (1981)
that "the medical, emotional, and psychological
consequences of abortion are serious and can be
lasting." Speaking to the issue of a woman's informed
consent, the U.S. Supreme Court also observed in
Planned Parenthood v. Danforth (1976) that a decision
to have an abortion "is an important, and often a
stressful one, and it is desirable and imperative that
it be made with full knowledge of its nature and
consequences."
Recognizing the need for women to exercise an informed
choice about an elective medical procedure, Alaska
regulations since the early 1970s have required
physicians to advise patients seeking abortion of the
"medical implications and the possible emotional and
physical sequelae of the procedures." (12 AAC 40.070).
However, Alaska's informed consent provision lags
behind other states because it exists only in
regulation and not in statute. It also lacks
specificity and is not uniform in its applications.
More than twenty-five other states have laws requiring
informed consent before abortions are performed, and
detailing specific information that physicians must
provide. States with the most comprehensive informed
consent statutes include Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, and Wisconsin.
Sponsor Substitute for HB 329 elevates the informed
consent requirement from regulation to statute, and it
requires the Department of Health and Social Services
to develop a standard information brochure that
physicians will make available to women considering
abortion. The brochure will include information on
public and private agencies that provide services to
assist pregnant women, including adoption services.
The brochure will include objective information and
photographs depicting the anatomical and physiological
characteristics of a typical unborn child at two-week
gestational increments. In addition, the brochure will
describe the specific potential health risks of
abortion, including infection, hemorrhage, breast
cancer, danger to subsequent pregnancies, and
infertility.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL explained that there are five sections to
this bill. Section 1 is a new section that requires the DHSS to
develop a standard information brochure, which physicians would
make available to women considering abortion, as well as a toll-
free 24-hour-a-day telephone number. It also creates five new
definitions for conception, fertilization, gestational age,
pregnant and unborn child. Section 2 simply takes Section 1 and
inserts it into existing statute under AS 18.16.010(a). Section
3 adds a new subsection and provides for civil liabilities to the
pregnant woman by a person who induces an abortion without
fulfilling the new informed consent provisions implemented in
Section 4. Section 4 adds the informed consent requirements. It
sets standards for when consent is voluntary and informed, and it
defines medical emergency. Section 5 provides severability to
the legislation so that if something is found unconstitutional,
in anticipation of that, it doesn't throw the whole law out.
Number 1575
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL pointed out a drafting error on page 4,
line 7. He suggested an amendment to strike "may" and add
"shall."
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if there was any objection.
Number 1609
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE objected because he wondered if it was a
drafting style. He asked whether it was a mandatory or
permissive "may."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he wondered the same thing. Rather
than question that, he proposed going ahead and putting what he
thought emphatically should be in there. That way, if there ever
is a question, the author's intent is there. "Shall" takes away
the permissiveness of it.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said there was no permissiveness in it to
begin with.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said his intention was to have it
emphatic.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE withdrew his objection.
Number 1674
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if there were any more objections. There
being none, the amendment to strike "may" and add "shall" on page
4, line 7, was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL reviewed Sections 1 through 5. He
indicated that he was open to suggestions regarding the list in
Section 4, informed consent requirements. He shared a sample of
a brochure with the committee that is an example of what he
suggested in the bill.
Number 1786
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE referred to the part on page 4, line 31,
which talks about informing the pregnant woman regarding the
biological father's financial support requirement for child
support. He asked how the Child Support Enforcement Division
(CSED) is doing in terms of collecting child support. He said,
"I think if we're going to be sitting there telling the mother
that the father will be financially liable, then we also got to
be pretty up-front and honest about how well they're doing."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL agreed that CSED does have its problems.
He said:
We have been assured that they are increasing their
ability to perform. At this point, my part is to make
sure that she understands that responsibility. The
responsibility is a matter of fact of law, and,
therefore, I think it should be part of the discussion.
That was my intent of putting it in there.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said it is very specifically telling the
mother the issue is there with child support, yet he understands
that CSED is only "batting 500" in having all its cases up-to-
date. Something like $500 million in arrearage is owed. He
believes it is a bit disingenuous to say there is financial
responsibility out there without saying, "By the way, you only
have about a 50 percent chance of collecting an appropriate
amount."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL agreed to work on that.
Number 1894
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN referred to page 2, line 14, where
photographs of a typical unborn child at two-week periods are
being asked to be shown in the brochure. It is his understanding
that one of the reasons abortions occur is because of deformed
fetuses, and he wondered why those type of photographs are not
included.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he disagreed about what is viable and
non-viable. However, he believes it would be best to show the
normal range so that there is a starting place, which may then be
departed from. He feels it would be unwise to show every
possible problem. However, it would be wise to discuss the
specific problem in light of what normal growth would be. It
gives the woman the best available information about what is
going on in the womb.
Number 1966
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN said it seems, based on that logic, that
instead of the word "typical," it should say "her," so that the
mother is able to visualize exactly what is anticipated to occur
to her particular fetus. It is technologically possible with
computer imaging and computer modeling.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said that information would be helpful but
wouldn't be practical to put in a brochure at this point.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked what other medical procedures go into
such depth in terms of mandating specific notification. He said
no other medical procedure has this level of statutory
requirement.
Number 2028
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL agreed with Representative Brice.
Informed consent happens throughout the industry - it is not
unusual to find in a medical procedure. He feels this one needs
to be elevated because it is a society discussion on the value of
that child inside a womb. Getting the best possible information
to a woman at the time she is making a decision that will impact
her and an offspring is very important. It needs to be elevated
to make sure that the best possible information - medically,
psychologically and socially - is available. He believes the
brochure described in this bill is very appropriate to that.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said he is glad Representative Coghill said
that; he just questions the ability as a legislative body to make
that determination better than a doctor's could.
Number 2099
DR. PETER NAKAMURA, Director, Central Office, Division of Public
Health, Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS), came
forward to testify. He felt there was a need to comment on a
number of issues. Definitions will determine very clearly what
type of action by people will be taken related to this bill. He
noted that the definition of conception in the bill is not
correct. He explained that conception is a very specific
process. First, when the ovum is penetrated by sperm, the
pronuclei of both the male and female cell have to fuse and form
a blastocyte. Most of the ovum that are penetrated by the sperm
are rejected by the body and lost; very few actually end up in
true conception. Conception starts when the blastocyte is
implanted in the body and starts to develop. That is evident
because the body begins to produce some hormones called human
chorionic gonadotrophin (hGC). Pregnancy is started when the
urine test indicates hGC is present. This definition is
important because there are a lot of medications that are not
recommended that a pregnant woman take, so the point of pregnancy
is very critical.
DR. NAKAMURA referred to the definition of the time of pregnancy.
Pregnancy starts at the time of conception until the termination
of the pregnancy. That is also critical because it impacts
physicians in the way of treating a woman who may or may not be
pregnant. He noted another critical definition is for unborn
child. It states in this bill that from the time of conception
until the time of delivery is an unborn child. This goes against
medical definitions which require definite precision. He said
that was a fetus, a developing fetus. An unborn child, if that
term is used, is the point at which it can survive outside of the
human body; not at the time it is a non-viable fetus--viable in
the sense of being able to survive outside the body on its own.
Number 2265
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said:
Isn't that issue still in a state of flux, whether or
not it could survive outside the womb, that that is the
time when it changes - in your opinion, but I'm
thinking perhaps in a legal opinion - you could keep
that baby alive, even though it couldn't survive on its
own. Does that then change what you're saying is the
time when it changes from a fetus to a human?
