03/08/2001 03:02 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES
STANDING COMMITTEE
March 8, 2001
3:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Fred Dyson, Chair
Representative Peggy Wilson, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Gary Stevens
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Sharon Cissna
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Reggie Joule
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 43
"An Act relating to reimbursement of certain student loans; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 43(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 112
"An Act relating to information and services available to
pregnant women and other persons; and ensuring informed consent
before an abortion may be performed, except in cases of medical
emergency."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 43
SHORT TITLE:STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)GREEN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/10/01 0049 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/10/01 0049 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
01/12/01 0073 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KERTTULA
02/07/01 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/07/01 (H) Heard & Held
02/07/01 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
02/14/01 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/14/01 (H) Moved CSHB 43(EDU) Out of
Committee
02/14/01 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
02/16/01 0341 (H) EDU RPT CS(EDU) NT 2DP 5NR
02/16/01 0341 (H) DP: GREEN, WILSON; NR:
STEVENS, JOULE,
02/16/01 0341 (H) GUESS, PORTER, BUNDE
02/16/01 0341 (H) FN1: (EED)
03/08/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 112
SHORT TITLE:ABORTION: INFORMED CONSENT; INFORMATION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)COGHILL
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/05/01 0241 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/05/01 0241 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
02/05/01 0241 (H) REFERRED TO HES
03/08/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
KEVIN JARDELL, Staff
to Representative Joe Green
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 403
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 43 on behalf of the
sponsor.
DANIELLE SERINO, Staff
to Representative John Coghill
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 102
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 112.
GERAN TARR
PO Box 1233
Girdwood, Alaska 99587
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 112.
DEATRICH SITCHLER
520 Glacier Bay Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 112.
EILEEN BECKER, Director
Homer Crisis Pregnancy Center
PO Box 2
Homer Alaska. 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 112.
JACKIE BLOOD
PO Box 1143
Delta Junction, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 112.
HUGH FLETCHER
(No address provided)
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 112.
KAREN VOSBERGH, Executive Director
Alaska Right to Life
PO Box 1847
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 112.
AMY BOLLENBACH
PO Box 3429
Homer, Alaska 99603
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 112.
JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director
Alaska Civil Liberties Union
PO Box 201844
Anchorage, Alaska 99520
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 112.
KAREN PEARSON, Director
Division of Public Health
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110610
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 112.
PETER NAKAMURA, M.D.
2346 Ka-See-An Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 112.
RENEE GAYHART
PO BOX 22237
Juneau Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Through written testimony read by Jenny
Persell (ph), testified in opposition to HB 112.
AMBER CEFFALIO
Juneau Pro-Choice Coalition
PO Box 21872
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 112.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-24, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR FRED DYSON called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.
Representatives Dyson, Coghill, Stevens, Kohring, and Cissna
were present at the call to order. Representative Wilson
arrived as the meeting was in progress. [The minutes for the
Confirmation Hearing: University of Alaska Board of Regents are
found in the 3:45 p.m. minutes for the same date. The minutes
for the Helping Kids Succeed/AK Initiative for Community
Engagement overview are found in the 4:40 p.m. minutes for the
same date.]
HB 43-STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS
CHAIR DYSON announced that the committee would hear testimony on
HOUSE BILL NO. 43, "An Act relating to reimbursement of certain
student loans; and providing for an effective date."
Number 0238
KEVIN JARDELL, Staff to Representative Joe Green, Alaska State
Legislature, came forth to testify on HB 43 on behalf of the
sponsor. He stated that Representative Green identified a
problem with the number of teachers in the state, specifically a
shortage of teachers in certain geographical areas and in
certain subject matter areas. He said the goal of HB 43 is to
increase the number of students studying in these subject matter
areas where there is a shortage and encourage students upon
graduation to begin their teaching careers in the geographically
underserved areas. He remarked that HB 43 accomplishes these
two goals by implementing a targeted loan forgiveness program
that builds upon and encourages students to meet these two
special needs.
Number 0346
MR. JARDELL stated that in order for teachers to be eligible for
the loan forgiveness program they must meet four criteria.
