HOUSE BILL NO. 160 An Act requiring the reporting of induced terminations of pregnancies. REPRESENTATIVE JOHN COGHILL, SPONSOR, spoke in support of the legislation. He noted that the legislation would implement a reporting system on abortion. He observed that the reporting system would provide information on teen pregnancy while protecting confidentiality. The information obtained through the provision would allow the state to respond to policy issues ranging from contraception to education. There would be a 30-day reporting period. An annual report would come through the Bureau of Vital Statistics. Most states have similar programs through their Bureaus of Vital Statistics. There is a $78 thousand dollar fiscal note. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) support the legislation. The legislation would provide information on the number of abortions, the number of abortions tied to various health issues, percentage of abortions in each trimester, and the number of abortions in rural vs. urban areas. Representative John Davies acknowledged protections to confidentiality but questioned how the statistics would be derived. Representative Coghill explained that the legislation does not require comprehensive reporting, but would be an additional tool to be used in assessing what is happening in the state. DANIELLE SERINO, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL provided information on the legislation. In response to a question by Representative Bunde, she clarified that Planned Parenthood and the Alaska Right to Life organizations testified in support of the legislation in previous hearings. Representative Coghill observed that there are certain monetary benefits to the state based on the number of abortions, which would benefit Planned Parenthood. The statistics could also be used to support a case for some other public policy. Ms. Serino explained that insurance would not be negatively affected by definitions contained in section (b) of the legislation. Representative Coghill reiterated that the intent is to determine the number of abortions in the state of Alaska through the Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Vital Statistics. He observed that there are no reports at the current time, which include these statistics. Live births, fetal deaths and some sexually transmitted diseases are reported through the Bureau of Vital Statistics. The category would be protected through confidentiality. KAREN PEARSON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF VITAL STATISTICS, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, spoke in support of the legislation. She clarified that the legislation would bring the state into compliance with the CDC guidelines and maintain privacy protections. The change in the definition of fetal death would not have any other implications beyond statistical information. The Division concurs with the fiscal notes. KAREN VOSBURGH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA RIGHT TO LIFE, MATSU, testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. She questioned if there would be data regarding the cause, age of mother, work status, location (outpatient or office) or the trimester that the abortion takes place. Representative Coghill explained that the report form would note the type of abortion (whether it was a live birth), gestational period, and national origin or race status. Ms. Serino explained that the report would have much of the information mentioned but noted that personal information would not be available to the public. The patient would not be identified. The final report would have the summation of the statistics. Representative Coghill observed that the statute only requires a report of the fact that there was a termination of pregnancy. Ms. Vosburgh expressed concern that death of the mother be reported. ANNE HARRISON, FAIRBANKS, testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. She noted that the statistics could be used for scientific and research purposes, but expressed concern regarding lapses in confidentiality. She referred to section 6: "fetal death" means death before the complete expulsion. She questioned if any sign of life in the fetus after the abortion would put the provider in legal jeopardy. She referred to section 8 line 2 and stated that she would add a period after: "induced termination of pregnancy" means the purposeful interruption of an intrauterine pregnancy." She felt that the remainder of the section was redundant: "with the intention other than to produce a live-born infant, and that does not result in a live birth, except that "induced termination of pregnancy" does not include management of prolonged retention of products of conception following fetal death." She felt that the language was emotionally charged and should be clarified. Representative Coghill observed that the language was copied from the Family Planning Prospective Volume 30, Number 5, Appendix B. BOB LYNN, PRESIDENT, ALASKA RIGHT TO LIFE, ANCHORAGE, testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He maintained that more and better information can do nothing but help regardless of one's stance on the issue. He observed that governmental policy makers and health providers could use the data for a multiple of purposes. He observed that some studies have shown an association between induced abortion and breast cancer. Adequate reporting of abortion, linked to the reporting of breast cancer could resolve important questions. Representative John Davies questioned the necessity of language on page 4, lines 3 - 6. Ms. Serino explained that induced definition of pregnancy is used by the CDC and felt that the language should remain. She added that "does not include management of prolonged retention of products of conception" relates to DNC procedures following abortions. Representative Coghill stated that if the language were changed that he would recommend the inclusion of the language by Planned Parenthood, which is more encompassing. Ms. Pearson explained that the definition is intended to prevent the classification of the procedure where the fetus has terminated prior to the expulsion, in order to get an accurate account of what areas actually induced terminations, as opposed to procedures needed to deliver a fetus that is no longer alive. Co-Chair Mulder referred to the fiscal note. He MOVED to report CSHB 160 (JUD) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSHB 160 (JUD) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a new fiscal impact note by the Department of Health and Social Services.