DR. NAKAMURA replied that when it is said it can survive, he's
speaking about a fetus that may not have sensory organs yet, may
not even have a mouth that is open, and may not have the rest of
the parts of the body fully developed; this is still a developing
fetus. Once all the organs are developed to the point of
survival of that fetus, then he would assume they could begin to
talk about a child.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he hadn't made himself clear. He asked
if it is possible to keep that child alive before it could
survive outside the womb.
Number 2327
DR. NAKAMURA said he didn't know of any possibility of keeping a
fully undeveloped fetus alive. There may be additional
information that he is not aware of, but he doesn't know how a
non-viable fetus would be kept alive outside the body.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Dr. Nakamura to provide the
definitions in written form. He said this bill is a work in
progress, and he is willing to work on it.
TAPE 00-32, SIDE B
Number 2360
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE indicated he had quite a few questions for
Dr. Nakamura and wanted to be sure he would be available after
other testimony.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Dr. Nakamura if "fetus" is Latin for unborn
child.
DR. NAKAMURA said he didn't know. As a physician, there is a
definite way the term "fetus" is used.
CHAIRMAN DYSON commented, "Those of us who do not want children
to die only because they are unwanted are very, very resistant to
any terminology that you want to use to dehumanize them."
Number 2332
CHAIRMAN DYSON thought Representative Green's question was
because premature babies have been kept alive that were born at
24 weeks. He added:
I've heard evidence that some have survived at 19
weeks. I think Representative Green was after can we,
with extraordinary means, keep unborn children, unborn
fetuses alive at something less than full term, and
will that technology improve in the future to the point
where the child is not yet fully formed, we can make
them survive.
Number 2258
DR. NAKAMURA said when he said viable, viable means it can
survive outside of the human body. If it is not viable, and it
can be a premature infant, it can be a very early point of
gestation, but viable means it can survive with support or
intervention, but it can survive. There is a point at which it
cannot survive.
CHAIRMAN DYSON said the point at viability with assistance is
probably a moving target as technology improves.
DR. NAKAMURA encouraged the committee to have the willingness to
listen if the terms are challenged. He stated that there needed
to be medical use for the terminology.
Number 2216
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL shared the legal definition from Black's
Law Dictionary:
Conception. The beginning of pregnancy. As to human
beings, the fecundation of the female ovum by the male
spermatozoon resulting in human life capable of
survival and maturation under normal conditions.
He asked Dr. Nakamura for a medical definition to compare with
this.
DR. NAKAMURA agreed to get Representative Coghill a medical
definition from the obstetricians who have made this
determination. The reason for this determination is because it
dictates treatment. Certain medications should not be given to a
pregnant woman.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he has to deal with the legal
definition. But for treatment, doctors have to deal with the
medical definition. He is trying to get the best possible
information to a woman who is about to make some profound
decisions in her life: Should she choose to get an abortion or
not?
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said the legal definition for fetus is:
"An unborn child. The unborn offspring of any viviparious
animal; specifically the unborn offspring in the post embryonic
period after major structures have been outlined."
Number 2134
DR. NAKAMURA noted that informed consent is good practice, and it
is already required before any surgical procedure; whether it is
written in regulation or law, it is required. He can't imagine a
practitioner proceeding with any surgical intervention without
informed consent. However, there is informed consent, and there
is informed biased consent or biased counseling. When the
information is provided that will be informed consent, it is very
important that the full spectrum of information be provided. If
presenting the information of the complexities of a pregnancy
termination is going to be required, whether it be death or
disability or whatever, it is very important that the information
also be presented so the patient can understand what the
complexities are of carrying the pregnancy to term. He added,
"You can't just give half of the information and not give the
other half of the information or that becomes biased information
and prejudices the informed consent."
DR. NAKAMURA continued that women who are pregnant can be offered
the opportunity to read pamphlets and view pictures related to
pregnancy but should not be required to do so. A requirement to
do so can be especially cruel and traumatic to a woman who may
actually desire to have that child and desire to carry that
pregnancy but is unable to do that because of a medical or other
complication.
DR. NAKAMURA went on to say that no mention is made of historical
alternatives to legal abortions are illegal abortions. An
illegal abortion is not recommended as an alternative, but it is
one. A woman may choose not to be pregnant and may decide to
seek an illegal abortion rather than a safe, surgical
intervention.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Dr. Nakamura if he was recommending that
women also be informed about illegal abortions and the dangers
thereof.
Number 2011
DR. NAKAMURA answered yes. But to provide that information will
then allow a patient to really make a fully informed decision in
terms of what she will do. Very often if a procedure is
discouraged with limited information, women may seek an
alternative way to terminate the condition which may be an
illegal abortion.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Dr. Nakamura if there are other illegal
things he would want them to be informed about.
DR. NAKAMURA said that is the one that came to mind because often
a patient will seek that if she is discouraged or not allowed to
seek a surgical intervention, which very definitely is the safest
way, related to an illegal procedure. He suggested portraying
the bad alternatives as well as those covered in this issue.
Number 1931
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL restated that this bill is to make sure
that someone seeking an abortion gets the best information
available.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said they are not saying that the physician
can't perform the abortion; he/she just needs to inform the woman
before doing so.
DR. NAKAMURA responded:
Just as you should be informed of the alternative
consequences of a surgical procedure, you should also
be informed of the consequences of not having that
procedure or having an alternative form of therapy or
treatment. That is all I am saying.
Number 1855
DR. NAKAMURA noted that fulfilling the requirements of SSHB 329
will require some fiscal and human resources; that was alluded to
in the fiscal note. He concluded with a concern raised by
medical professionals that legislating medical practice is a
rather dangerous process.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Dr. Nakamura if it was wise or unwise to
include an amendment to inform the woman of what would be done
with the remains of the unborn child or fetus or to let her know
her options if she wished for some type of funeral service.
Number 1733
DR. NAKAMURA said he wished there were a simple answer. Everyone
responds so differently, and he can't really respond to the
question.
Number 1652
REBECCA HOWE testified via teleconference from Sitka. She spoke
against HB 329 which she believes is a biased consent bill. This
bill is not to help women in any shape or form who are making a
very difficult decision. Instead it creates shame for women and
infringes on their rights. Already women give consent, are told
all the consequences of any surgical procedure and know what to
expect. This bill is anti-choice legislation. She urged the
committee to not let it go any further.
Number 1601
SANDY DORAN testified via teleconference from the Matanuska-
Susitna (Mat-Su) Legislative Information Office (LIO). She
expressed support for HB 329. She had an abortion 17 years ago
and had something like this been available, she would not have
had one. It is important that women know this information; the
doctors do not share anything like this. When someone is in
crisis, she doesn't always think properly. She commented that
abortion is a life-changing experience and will affect someone
forever. A lot of women don't see that; they see it as a "hurry
up and the problem is fixed." There are many emotional side
effects. She urged the committee to support HB 329.
Number 1534
EILEEN BECKER, Director, Homer Crisis Pregnancy Center, testified
via teleconference from Homer. She indicated that HB 329 is long
overdue. Women in crisis are unable to make a rational decision
at the time. She deals with women in this situation, and they
are desperate and feel like they have no other alternatives.
With the 24-hour waiting period, it gives them a chance to seek
other options. She has never met a women who wasn't sorry for
the decision she made. Informed decision that requires the
doctor's name is important. It is time to allow women to know
all the facts and all the ramifications, good, bad and otherwise.
The main thing she has heard from women who have had abortions is
"I never knew, I never knew how this was going to affect me, I
never knew how I would feel."