First, they must have received a teaching certificate, degree,
or endorsement from an in-state college or university. Second,
they must be employed in a public elementary or secondary
school. Third, they must be employed within a geographically
underserved area or in a subject matter area that has a shortage
of teachers.
CHAIR DYSON asked whether somebody would be required to get a
certificate through an Alaskan university if he or she went to a
school outside of Alaska.
MR. JARDELL answered that [he or she would]. He said that the
district, not the university, issues the endorsement for the
certificate. If a student obtained the credit hours necessary
for that endorsement in-state, then he or she would qualify for
the program.
Number 0450
CHAIR DYSON asked if, currently, a credentialed person from out
of state has to take additional courses in Alaska in order to
get an Alaska teaching certificate.
MR. JARDELL replied that he understands that the person does
[have to take additional courses in Alaska]. He continued,
stating that the fourth requirement is that the person has to be
in compliance with loan requirements under AS 14.43.120, meaning
he or she cannot be in default on his or her loan. He clarified
that [these four requirements] are for individual eligibility,
and that there are additional requirements for the loan itself
to be forgiven. He stated that, after looking at the history of
loan forgiveness programs, Representative Green is allowing only
loans taken after 60 credit hours to be eligible for the
forgiveness programs. Mr. Jardell said the reason for this is
because, in the past, there have been high default rates for the
forgiveness program. The thought was that people enter the
first two years [of school] with the belief that they will never
have to repay their loan; they never complete a degree program
and end up having to pay a debt that they never intended to pay
back. He remarked that the graduation success rate is
dramatically improved by requiring [loan forgiveness] only after
the first 60 credit hours.
CHAIR DYSON asked who decides what areas are geographically
underserved, and which [subject areas] qualify as having a
shortage of teachers.
Number 0600
MR. JARDELL answered that the legislation [provides for] the
Postsecondary Education Commission to make that decision. He
stated that it was believed that giving the commission latitude
in trying to ascertain what areas have a shortage would provide
the best opportunity for the program to work.
CHAIR DYSON asked if [the Postsecondary Education Commission]
has agreed to have that role.
MR. JARDELL responded that it is his understanding, in
discussing the bill with them, that they believe they could
handle the obligation through implementing regulations.
CHAIR DYSON asked if [the Postsecondary Education Commission]
had asked for a budget increment to take on that responsibility.
MR. JARDELL answered that they asked the legislation to clarify
how this would be funded. He stated that it is a GF (general
fund) funding mechanism, and if there is no appropriation, there
will not be a program.
Number 0695
CHAIR DYSON asked if the [present] fiscal note covers
administration and the cost of forgiving loans.
MR. JARDELL replied that he didn't know, but that it was his
understanding that it does [include all costs]. He continued,
stating that all loans taken after the [first] 60 credit hours,
if the student meets the individual eligibility requirements,
can be forgiven up to 100 percent over a five-year payout.
Number 0779
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA remarked that there are many incentives
[with this program], which are needed in order to make sure
people go to Alaskan institutions and stay in Alaska. She
stated that she thinks it is necessary, in the [geographically]
underserved areas, for people to stay and teach there, because
the chances of their staying are much greater than having
someone come from Southeast and go up to Barrow. She asked if
there was any thought of making an extra incentive for someone
to go home [to the geographically underserved areas] to teach.
MR. JARDELL answered that it was discussed, but it is difficult
to come up with incentives and utilize the resources that are
best available. He stated that Representative Green believes
that encouraging the in-state participation would persuade
people to stay longer than five years. He pointed out that
there is a program available to rural students who want to teach
through which their loans are forgiven 100 percent.
Number 0900
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked how [the loan forgiveness] is
prorated if someone has accumulated 55 credits and is in the
middle of a semester in which he or she is taking another 15
[credits].
MR. JARDELL responded that the intention of the legislation is
that [the loan forgiveness] would be prorated. If a person has
55 credit hours and takes a loan out for an additional 15 credit
hours, the commission and the Alaska student Loan Corporation
would run the program in a manner allowing a portion of that
loan, on a prorated basis, to be forgiven.