Number 1412
ALEATHA MARTIN testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. She
is a family nurse practitioner. She worked in the neonatal
pediatric intensive care unit (NICU), adult intensive care and
holds a Master of Science degree in Nursing and worked with
Community Health Aid Program as an instructor. She had an
abortion over 15 years for an unplanned pregnancy. She needed
help but did not know where to get it. She had read in a
psychology book that there were no lasting effects to abortion
(15 years ago); however, that is untrue. Nobody told her how
painful the actual procedure would be. She experienced
complications following the procedure that resulted in a period
of unconsciousness and a very long recovery period. Years later,
when she and her husband wanted to start a family, she had
difficulty carrying a baby to term due to cervical damage. She
has lost four babies. She nearly lost her son through premature
labor at 23 weeks, and they both nearly lost their lives due to
an experimental drug used.
MS. MARTIN said when she worked in a hospital, she observed
physicians describing procedures that patients were to undergo so
it was clear to the patient what the risks and side effects were.
Giving the knowledge of the entire procedures should be common
practice. She expressed support of HB 329. The fact is "it was
my baby; I have emotional and psychological trauma that I deal
with the rest of my life. And I have the medical experience and
expertise from NICU to recognize that this baby has fingers and
toes and a heartbeat very early on."
Number 1227
REXANN BASSLER testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
is a counselor at a crisis pregnancy center. She recently
counseled a 16-year old girl seeking an abortion who decided not
to get an abortion when she was presented with all the facts.
Ms. Bassler firmly believes that being presented with the facts
helped this girl make an informed and humane decision. She
believes the 24-hour waiting period is important because it
allows women in crisis situations time to contemplate their
decision after they have been presented with the medical brochure
explaining the abortion procedure.
MS. BASSLER shared another story about a young man who had paid
for more than one abortion for his girlfriends. After he saw a
sonogram, "it changed everything." He was clearly suffering from
post-abortion syndrome. She submitted that abortion is not just
about women and babies; there are emotional side effects to
abortion and had the realities of fetal development been
presented to this young man, perhaps he would have been more
responsible in his lifestyle choices and in his decisions to
pressure his girlfriends to get abortions.
Number 1056
KAREN VOSBURGH, Executive Director, Alaska Right to Life,
testified via teleconference from the Mat-Su LIO. She informed
the committee that when a woman is considering abortion, very
little factual information is given, and what is given is often
false. Pre-born babies are sometimes referred to as "pregnancy
tissue," "not alive yet," "just a bunch of cells," or only a
"glob." These descriptions are given at a stage of development
when the baby already feels pain, sucks its thumb and has a
heartbeat. The United States does not have information in the
zone of privacy by federal court ruling because it is
unconstitutional.
MS. VOSBURGH shared some abortion statistics from European
nations with socialized medicine. There are over 100
complications associated with abortion. Some can be immediately
spotted such as a puncture to the uterus or other organs,
convulsions or even cardiac arrest. Other complications reveal
themselves within two days such as a slow hemorrhage, pulmonary
embolism, infection or fever. Records at a hospital in Great
Britain revealed a 27 percent infection rate among women who had
abortions, and 9.5 percent hemorrhaged enough to require a blood
transfusion. Long-term complications usually result from damage
to the reproductive system and can result in chronic infections
or inability to carry a subsequent pregnancy to term or even
sterility. According to one Japanese study, women undergoing
abortions have experienced the following complications: nine
were subsequently sterile; 14 percent suffered from reoccurring
miscarriages; and there was a 400 percent increase in ectopic
pregnancy. Recent studies indicate instances of total sterility
following 4 to 5 percent of all abortions. She reported that the
suicide rate among women who had abortions is phenomenally high.
According to one study, women who had abortions are nine times
more likely to attempt suicide. She also noted the breast cancer
connection with abortion.
Number 0803
HEIDI LIVENGOOD testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. She
is a 19-year old student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
She stated that HB 329 is a very important step in improving the
medical care and education of women in Alaska about abortion.
Abortion is a very popular and serious issue facing many people.
The need to understand all the risks and complications of such a
procedure is essential. Serious complications and risks after an
abortion are pelvic and inflammatory disease, uterine
perforations, possible increased risk of breast cancer and a 30
percent risk of ectopic pregnancy after the first abortion.
After two or three abortions, the rate of ectopic pregnancy
increases to 160 percent. If women are informed about these
risks, then they may choose to give their child to another
family. It is wise to give the mother as much information as
possible before she chooses to terminate the life of her child
before it is born. There is no reason why important information
should be withheld from anyone that is considering abortion.
Number 0699
ROZ JENKINS, Chairperson, Advisory Council, Planned Parenthood of
Alaska, Sitka clinic, testified via teleconference from Sitka.
She pointed out that this bill places an undue burden on the
women of Alaska. Women in Southeast Alaska have to travel to
Anchorage or other places to receive an abortion which adds more
burden and financial cost. She referred to a particular study
that shows after enactment of this law, the proportion of second
trimester procedures increase by 53 percent. She has a copy of
that study if anyone is interested. No woman lightly takes
having an abortion without serious thought to the consequences
and her options.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Ms. Jenkins how would giving the woman the
information increase the cost except for the 24-hour delay.
MS. JENKINS answered that it is the 24-hour delay which increases
the cost.
Number 0584
DR. NELSON ISADA testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He
is a perinatalogist, which is maternal fetal medicine. He is one
of two perinatalogists in Alaska and sees many folks from all
over the state. He expressed some concerns about HB 329. He has
several concerns regarding the number of abortions and the
psychological impact, but he is the one who has to see women at 2
a.m. or 4 a.m. when they come in from Fairbanks with ectopic
pregnancy and placenta previa bleeding. Sometimes these occur in
a previable time. What is or what isn't a medical emergency can
be argued and often is in the eyes of the beholder.
DR. ISADA said he is not terribly interested, when he is seeing
the daughters, wives and girlfriends, in whipping out a flip
chart at 2 o'clock in the morning. Showing a woman the pictures
of how the fetus looks at every two weeks - when she is possibly
bleeding to death - is not an option if he is trying to save her
life. If there is an abnormal fetus detected on an ultrasound,
he and his partner have to see these folks. He noted that the
pictures are misleading. He does do informed consent and has for
the past 22 years. He is the only quadruply board-certified
physician on the planet; he is "boarded" in maternal fetal
medicine, OB/GYN [obstetrics/gynecology], internal medicine and
medical genetics. That is why he sees a lot of folks in this
terribly tragic situation. He understands the intent of the
bill, but he doesn't need this.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said it has been alluded to that there is no
type of counseling or discussion with patients about the impacts
of abortion services and procedures. He asked Dr. Isada what
procedures he goes through in discussing the implications.
DR. ISADA said he spends hours going through informed consent.
He tells women up-front they could die, they could lose their
uterus, they could be depressed or suicidal afterwards; if they
are ambivalent about it, don't even think about it. As a
geneticist he is bound to do nondirective counseling. He can't
tell a woman either way; it is her decision. His job is to let
people know it is medically possible.
Number 0210
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked about the psychological impact to
women who are facing an instance where the child will not be born
alive and are made to go through the whole procedure outlined in
HB 329.
DR. ISADA answered it is very cruel. He understands the women
who have had horrible abortion experiences but he doesn't want to
add to the woman in front of him who is carrying a baby with
defects for example and making her sit through the flip charts.
He will have to her, "It's required by HB 329."
CHAIRMAN DYSON understands that HB 329 has only to do with
elective abortions; nothing to do with abortions of medical
necessity.
DR. ISADA said he doesn't want to threaten anyone; he wants to
help get women through this procedure alive. He would be happy
to work with anyone on this bill.
TAPE 00-33, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN DYSON agreed he is interested in keeping everyone as
healthy as possible and making the best decisions. He wished all
the practitioners were as ethical and concerned as Dr. Isada
appeared to be.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Dr. Isada if the requirements
outlined in HB 329 constitute directive counseling.
DR. ISADA said yes. He said there are other ways to provide the
information. Things could be improved, but he doesn't know if
this is the best way to do it.
Number 0187
KARL ASHENBRENNER, Juneau Pro-Choice Coalition, Member, Alaska
Pro-Choice, came forward to testify in opposition to HB 329. The
Juneau Pro-Choice Coalition is an organization which has
identified more than 5,000 pro-choice voters in House Districts 3
and 4. Juneau Pro-Choice is a member of the Alaska Pro-Choice
Alliance. He read the following testimony:
Our organization's first comment on HB 329 is that it
shows a profound and unnecessary distrust in Alaska
women and their doctors. We believe strongly that
government should refrain from interfering in private
medical decisions and let women make such decisions in
the privacy of their doctors' offices. Bills that
mandate 24-hour waiting periods and biased counseling
are strongly advocated by anti-abortion extremists
because their agenda is to stop all abortions by making
them difficult and/or impossible to get.
It is common knowledge in the pro-choice community that
waiting periods like the one proposed in this bill
force women to confront shouting protestors twice. At
the door of abortion clinics protestors use the
opportunity to collect license plate numbers and
identify patients. In the intervening 24 hours, they
harass patients at home and try to interfere with
whatever plans or decisions they are trying to make.
All sense of privacy is lost for the patient.
A 24-hour waiting period is especially restrictive in a
state like Alaska where women in virtually all but a
few communities are forced to travel great distances,
such as to Anchorage, Seattle or elsewhere, to obtain
an abortion. Women who live in communities where there
is no abortion provider such as Juneau, Fairbanks, and
virtually all bush villages, must travel to Anchorage
or Seattle. The 24-hour waiting period adds to the
length of the expense and the expense of the trip with
extra hotel, food and child care costs and no doubt,
lots of extra stress. It is quite common that 24-hour
waiting periods really turn out to be longer because
not all clinics provide daily services. Such waits can
force women to delay an abortion until the second
trimester of a pregnancy, which doctors claim will
increase the risk of medical complications and
therefore the cost.
Juneau Pro-Choice Coalition also strongly objects to
the provisions of this bill which attempt to bias the
counseling of women in order to talk them out of an
abortion. First, Alaska regulations already require
that doctors provide patients with information about
the possible consequences of an abortion. The
additional requirements for counseling that are
included in this bill are unnecessary and in the case
of rape and incest victims, absolutely outrageous.
The requirements to provide information in photos of
the physiological characteristics of the fetus reminds
our group of the Right to Life exhibits at the state
fair. They ignore the legal issue of fetal viability
and instead to play with the emotions of women by
confronting them with the pictures of fetuses, forcing
rape and incest victims to endure this is particularly
insensitive and outrageous.
Also the information required concerning child support
is biased. It would leave out information that more
than $570 million are overdue child support. They're
owed to Alaskan families. More than half of the 37,000
child support cases are in arrears according to
statistics from our own Department of Revenue, and this
would not be included.
We encourage the committee to stop this bill; the 24-
hour waiting period is a ploy to assist protestors and
invading a woman's right to privacy, and counseling is
biased. The legislature needs to be addressing the
real problems of Alaska such as our lack of a fiscal
plan and the plight of abused children. This bill
tries to create answers for problems that do not exist.
Number 0508
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Ashenbrenner if he thought department
should repeal the current regulations on informed consent.
MR. ASHENBRENNER said he believes the existing regulations on
informed consent are more than adequate.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Ashenbrenner if his organization would
have any objection to this bill if it just had the things that
are in the regulations.
MR. ASHENBRENNER answered no.
Number 0592
DEBBIE JOSLIN came forward to testify and read the following
testimony:
My husband Steven and I live in Delta Junction with our
three children: Matthew, Emily and Victoria. Steven
is the resource forester in our area. I am a
homeschooling mom. I teach third and fourth grade
Sunday School at our church.
On January 15, 1999, I was 22 weeks pregnant when we
drove 100 miles to Fairbanks for an ultrasound on our
child. After a lengthy examination of the baby, I was
told we were expecting a male child with multiple
anomalies. The baby we named Isaiah John had a brain
cyst, a missing or unconnected stomach and a
hypoplastic left heart.
We were given the name of a perinatologist in
Anchorage. A perinatologist, as I understand it, is a
doctor who specializes in unborn babies who have
serious health complications. I spoke to this
specialist over the phone and made arrangements to go
to Anchorage and have another ultrasound. During that
phone conversation she urged me to have the pregnancy
terminated without even examining me. The reasons she
listed were that the baby would probably die anyway,
the medical expenses would be too great and that my own
life was probably in danger. Keep in mind, I hadn't
been examined at this point. I made an appointment
with this doctor because I had been told she was the
only perinatologist in the state; now I find out there
are two.
My husband and I drove 350 miles to keep that
appointment, leaving Delta at 40 below zero. When we
arrived for our appointment, we first saw a genetic
counselor who went over some family history with us and
explained that they thought Isaiah probably had Trisomy
18, a chromosomal abnormality (an extra number 18
chromosome). ... She expressed surprise that we were
not considering terminating the pregnancy and asked
several times whether we wanted to consider terminating
the pregnancy.
Another ultrasound was performed by a technician, and
then the perinatologist took over the exam and listed
the following anomalies: brain cyst, missing or
unconnected stomach, hypoplastic left heart, eyes not
properly spaced, underdeveloped chin, something wrong
with spinal development, something wrong with his
penis, rocker-bottom feet, possibly an extra toe and
fluid in the abdominal cavity and lungs. We were told
the fluid indicated that Isaiah was already in
congestive heart failure and that he would never make
it to his due date in May.
The perinatologist told us that Isaiah would never
respond to us if he were to live; we were told that all
Trisomy infants were severely mentally retarded. She
described a somewhat vegetative state but said that
more probably he would be stillborn any day. She said
that if he were to be born alive, he would only live
for a few minutes. Later they adjusted it to a few
hours, and then later yet they said maybe a day at
most, and then finally, much later the doctors were
saying a few days. We agreed to an amniocentesis that
day to determine whether Isaiah did actually have
Trisomy 18. Our hope was that he would not, and we
could begin then to make plans for heart surgery. She
told us doctors will not operate on Trisomy infants
since they ALL die in infancy anyway.
You can imagine what heavy hearts we had as we drove
back to Delta. The plans and dreams I had had for my
son were shelved as we instead discussed his funeral.
Within a few days, I got a call from the genetic
counselor with the preliminary test results which
showed Isaiah had Trisomy 13. I asked how that
differed from Trisomy 18, and she said it was worse.
She asked again about termination, and I told her again
that we were not interested in that.
Almost immediately I got a call from my doctor in
Fairbanks, who asked me about termination. I told her
again that I was not interested in that. She told me
that since my life was in danger ... and I had chosen
to continue with the pregnancy, she could no longer be
my doctor as she was a general practitioner and not
qualified to handle such a case. I began seeing the
osteopath doctor in Delta and an OB/GYN in Fairbanks.