CHAIR DYSON stated that in hearing testimony on a previous bill,
the committee realized that the term "schoolteacher" may not
include certificated librarians and counselors. He asked if [HB
43] intends for all the certificated personnel in the facility
be included.
MR. JARDELL answered that it is his understanding that in any
area where a person would receive a teaching certificate,
whether it be a librarian or counselor, and there is a shortage
he or she would be eligible for the forgiveness program.
Number 1028
There was a motion to adopt CSHB 43(EDU), 22-LS0225\S, as the
working document, but it was already before the committee.]
CHAIR DYSON asked Mr. Jardell if he would object if the
committee offered an amendment [22-LS0225\S.1, Ford, 3/8.01],
which read:
Page 2, following line 25:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(f) In this section, "teacher"
includes a librarian, counselor, or other
person who possesses a valid teacher
certificate issued under AS 14.20.020."
MR. JARDELL replied that he has seen the amendment and believes
that it would be consistent with what [Representative Green]
hopes to accomplish with the legislation.
Number 1088
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING made a motion to adopt the forgoing as
Amendment 1. There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 1115
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked Diane Barrans whether [Amendment 1]
will have any impact on the fiscal note.
DIANE BARRANS, Executive Director, Postsecondary Education
Commission, Department of Education and Early Development, came
forth and answered that it may have an impact on the fiscal
note. She stated that it is her understanding that the
assumptions used to develop the cost in the fiscal note
accompanying this version of the bill relied just on those
classroom employees.
CHAIR DYSON remarked that it might [affect the fiscal note],
depending on whether there is a shortage of counselors or
librarians somewhere, but it is not known for sure.
MS. BARRANS answered that he was correct.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked if principals would be a part of
this as well.
CHAIR DYSON answered, from his reading [of the bill], that they
would if there were a shortage of them.
Number 1220
MS. BARRANS stated that, specific to the fiscal note, there are
no administrative costs incorporated. The [Postsecondary
Education Commission] administers a number of small programs,
which she believes to not have a significant direct cost
associated with them. She said it would be her determination
that this would fall under that category. She added that she
believes the [Postsecondary Education Commission] is working
with the commissioner of Education and [Department of] Early
Development and could come up with criteria for shortage by
regulation.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked if [the Postsecondary Education
Commission] is prepared to prorate [the loan].
MS. BARRANS replied that the intent of the sponsor is not clear
in the bill. She understands that the individual would not
receive a benefit for the term prior to passing over the 60-
credit threshold. She explained that trying to prorate that
sort of benefit for the loan for a single term would be
administratively cumbersome for the [Postsecondary Education
Commission's] and for the institution that's certifying the
level of credits. She stated that she believes the basic
structure of the bill is built around the typical 15-credit
full-time course load, and doesn't think that there would be a
great number of students that this would pertain to.
Number 1328
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS remarked that he understands it would be
the first semester after the completion of 60 credits.
CHAIR DYSON asked Mr. Jardell if he wanted to try to solve this
problem or let it stand as it is.
MR. JARDELL responded that when [the bill] was written, the idea
was to come up with a methodology that didn't produce the high
default rates that forgiveness programs have had in the past.
He stated that 60 credit hours was what Representative Green had
chosen, and looking at it again it does seem to indicate that
someone would have to have completed the 60 hours before taking
out the loan. He stated that he believes leaving the bill as it
stands would accomplish the overall goal without the
administrative problems that seem to be indicated.
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING asked why the legislation only applies to
public schools.
MR. JARDELL replied that because of the limited resources
available, Representative Green hoped to restrict it to the
public education system, where there seems to be the most
problems with shortages.
Number 1413
CHAIR DYSON called for an at-ease at 3:26 p.m. The meeting was
called back to order at 3:27 p.m.
CHAIR DYSON asked Ms. Barrans whether there would be problems if
there was an amendment that took out the word "public" on page
1, line 9.
Number 1437
MS. BARRANS replied that private school teachers are a sort of
unknown quantity, and she is unsure of where to look to see how
many there are in order to estimate a fiscal impact.
CHAIR DYSON asked [if she is also unsure of where to look] to
certify that there is a shortage.