I told them what I had been told about the baby and
about my own health. The OB/GYN doctor told me he
could not understand why I had been told my life was in
danger. He treated me during the remainder of the
pregnancy, and I never had any complications or
problems--only the usual complaints pregnant women
suffer from.
A couple of weeks after the preliminary results, the
genetic counselor called with the final results from
Isaiah's amniocentesis. It was final--Isaiah had
Trisomy 13. She asked me again about termination, and
I told her no again. I then asked her out of curiosity
what she would do if I did say yes. She got very
excited and told me that "there is the most wonderful
clinic in Kansas." I asked if she meant Dr. Tiller's
clinic and she said, "Yes, do you know him?" "No," I
told her, "but I know about him." She offered to have
other women who had had abortions call me, but I
declined.
Sensing that I was not interested in pursuing this
further, she told me in a very apologetic voice that
there is a parent support group, but well...they are
rather positive. She made it sound as though positive
was a bad thing to be. She then went on to tell me
that she had information on this group, including an
800 number as well as pamphlets and books in her office
that gave detailed information about Trisomy 18, 13 and
other disorders including pictures.
I called S.O.F.T. (Support Organization for Trisomy 18,
13 and Related Disorders) right away and found that
they were indeed positive, but realistic. I told the
woman over the phone about Isaiah's diagnosis, and she
told me that probably they were right, but there was a
chance he could live. She talked to me about the
parents and I remember asking her, "Parents, you mean
they have live children?" "Yes, some did," she said.
"How old?" I was told that they varied, but there were
a few children who were teenagers and even a couple of
adults. The lady took my name and address and told me
she would send me a family packet right a way. I also
requested the books they had available: Trisomy 13, a
Guideline for Families and Care of the Infant and Child
with Trisomy 18 or 13. These were the books the
genetic counselor had described, the very ones she had
in her office. While the information was
heartbreaking, it also offered some hope and some help.
Those were two things we hadn't had much of. Not only
did some of these children live, they played and smiled
and laughed and talked and learned things and showed
affection and responded to love and affection.
We located a wonderful pediatrician in Fairbanks who
agreed that Isaiah's chances were not good, but she was
willing to do what she could to help him. We made the
decision to hire her and made plans to deliver our baby
in Fairbanks. On May 19, 1999, only 11 days before his
due date, Isaiah John Joslin was born at Fairbanks
Memorial Hospital. He weighed 6 pounds, l ounce and
was 18 1/4 inches long. Isaiah was a pretty baby with
lots of bright red hair. Isaiah had difficulty
breathing when first born, but as the doctors and
nurses checked him over, they could find no sign of the
problems seen earlier on three different ultrasounds.
The brain cyst, the stomach problem and hypoplastic
heart were all missing as were all of the other
problems earlier noted. No rocker-bottom feet; his
eyes were fine; there was no extra toe. However,
Isaiah suffered from a ventricular septal defect (VSD)
- a hole in his heart. Although very serious, it was a
far cry from the problems he had had earlier. Isaiah
required oxygen and a nasal gastric tube for feeding.
Because of the hole in his heart, he was too weak to
nurse and had to be fed with a tube. Isaiah looked so
normal that even the nursing staff agreed we should
retest him. Test results again showed Isaiah to have
Trisomy 13. He stayed in the hospital for 12 days and
then came home where we cared for him for 20 days
before he left us to go to be with the Lord in heaven.
Those were some of the hardest but the sweetest days of
my life.
I am telling you this story so you can understand why I
stand before you today and ask that you pass HB 329.
After talking to other doctors and doing a great deal
of research on my own and reading about Trisomy infants
and because of my own personal experience, I believe my
life was never in any danger. Yet, this undue burden
was placed on me at a time when I already had plenty to
worry about. I believe this was done to try and
convince me to have the abortion.
I was told that ALL Trisomy infants die. I now know
that somewhere between 90 and 95 percent of all Trisomy
infants die before one year of age. That doesn't leave
much room for hope, I realize, but it is quite
different than saying they ALL die.
I was not told about the parent support group
(S.O.F.T.) for over two weeks, not until they had
finally given up on talking me into an abortion. Well,
you may say they were not sure your child had Trisomy
until the final results were in. Perhaps, but they
were sure enough that they continually brought up
termination. I drove 350 miles to see the doctor and
was never shown the written information about this
disorder that they had right there.
Though they were careful to tell me every negative
thing they could about the baby, I was never told of
any of the risks of having an abortion. There was
never any mention made of the risk to my health, either
physical or emotional from having the abortion.
I believe the doctors who repeatedly brought up
termination probably meant well. The problem comes in
where they apparently believed that their professional
status, or their medical degrees placed them in a
position to know better than me what was best for me,
my family and my baby. That simply is not true.
Giving life to Isaiah was hard on our family; but it
wasn't TOO hard. It was expensive; but it wasn't TOO
expensive. It was hard on the other children; but it
wasn't TOO hard on the other children. Giving life to
Isaiah blessed our family, including the other
children. Because of his heart condition, Isaiah was
always lethargic and sleepy and tired acting, but he
was never in pain. The equipment which monitored his
oxygen saturation rate showed that whenever we held him
or showed affection to him, Isaiah was aware of it.
His saturation levels would soar when he was being
loved on.
My daughter Emily, who is five, loves to recount the
story of how Isaiah's oxygen saturation level was in
the 60s the night before he died. I laid him in
Emily's arms, and immediately his saturation level rose
to 100. There seems to be a feeling out there that a
successful life is one that is free from pain or
suffering or trials, and that isn't true. Isaiah's
life was successful. We loved him, and he loved us.
We have been comforted and encouraged ever since
Isaiah's death by reading of other families with
Trisomy children in the S.O.F.T. newsletter. The
letters and testimonials are all expressions of the
love each family has for their infant or child. Many
of them include pictures of their precious children,
most of them deceased, but some still living. Some of
them tell stories of medical professionals pressing
them to have abortions are very similar to our
experience. Without exception, every family expressed
love and gratitude for the time they had had with their
children, no matter how short.
Uniform written information should include basic facts
regarding fetal development and the risks associated
with continuing the pregnancy versus terminating the
pregnancy. Crisis pregnancies come in many different
forms. For some women it can be a simple as finding
out about WIC [federal Special Supplemental Nutritional
Program for Women, Infants and Children], others may
not even be aware that the child's father is legally
responsible for helping to provide support. Over 90
percent of all babies diagnosed prenatally with Downs
Syndrome are aborted. Could it be that those women
don't know about the parent support groups out there?
There is a wealth of information out there, and it
would be a great help to doctors to have a booklet they
could hand out to their patients.
Of course, I would like for every mother to make the
same decision I did, but I realize that won't happen.
But every mother deserves to have all of the
information pertinent to her situation so that she can
make an intelligent informed decision. I stand before
you today and say that if you vote against HB 329, you
are saying, in effect, that women are not competent
enough to be trusted with the facts regarding the
health of their own bodies and that of their unborn
children. A "no" vote says that you have no
compassion for families and believe that doctors are
better suited to make decisions for women and their
unborn babies.
A "yes" note for HB 329 sends an entirely different
message. A vote for informed consent says that you
have respect for the intelligence of women and you
believe that they have the right to be trusted with the
information necessary to make decisions for themselves.
I trust and hope that this body of legislators will
prove themselves to be in favor of women's rights.
MS. JOSLIN commented on some questions to previous testimony and
shared photos of her baby.