MS. BARRANS answered yes.
Number 1475
REPRESENTATIVE KOHRING made a motion to adopt a conceptual
amendment striking the word "public" anywhere it is used in the
bill. There being no objection, Amendment 2 was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS remarked that the point of [HB 43] was to
target both geographically underserved areas and subject areas.
On [page 1], line 10, it says, "is employed within a
geographically underserved area of the state or is employed in
the state to teach a subject for which there is a shortage of
teachers". He stated that it has been amended so the word
teacher includes librarians, counselors, or other persons who
possess a valid teaching certificate, and he understands there
could be shortage [of these professions] geographically. He
asked if this would affect the subject areas where there are
teacher shortages, because it doesn't seem as if librarians,
counselors, and other persons fit in to this [category].
Number 1589
CHAIR DYSON called for an at-ease at 3:31 p.m. He called the
meeting back to order at 3:38 p.m.
Number 1591
CHAIR DYSON offered a conceptual amendment on page 1, line 11,
after "teachers", to add: "or works in another professional
capacity for which a shortage has been identified". There being
no objection, Amendment 3 was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report CSHB 43(EDU) as amended
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB
43(HES) was moved from the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee.
Number 1636
CHAIR DYSON called for an at-ease at 3:40 in order to hold the
joint meeting with the House Special Committee on Education.
[The minutes for the confirmation Hearing: University of Alaska
Board of Regents are found in the 3:45 p.m. minutes for the same
date.]
CHAIR DYSON called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee back to order at 3:57 p.m.
HB 112-ABORTION: INFORMED CONSENT; INFORMATION
Number 1638
CHAIR DYSON announced that the committee would hear testimony on
HOUSE BILL NO. 112, "An Act relating to information and services
available to pregnant women and other persons; and ensuring
informed consent before an abortion may be performed, except in
cases of medical emergency."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL remarked that this is one of the hotly
debated items in [Alaskan] society right now, surrounding the
abortion issue. He stated that this particular [bill] does not
circle around the debate as far as whether abortion is or isn't
[accepted], but is to get the best possible information to
somebody who is considering [having an abortion]. He stated:
It is a decision. Certainly, there's a choice
involved. Our society has agreed that there is; I
disagree with that as a matter of policy. But the
fact is we're there. So I introduced this bill just
to say, "Let's go ahead and get some information about
social services, about what the gestational period is,
get some graphic material ... so that people have
information to read."
Number 1730
DANIELLE SERINO, Staff to Representative John Coghill, Alaska
State Legislature, came forth to testify on HB 112. She stated:
HB 112 focuses on Alaska's current informed-consent-
before-abortion provision. Since 1970, Alaska has
recognized that abortion is unique in comparison to
other types of medical surgeries and thus necessitated
a separate informed-consent standard. Alaska's
current provision substantially lacks in content and
also has not been updated since 1973.
HB 112 seeks to elaborate on this provision and
elevate it to statute. It is not the intent of this
bill, in any form, to hamper or hinder access to
abortions in this state, or to insinuate that
physicians are currently providing inadequate
information to their patients. Currently in Alaska
statutes the only requirements before an abortion is
performed are that the physician be licensed by the
state, that the facility be approved by the state, and
that the patient have been present for at least 30
days in the state before the procedure is performed.
HB 112 would insert into these statutes an informed-
consent provision, along with a higher standard of
physician liability, and also ask that the state
develop an informational pamphlet designed for
pregnant women that lists both abortion and pregnancy
resources and options that are available to women in
making their choice.
To date, 31 states, including Alaska, have some type
of law addressing informed-consent standards for
abortion. Alaska's law is unique or different in
[the] fact that our provision exists only in
administrative regulation and not statute. HB 112
seeks to set a guideline in Alaska statutes for
abortion informed consent that is open to physician
flexibility in tailoring the information to the
individual needs of the patient.
Number 1811
MS. SERINO summarized:
The intent of this bill is to ensure that women are
backed by Alaska law in that they have the direct
access they need to the best information possible for
their situation without putting a hamper on their
access to the procedure itself and in protecting their
individual right to privacy and circumstances
surrounding that choice.
Number 1919
GERAN TARR came forth to testify in opposition of HB 112. She
stated:
I believe the role of a legislature is to work towards
enactment of public policy that meets the needs of the
people of the state. House Bill 112 does not do this
and, in fact, makes a necessary medical procedure more
difficult for individuals [who], by law, have a right
to it. Unplanned pregnancy is not just an Alaskan
problem, but a national problem that has drastic and
often negative consequences. As a young woman in the
prime of my reproductive years, my reproductive health
is of primary concern. I am offended by this bill
that implies I do not take this seriously, as it
implies that if pregnant, I would not fully research
all of my options before making a decision. Whether I
would decide to have an abortion or to have a baby, I
fully understand the lifelong implications of my
decision, as do all women, I believe.
I wonder if the sponsor of this bill has spent the
many, many hours discussing the scary prospect of
becoming pregnant at a young age when you are in the
beginnings of planning your future. I doubt it. This
is very much a woman's problem, and we all know no
contraception is 100 percent effective. I watched
last year, terrified, as a similar bill passed through
this same committee. Passage of this bill will not
stop abortion. It has always been a part of our human
culture. One should read Eve's Herbs by noted
historian John Riddle for more information.
When I return to Anchorage, I will become a part of a
training program to become an advocate for children
who are in the custody of the state. This program
exists because these are children, 1200 of them in the
Anchorage area alone, that have no one else.
Currently, this program can only meet the needs of a
third of these children. This saddens me. I don't
believe these children have the emotional capacity to
understand why no one wants them. I have also
volunteered in domestic violence shelters for several
years. Again, in this setting, the severe problems
that often follow unplanned pregnancies and unplanned
families are underscored.
Number 1996
MS. TARR stated, in conclusion:
... From looking at the fiscal note, I can see that
the new requirements have significant cost associated
with them, and I would ask that if these funds are
available from the general fund, they be used instead
to prevent pregnancy through education and by
providing contraception to those who want it but may
be financially burdened and unable to obtain it.
Number 2041
DEATRICH SITCHLER testified via teleconference in opposition to
HB 112. She shared:
At the age of 14 I was diagnosed with hemophilia, a
disease affecting the blood. As a result of this
condition, it has become medically dangerous for me to
carry a pregnancy to term. The loss of blood during
the deliver would be potentially fatal to me. I am in
a long-term committed relationship, and my partner and
I are very careful, but as everyone knows, no form of
birth control is 100 percent effective. Were I
accidentally to become pregnant, it would be in my
best medical interest to terminate the pregnancy
rather than carry the pregnancy to term. I strongly
feel that this is a decision between me and my partner
and the advice and consult of my doctor. The
government has no place in personal, painful choices
that I would have to make. Furthermore, my partner
and I would find if very painful to have to listen to
a litany of alternatives to abortion, alternatives
that are not actually in my best interest and that
could actually threaten my life before I would be
deemed capable of consenting to this abortion.
My biggest objection is to the definition of the
medical emergency. I would not fall under the medical
necessity exception to HB 112 because having an
abortion at that very moment would probably not be a
life-saving measure or an emergency situation.
Therefore, I would be subject to this extra counseling
which would be wholly irrelevant to my individual
circumstances. ... This termination of this pregnancy
would be to save my own life. Why should these extra
hurdles be placed before me that are not placed before
any other patient seeking any other medical treatment.
I feel that this is a doctor-patient issue and that I
should be able to determine, along with my doctor,
what is in my best interest.
Number 2122
EILEEN BECKER, Director, Homer Crisis Pregnancy Center,
testified via teleconference in favor of HB 112. She stated
that she has had quite a bit of counseling experience with women
who have been "post-aborted". She said she knows for a fact,
firsthand, that had these women had the information included in
this bill, they probably would have made a different choice.
She remarked that perhaps the choices they would have made would
have been a lot better. She stated that she thinks it is time
for the State of Alaska to do something that is good for the
women of Alaska, good for their future, and good for their
decisions that they are going to make.