Number 1426
DANIELLE SERINO, Staff to Representative John Coghill, Alaska
State Legislature, came forward and read the written testimony of
Wendy S. Cloyd:
When I began my family in 1993 with the birth of my
daughter, Carli Ann, I was thrilled to begin the
journey of parenthood. I don't think I'd ever
contemplated the miracle of life until I'd been a part
of such a miracle. I had my second daughter, Candra,
in 1994, then my son Matthew in 1996. I was pregnant
with my fourth child in 1998 when I first learned that
my son had Fragile X syndrome, an inherited genetic
disorder which causes a myriad of issues, including
mental retardation and autistic-like behavior.
From that moment forward, there was a change in
attitude in almost every health professional I
encountered. Each of them seemed to express with
urgency the need for me to have an amniocentesis to
determine if the child I was carrying was Fragile X
positive also. My immediate response was to tell them
that I would wait for the child to be born before I had
any test; after all, the information would not be used
to determining whether or not I would keep the child,
only for the purpose of preparation, if needed.
Whispered and hushed tones usually followed suggesting
that if I changed my mind, to let them know. They
seemed to imply, that when I came to my senses, to let
them know!
In the meantime, my other two children were tested, and
the results of those tests determined them to be
positive for the full mutation of Fragile X Syndrome
also. Each child has a 50-50 chance of inheriting the
defective gene from a carrier mother or father. Three
of three, so far were positive. With these results,
doctors again urged me to have my unborn child tested.
Again, I wondered what urgency they saw, other than to
give me the option of terminating the pregnancy. Often
with tears, I let them know that to consider my current
pregnancy "disposable" gave the unarguable implication
that the three already living in this world had less
value.
I tell you, not one medical professional ever
volunteered to give me the entire story of abortion.
It was presented as the only logical choice if a child
were found to be carrying the full mutation of Fragile
X Syndrome. The idea that those in the medical
profession might find it an "unnecessary nuisance" to
treat abortion with the seriousness that it demands is
lunacy. A doctor will tell you not to be out in the
sun if you are taking certain antibiotics, to avoid
driving after taking a sedative and on and on. Why
would it be too much to ask for a doctor to tell a
patient the ramifications of abortion on a woman's
body? I would have to assume that, in their minds, to
do so would put the responsibility of a woman's
physical and emotional health in their hands, and that
seems to be more than they want to be accountable for.
I urge you to make informed consent a simple and
mandatory event in the discussion of abortion by those
in the medical profession.
Number 1563
ANN HARRISON testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. She
has 35-years experience as a registered nurse and women's health
care practitioner. The health of women and children has been the
focus of her vocation. She and her colleagues provide pregnant
women with unbiased information and since 1994 have been
providing informed consent. They speak professionally and
without judgment and do not make decisions for others. The vast
majority of women who decide on terminating their pregnancy do so
with great thought, knowledge and soul searching.
MS. HARRISON strongly opposes HB 329. It is biased and anti-
abortion, one sided and can only add to the stress of an already
difficult time. Her conscience and professionalism have dictated
that she educate pregnant women on the legal options of
pregnancy: carrying to term and parenting, giving the child up
for adoption, or terminating the pregnancy. She commented that
pregnancy can be a joyous occasion for women or a very
distressful time for women and the consequences can be serious
and lasting. From that standpoint, she believes that
professional knowledge about and compassionate abortion
counseling is critical.
Number 1695
DAWN HOOKS testified via teleconference from Anchorage in favor
of HB 329. She gave the following testimony:
At the age of 18, I was preparing myself for the
upcoming fall to enter college. Two weeks before I was
to leave home for school, I found out that I was seven-
weeks pregnant. I was ashamed and very disappointed.
I had been on the pill and thought that I was
protecting myself. I told my mother and later told my
boyfriend of the news hoping that someone would counsel
me on what to do. My mother told me it was my choice,
and my boyfriend thought I had to get on with my
college plans and pursue my career. I did not know
what to do. I thought about my goals and placed them
as my guiding decision.
I called numerous clinics and finally spoke to a nurse;
she told me to come in the next day. I was told that I
was so early in my pregnancy that the doctor would just
be removing tissue. Had I known what she called tissue
was my child--a living, moving, breathing part of me--I
would not have had an abortion. If I was told all the
facts and then given time to discuss this, or review
them for myself, I would not have had an abortion. If
I had been told what the procedure truly was, and the
truth of fetal development, I would not have aborted my
child 14 years ago. I can visually remember everything
that led to that dreadful decision in my life. As I
daily come to terms with that decision, I find it hard
to stand by and let someone make the same decision that
I did without knowing the truth of what an abortion is
and its consequences. I witness to the fact that
daily. I think of my child and realize that I did not
give myself or my child a chance because I did not know
the facts. I received more information regarding
getting my wisdom tooth pulled than I did choosing an
abortion.
Number 1781
RUBY FLETCHER testified via teleconference from the Mat-Su LIO.
She had two abortions and wanted to share how they affected her
life. After the abortions she became more intent on justifying
her right to choose abortion; she hated the booth at the fair
because it showed her what she had done. She would become
depressed at certain times of the year, and she didn't know why.
She chose shortly after the abortions never to trust men, which
caused many problems in her relationships; she began to use drugs
and alcohol to numb the pain. She has loads of guilt and shame
when she thought of her aborted babies and thought they hated
her. Eleven years and three children later, she had a
miscarriage at the same state of development as her aborted baby
and realized what her aborted baby looked like. No one had given
her that information. During the aftermath of the miscarriage,
she grieved for three babies. She wished somebody would have
told her what her babies looked like; not that it was just a glob
of tissue. She expressed her support for HB 329. It is
important that women know what their babies are.
Number 1891
DR. COLLEEN MURPHY testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
opposition to HB 329. She read the following testimony:
I am an obstetrician-gynecologist who currently
practices in private practice in Anchorage, Alaska. I
have been in the state since 1987 and have delivered
over 2000 babies.
I'd like to speak against SSHB 329.
I believe it is a very dangerous precedent into the
practice of medicine by our legislators. There are
very dangerous ambiguities contained in this bill and
serious professional implications of allowing Alaskan
lawmakers to define patient treatment options.
As the American College of Obstetrics and
Gynecologist's Executive Board stated in January 1999
[Statement of Policy]: "The intervention of
legislative bodies into medical decision making is
inappropriate, ill advised and dangerous." As well as
the American Medical Association resolved in 1999 to
oppose such practices of procedure-specific informed
consent finding them "informed consent requirements for
specific medical procedures often are not medically
indicated and are never appropriate areas for
codification in law."
Regardless of what one thinks of about abortion,
legislative intrusive in the licensed practice of
medicine has very serious implications to the future of
the profession of medicine in Alaska.
These biased counseling laws, like waiting period
requirements, residency requirements, physician only
laws, and an array of other restrictions, are not
created to protect women's health. The purpose is very
clear. These laws are enacted to make a woman's very
personal decision even more difficult. Biased
counseling laws intimidate women and discourage them
from seeking legal medical care and exercising their
legal reproductive rights. Fear of criminal sanctions
and the intrusive nature of these state prescribed
litanies also serve to deter doctors from performing
abortions, further exacerbating the present shortage.
Opponents of choice only hope that if they create
enough barriers like these that women will not be able
to overcome them.
I speak firmly in opposition to this bill. I feel it
does a disservice to my patients and to your
constituents statewide.
CHAIRMAN DYSON referred to the Roe v. Wade decision and said as
he remembered it, it said that the state had an increasing civil
rights type interest in the second and third trimesters, and he
asked Dr. Murphy if she and her profession disagreed with that.