Number 2171
JACKIE BLOOD testified via teleconference in favor or HB 112.
She stated that as a woman, she feels it is essential to provide
pregnant women with scientific and objective information
concerning the development of their babies. She said it is also
very important to provide clear and unbiased information to
women about the abortion procedure and what an abortion is
actually doing to their babies and their own bodies. She stated
that this is not like any other medical procedure because this
involves the welfare of another life. She added that
information concerning adoption services should be encouraged.
She concluded that this type of information is basic, necessary,
and really should not cause any woman or health care provider
undue duress.
Number 2255
HUGH FLEISCHER testified via teleconference in opposition to HB
112. He stated:
Rather than expend the government's money and the
attorneys' time and energy, it would be best just to
simply stipulate that the matter is subject to
injunction if you wish to pass it, because it doesn't
make any sense. It's a ridiculous bill' and it should
be thrown out.
Number 2305
KAREN VOSBERGH, Executive Director, Alaska Right to Life,
testified via teleconference in support of HB 112. She stated
that anytime there is information that would help women make a
fully informed decision, it should go forth. She remarked that
when women are considering an abortion, very little factual
information is given, and what is given is often false, such as
calling [the fetus] pregnancy "tissue", "a bunch of cells" or
only a "blob." She noted that these are descriptions that are
given at the stage of development when the baby already feels
pain, sucks its thumb, and has a heartbeat.
MS. VOSBERGH stated that unfortunately, the abortion industry or
the general press is not doing anything to warn women
considering abortion about its high rate of risks. She said
that several states have, however, implemented right-to-know
laws, and she thinks Alaska should follow suit. She mentioned
that there are over 100 potential complications associated with
abortion, and noted that Great Britain revealed a 27 percent
infection rate among women who had aborted, of whom 9.5 percent
hemorrhaged enough to require a blood transfusion. She stated
that long-term complications usually result from damage to the
reproductive system, causing chronic infection, the inability to
carry a subsequent pregnancy to term, or even sterility.
TAPE 01-24, SIDE B
Number 2350
MS. VOSBERGH remarked that according to one Japanese study, 14
percent of women undergoing abortion suffered from recurring
miscarriages and there was a 400 percent increase in ectopic
pregnancies. She stated that Swedish and Norwegian studies
indicate a total of about 5 percent sterility following
abortions. She stated that if 1.3 million women are having
abortions in this nation and 5 percent are rendered sterile,
that's over 50,000 women. She stressed that [women] need to
know what could happen to them if they have an abortion. She
mentioned that there was a study by California researchers that
found the risk of breast cancer doubled among women who aborted
their first pregnancy. Another study done by Janet Daling, M.D.
of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, showed
a 50-90 percent increase in breast cancer risk for women who had
their abortions before the age of 18.
MS. VOSBERGH continued, stating that researchers at the New York
State Department of Health used computer records to track every
case of breast cancer [in women] under the age of 40 outside of
New York City. Short-term pregnancies before the first live
birth correlated with a 90 percent higher risk of breast cancer.
She added that right now there are studies underway to determine
if there is a link between abortion and the high instances of
cervical cancer among women who have aborted. She stated that
according to a paper to be published shortly by the Royal
Statistical Society, the number of cases of malignant breast
cancer diagnosed each year will, by 2030, have risen from 30,000
to more than 50,000. She added that Patrick Carol (ph), an
actuary who wrote the report, said there is a lot of cancer "in
the pipeline." The breast cancer-abortion association shows at
least a 50 percent increase, and up to a 150 percent increase,
depending on the [woman's] age at the time of the abortion.
MS.VOSBERGH continued, stating according to one study, women who
have had abortions are nine times more likely to attempt suicide
than are women who have not had abortions. When a woman is
considering this "life-changing" decision, she needs
information. She stated:
I do not understand why the "pro-aborts" are so
against having women know everything there is to know.
... They need to know what that baby's like that
they're carrying inside; they need to see what that
baby is.
Number 2731
AMY BOLLENBACH testified via teleconference in opposition to HB
112. She stated that she appreciates that HB 112 was improved
from the last year's version in objectivity and legality, but
she is still opposed to the bill because the purpose appears to
slow down and reduce the opportunity to obtain an abortion. She
remarked that she personally would have no objection to a
pamphlet prepared by the Department of Health & Social Services
that would give information, if it were truly objective.
MS. BOLLENBACH remarked that the worst part of HB 112 is Section
4, lines 20-28, describing medical emergencies. She remarked
that "medical emergency" is defined in such a narrow way that it
would frighten doctors away from performing abortions under
medical emergencies and would endanger women's lives. She added
that she has had experience teaching at Anchorage Community
College in women's studies and other areas; she counseled many
young women there, and she is aware that some women who have had
abortions are psychologically upset, some who didn't have
abortions are psychologically upset, and some are very relieved
after they have had abortions. She stressed that it is very
hard to get objectivity in this field.
Number 2131
JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director, Alaska Civil Liberties
Union, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 112.
She stated that she agrees with Amy Bollenbach that this version
is better than the version that was "floating" around last year;
however, it still poses hurdles and obstacles that are placed in
the paths of women seeking abortions that are not placed in the
paths of women who want prenatal care or any other medical
treatment. She stated that there are several points where HB
112 is either overbroad or false. First of all, she said, the
mandatory extra counseling, referred to in the bill, goes beyond
what doctors might consider to be relevant to that patient. She
expressed that this is a relationship between a doctor and a
patient, and there is nobody better able to decide what is
relevant to the patient's circumstance than someone who is
trained in medical sciences. She added that the government
should not superimpose its judgment.
MS. RUDINGER stated that the bill refers to possible
psychological effects that have been associated with having an
abortion, but there is no medical evidence that abortion causes
psychological injury. She stated that requiring this
information is wrong, false, misleading, and certainly, at the
very least, subject to debate.
MS. RUDINGER, referring to the pamphlet, said that every patient
is different and what's in the pamphlet might not actually be
what's happening to that woman. It's up to the doctor to talk
to [the woman] about what's happening, her choices, and what she
wants to do. She summarized that requiring that physicians give
these lectures to a woman - as opposed to having a nurse, nurse
practitioner, or physician's assistant do it - makes the
delivery of this health care more expensive and more difficult.
Number 1974
KAREN PEARSON, Director, Division of Public Health, Department
of Health & Social Services, came forth to testify on HB 112.
She stated:
The Division of Public Health supports what seems to
be the intent of HB 112, which is ensuring that all
women seeking an abortion are fully informed prior to
signing consent for the procedure to be done. Since
this is currently required prior to any surgical
procedure being performed, and is considered essential
by the medical provider community, we question the
need for a law specific to the abortion procedure. I
believe we are in agreement that each woman seeking an
abortion needs information about the physical,
emotional, psychological, and medical risks and
benefits of both pregnancy and abortion.
MS. PEARSON remarked that this bill seeks to address the need
from the abortion perspective by requiring that each woman be
provided a detailed and lengthy informational document, and
requiring that the physician sign a form indicating that she has
read the document, understands it, and understands its relevance
to her. She continued:
Some women would find such material informative, but
many women are low literacy, illiterate, or have
English as a second language; they will not be served
well by this process. Many individuals who have
reading problems are very skilled at hiding them from
those of us that have better skills; thus it can be
very difficult for a physician to ascertain, with any
degree of certainty, that a woman who has been
provided the written materials really was able to read
and comprehend the information that's so important to
her.
Number 1904
MS. PEARSON continued, stating:
Providers are accustomed to explaining procedures,
risks, and benefits relative to medication options,
treatment options of all kinds, and are being able to
follow up on questions and concerns as they arise.
They are used to tailoring the information given to
meet the specific needs of the patient being seen and
there are many individual health issues that [a]
physician must address with each patient, no matter
the procedure to be performed. These needs are not
well served when large volumes of written material
that may or may not be relevant to that particular
individual are required first in order to verify the
person is informed. The language, the culture, the
age, and numerous other relevant factors, specific to
each woman, must be considered when we're deciding how
to provide information in the most usable form and
manner. And only the provider and the patient,
together, can figure out what communication and
information needs to take place so that a truly
informed decision can be made.