Number 2011
DR. MURPHY answered no, she believes the issue right now is the
right to privacy. What is so interesting about HB 329 is how it
is procedure specific. It does not seem that there is any sort
of effort on the part of the legislature to be creating such
codification for appendectomies, mastectomies, or any sort of
procedure. Realistically, much of the previous testimony is
based on informed consent done very many years ago. The standard
of practice has radically changed in the last ten years. The
medical/legal environment has radically changed. It is now the
standard of care to provide a complete, concise, age-appropriate
consent for virtually any sort of medical procedure, including
abortion. Abortion should not be singled out for a detailed
consent that is codified in the state law.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if it was fair to infer in her view that
there is nothing fundamentally different about an abortion than
any other legal medical procedure.
DR. MURPHY replied that an abortion is a medical procedure that
is offered to a woman as part of the spectrum of prenatal care.
There are some women who do not elect to continue a normal
pregnancy; there are some women that become pregnant because of
sexual assault; there are some women that have pregnancies that
are abnormal that they elect not to continue. It is a spectrum
of medical care that is legally provided in this country at this
time.
CHAIRMAN DYSON said "So in your view, there is no basis on which
we ought to consider the rights of the unborn child."
DR. MURPHY noted that the rights of the unborn child is a very
complex issue. Currently she is involved in a case where they
are trying to determine the beginning of life. "Frankly, if you
look at the Alaska state statutes, it's defined as 'the presence
of a heartbeat after birth as well as the presence of
respiration.' So you need to look elsewhere where the definition
of life has already been defined for criminal intent."
Number 2143
RUTH EWIG testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. She
thanked Representative Coghill for sponsoring informed consent
before abortion. Abortion has been legal for 27 years yet there
has been no accompanying law ensuring that pregnant women will be
provided with the facts and risks of the abortion procedure to
her and obviously her baby. She recommended the book Lime 5. It
was the physician's discretion in each one of these case
histories not to inform the women who are now either dead or
permanently physically injured for life as the result of legal
abortion. Lime 5 does not address emotional injury; that would
require another larger book. She encouraged the committee to
read this book.
Number 2217
MARVELLE WILLIAMS testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
favor of HB 329. Several years ago she found herself going
through an unwanted pregnancy. She was under the misconception
that because abortion was legal, it was safe. After all, the
fetus was not considered a child until it was born anyway. She
was told she would experience a little pain and discomfort. No
one told her about the years of guilt, remorse nor the
unexplained depression. Had she been fully informed, she would
have made another choice.
Number 2276
CATHY GIRARD testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
stated that informed consent as it stands is not broken; please
don't try to fix it. She is bothered by the government's
continual pursuit to restrict Alaskans' freedoms to make their
own reproductive decisions. Informed consent is nothing more
than biased redundant counseling. Alaska already has an informed
consent law for all medical procedures. She doesn't believe it
is the legislature's business to mandate a woman or couple to
wait for a medical procedure that could prevent a baby from being
carried to full term because abortion is already legal and
equally as important, safe. If she were faced with an unintended
pregnancy, her counseling would be with friends, family and her
own chosen sources, not a state-assigned counselor. Since she is
responsible to pay taxes, she feels she is responsible to make
her own parenting decisions on her own terms.
MS. GIRARD continued, furthermore, HB 329 has changed the federal
definition of pregnancy to the degree that it would render IUD
[intrauterine device] and emergency contraception illegal in the
state of Alaska. Currently, both methods are legal, simple and
inexpensive ways to keep a fertilized egg from implanting in the
womb and therefore prevent a future abortion. Abortion is
stressful; but what about bringing an unwanted child into the
world? An unwanted child, whether aborted or birthed, presents
emotional and physical consequences no more or no less than the
other during those pregnancies and long after the pregnancy as
been aborted or carried to term. "If you are going to require
two week incremental photos of fetus growth, I hope you are also
going to require photos and statistics of what it's like to give
up a baby for adoption. Or how about when a raped woman or
incested girl might feel like after she sees her assailants face
in her child's face? Or what it takes to become a parent? It
appears that the underlying motivation for HB 329 is to dissuade
pregnant girls and women from having abortions. This does not
treat the three options, abortion, adoption and parenting, with
equal consideration."
TAPE 00-33, SIDE B
Number 2353
KATHERINE DAVEY testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
is a health educator in Anchorage. She spoke today as a woman, a
daughter and an adopted person, a life-long Alaskan and a voter.
She strongly opposes HB 329; it is inaccurate, insensitive,
unrealistic, irresponsible, dangerous, and it places as undue
burden on Alaskan families. She appreciated Dr. Nakamura's input
on the inaccuracies of the definitions within the bill. She
would never challenge another person's belief about when life
begins and believes that is best left to philosophy and religion.
MS. DAVEY went on to say that HB 329 is insensitive regarding
counseling a woman that the father is liable financially; that is
unrealistic, as has been discussed previously, when the degree of
compliance is noted. Even with federally mandated networking
programs, only 15 states have signed up for that with a 20
percent success rate in getting the child support money. She
cannot imagine a woman who has been raped being counseled that
she can rely on the support of that rapist to provide money for
that child. To force a woman to view gestational developmental
pictures is especially insensitive when that pregnancy is wanted.
She concluded that this is a dangerous bill. She noted that
Mississippi passed the 24-hour waiting period and the incidences
of second trimester abortions went up 53 percent; that is in a
state where women can go to adjacent states and receive medical
procedures. Women are not just restricted with a 24-hour time
period; it ends up being weeks and weeks. Second trimester
abortions are much more risky.
Number 2244
ROBIN SMITH testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
opposition to HB 329. She stated that this bill questions
women's intelligence and their moral decision-making
capabilities. The same woman's intelligence she questions will,
nine months later, have total parental control over another human
being simply if she endures a pregnancy. Does giving birth make
a woman more intelligent or equal to men in making moral
decisions? There already is a 24-hour waiting period for any
woman considering abortion. This is a typical scenario:
First, am I pregnant? How many days late is my period,
three, four, a week? Then the home pregnancy test -
positive. Could it be wrong? Go to a medical clinic
and get a real pregnancy test. The test is positive;
what do I do? Have the baby, be a parent; choose
adoption; how about abortion? ... I've seen the
pictures on TV so I know what a fetus looks like. I
decide on abortion; I call the doctor's office to
schedule an appointment; I cannot have one until I am
seven-weeks pregnant. It will cost $550, and I have
one more week to wait. The reason that they have to
wait until seven weeks is because the doctors can't
determine whether or not the tissue is actually the
fetus until seven weeks. I arrive at the clinic, ... a
nurse or physician talks to me to make sure this is my
decision and I'm not being coerced into having an
abortion by a parent or a partner. Am I aware of my
other options? Do I fully understand the procedure? I
sign the standard consent form; the abortion is
performed.
This is no simple decision. It is now three full weeks
from the first day the woman missed her period. Do you
really feel an additional 24-hour waiting period is
needed or just an added burden. ...Where will I get the
money? The state is not paying for abortions for poor
women despite a court order. I need to fly to
Anchorage. Where will I stay? Who will take care of
my children? Putting more obstacles in front of women
just increases a woman's health risk; pregnancy is not
benign; women do die in pregnancy.
MS. SMITH shared a story which suggested a better way would be to
require responsible sex education in school. It would have an
impact on both men and women. This could potentially prevent
unintended pregnancies and therefore abortions. She urged the
committee to consider more appropriate action and vote no on this
bill.