MS. PEARSON stated, in conclusion:
The substantial costs reflected in the fiscal note to
compiling the information are significant, and I would
offer the resources of the division to work with you
to provide information for informed consent, but it is
not our belief that this is the best use of the funds
to produce information.
Number 1805
PETER NAKAMURA, M.D., came forth to testify on HB 112. He
stated that his comments are based on 40 years of practice in
health, both as a physician and as a public health specialist.
He remarked that there are a certain number of principles used
when making decisions, such as honesty or the cost of services.
He remarked that he would like to address two [principles]:
prevention and the influence of individual beliefs - including
cultures and religions - as they impact on the issue of health.
He stated that it is not beneficial to interfere with issues
that would prevent the negative consequences that do, very
often, come with unintended pregnancies. He stressed that it is
necessary to not present barriers that get in the way of
unintended pregnancies. The alternative is to wait until
[unintended pregnancies] happen and end in treatment, which is
not as effective as prevention.
DR. NAKAMURA mentioned that he read an article that said the UN
(United Nations) is going to take on a special charge to address
the first marriage of children in some countries, many in the
Middle East. Many of these cultures allow kids to be married at
the age of 12. He stated that the issue, then, is whether to
respect that culture and allow that practice to continue or to
look at the negative outcomes and say, "Hey, [we'd] better try
to stop that." This is an issue the UN has decided to step in
on and say it is more important to address the health issues
than the special cultural issues. He concluded by stressing
that it is important to address the issues of prevention as well
as the potential negative impact of special cultural or personal
beliefs.
Number 1580
RENEE GAYHART testified through a written statement read by
Jenny Persell (ph). Ms. Persell stated:
House Bill 112 would require that health care
professionals give information to women who are
seeking an abortion in an attempt to prey on their
emotions and frighten them so that they won't get an
abortion.
This bill would require a health care professional to
show a woman pictures of fetuses and to describe the
anatomical and physiological characteristics of a
fetus. This is a tactic well known to anti-abortion
extremists who ignore issues of fetal viability and
try to play on the emotions of pregnant women by
confronting them with pictures. The bill requires
that women be told about adverse psychological effects
of having an abortion, yet what about the adverse
psychological effects of sitting through this biased
counseling for a woman who has been raped or is a
victim of incest? Incidentally, there are studies,
one done by the World Health Organization, that could
find no medical evidence that abortion causes
psychological injury.
Leave the details of informed consent up to the people
that understand the health risks of pregnancy and
abortion. Abortion is being singled out for these
counseling requirements because the sponsors want to
outlaw abortion.
The harm from the restrictions the sponsors of this
bill wish to impose are felt most by those who have
the fewest resources: low-income women, minors, rural
women, working women without insurance or sick leave,
and battered women.
Many in this legislature talk a great deal of less
governmental intrusion, and this would be a good time
to practice what you preach. Leave these matters up
to women and their doctors.
Number 1553
AMBER CEFFALIO, Juneau Pro-Choice Coalition, came forth to
testify in opposition to HB 112, which she thinks would require
women to go through biased counseling before getting an
abortion. She stated:
I certainly favor health professionals giving patients
informed consent before undertaking a medical
procedure. To my knowledge, there is no reason to
think that women seeking abortions are not given all
the information they need to make a reasoned decision.
Legislatures should not be in the business of telling
medical professionals what is and is not important to
advise a patient. Legislatures should not single out
abortion for [the] biased-counseling requirement.
Legislatures should be more concerned about women's
health and not trying to coerce them into carrying a
pregnancy to term by whatever possible means.
Mandatory anti-choice lectures don't give women
unbiased, meaningful medical information. Rather,
they are told a laundry list of possible and rare
complications that may occur from having an abortion.
[HB 112 was held over.]
Number 1488
CHAIR DYSON called for an at-ease at 4:38 p.m. in order to hear
the Helping Kids Succeed/AK Initiative for Community Engagement
overview. [The minutes for the Helping Kids Succeed/AK
Initiative for Community Engagement overview are found in the
4:40 p.m. coversheet for the same date.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|