Number 2115
JOYCE LAINE testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
opposition to HB 329. She said she gave birth to a child 34
years ago after an unsuccessful illegal abortion attempt. She
gave the child up for adoption feeling that was the only choice.
She began living as another person, a person who had not had an
out of wedlock child, and it has been only in the last few years
that she has reemerged as a person who did that. She spent the
better part of 34 years being ashamed because she had a child.
She was date-raped and only figured that out a few years ago; all
this time she thought it was her fault. That was a heavy burden
that spoiled her family relations and lost friends. Twenty three
years ago, she and her ex-husband adopted a five-year girl who
was not given up by her mother at birth, nor was she aborted
because the mother was married at the time. The mother was
woefully inadequate as a parent. She beat the child, the child
was sexually abused, neglected, shut in closets and made to
suffer dreadful things because she was kept by somebody who had
no business of being a parent. Going ahead and having a baby
does not ensure that that child will live happily ever after with
some loving family who adopts him/her. She stated that this bill
is woefully inadequate, unnecessary, badly phrased and very
biased.
Number 1986
JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director, Alaska Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU), testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
referred to the earlier question of How does this bill increase
the cost of abortion? In addition to what has already been
mentioned about the 24-hour delay, specifically that will
increase the complication of the surgery and increase the level
of specialization required. In addition to increased costs in
the delay due to rescheduling work, family and school
obligations, there is also increased cost from the biased
counseling provisions of the bill.
MS. RUDINGER said HB 329 prohibits a trained counselor or nurse
or another health care practitioner from providing the counseling
to the patient, requiring instead that a doctor deliver the
state's message. This stipulation has a direct effect on women's
health and also drives up the cost. Many clinics experience
serious difficulty in finding doctors willing and able to perform
abortions, and the few who are available often find themselves
barely able to meet the needs of their patients. By prohibiting
doctors from delegating the counseling and related tasks to other
trained professionals, this bill would make it far more difficult
for clinics to provide women with the health care that they
deserve. Furthermore, since the doctor's time costs much more
than that of a nurse, clinician, social worker, or counselor, the
doctor-only stipulation drives up the costs of abortion and other
health services provided by clinics.
MS. RUDINGER noted that the members of the ACLU oppose this bill
because they believe it is unconstitutional under the Alaska
constitution. She concluded with these points: Biased
counseling gives women inaccurate and incomplete medical
information; requiring that physicians deliver the biased
lectures makes access to quality reproductive health care more
difficult and expensive; informed consent is already required for
medical procedures; biased counseling requirements violate
standard medical practice and the doctor/patient relationship;
waiting periods cause medical risks; waiting period laws demean
women's decision-making ability.
Number 1853
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Ms. Rudinger if she would be willing to help
the sponsor craft this bill so the information dissemination
isn't biased.
MS. RUDINGER replied the entire bill is biased in the language
and the requirements; there is no way to make this bill unbiased.
She basically said no.
Number 1805
LAVERNE PETTIGER testified via teleconference from Anchorage.
She expressed her support favor of HB 329 because it fills a need
that is not there. Women can make an informed decision about
abortion. She had an abortion 19 years ago, but there were many
things that were not told to her then. The medical risks for the
abortion procedure were not mentioned nor were infection, breast
cancer, infertility, or psychological effects. There was no
alternative to abortion. No pictures of the unborn child's
gestational age were shown either.
MS. PETTIGER said she believes if she had gotten all the
information, she could have made a better decision at that time.
When people are in crisis, they need more information to make an
informed decision. Her abortion was paid for by the federal
government, and she doesn't believe that should have happened.
She doesn't remember doctor's name; he was vague about any
information about the procedure. He never told her about any of
the side effects. She regrets having an abortion. It comes down
to giving people the facts so they can make informed decisions.
She believes she would have her baby today if she had been given
the facts.
Number 1688
LEILA WISE, Alaska First Choice Alliance, a statewide coalition
of organizations united in the commitment to protect reproductive
rights, testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She made
the following testimony:
We oppose HB 329 and urge you to vote against this bill
and to not pass it out of committee. The decision to
choose an abortion is personal and private, and it's
best left to a woman in those individual (indisc.) that
she chooses to advise her--her family, her friends, her
clergy, her physician. The provisions of this bill are
invasive and punitive and are seemingly based on
inaccurate information about medical practices and
terminology.
As I have sat here today, I've been struck by the
testimony of other women who had abortions many years
ago and who speak of not receiving the information that
they would have liked to have obtained then. I'm happy
to report that the standard of care has changed and
that women today receive full and accurate information
from their physicians and health care providers.
I would also like to point out that the women who spoke
today about choosing against abortion in the recent few
years were provided information about the status of
their pregnancies and made and exercised their freedom
of choice to continue their pregnancies to term. I
commend them for exercising their choices just as I
applaud those women many years ago who exercised their
choice at that time. This bill is inaccurate; it uses
incorrect definitions. Abortion is a medical procedure
and relying on Black's Law Dictionary is inappropriate;
it is best to use only medically accepted and accurate
terminology, and I appreciate the willingness of you to
look at those definitions instead.
In particular, we are concerned about the definition of
conception, and that it could in fact ban the use of
contraceptives, since contraceptive use is the best way
to prevent pregnancy and abortions. This bill is
intrusive; no other medical procedure requires a 24-
hour waiting period for all women and no other waiting
period of any kind punishes women exclusively.
Abortion, like any other surgical procedure, requires
informed consent. As with any surgical procedure, the
physician and his/her staff convey that information.
Are you going to require informed consent for
(indisc.)? Will pregnant women and their families be
shown pictures of the gestational age of children and
then pictures of children as they develop through life,
children who may have severe birth defects? Are you
going to discuss the consequences of having a child and
not receiving support from an absentee father?
... This bill is dangerous. Women in Alaska already
face enormous burdens and challenges in locating
abortion services. Many women must leave their homes
even to obtain a first trimester procedure; it creates
an enormous financial burden. Imposing a 24-hour
waiting period will magnify that burden and as has
already been pointed out would allow anti-choice
extremists to harass women ... This bill dehumanizes
women; it patronizes women; it shames them. We are
very concerned about that. We believe that women are
smart enough, responsible enough, capable enough, to
make their own choices and to take responsibility for
those choices.
Number 1486
HUGH FLEISCHER testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He
considers it to be inappropriate for the state of Alaska. He
opposes the passage of HB 329 and believes it is
unconstitutional. He respectfully asked the members of the House
to not pass HB 329.
Number 1438
CAREN ROBINSON, Lobbyist, Alaska Women's Lobby, came forward to
testify. The Alaska Women's Lobby is a citizen activist group
formed in 1982 dedicated to equality, and they strongly are
against HB 329. Her experience included being director of the
AWARE [Aiding Women in Abuse and Rape Emergencies] Shelter
working with victims of rape and incest and being involved in
working with women across the state. She urged the committee to
reconsider the 24-hour waiting period. The main reason is women
already go through a long process to decide to carry the
pregnancy to term or to get an abortion. She doesn't know of
anyone she has talked to who has found out she is pregnant and
that day got an abortion. It usually has been a long, well-
thought out process. Women in Alaska have to seek out the
information of who and where they can go for an abortion. She
recommended training people to advocate for themselves in medical
situations to ask the questions. She urged the committee members
to not pass the bill out of the committee and let the normal
process continue to work as it does. [HB 329 was heard and
held.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 5:59 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|