Michigan Legislation – Current/Pending

For more information, click on the links of the bill numbers below to see and print the actual bill or act. 

Abortion Provider Funding Ban

S.B. 162 – Sen. Patrick Colbeck

H.B. 4221 – Rep. Steven Johnson

Current Status
S.B. 162 was introduced on February 15, 2017 and referred to the Senate Oversight Committee. H.B. 4221 was also introduced on February 15, 2017, and referred to the House Appropriations Committee. A time frame for action on either of the bills has not be established.

Description
S.B. 162/H.B. 4221 declares that state departments shall not contract with or distribute grant money to organizations that advertise for and perform elective abortions. The bills would not eliminate the expenditures, but would redirect both state and federal money away from abortion providers.

Background
Abortion providers in the state receive thousands of dollars of both state and federal money for family planning services. While family planning services serve a legitimate function, it is the policy of the state that abortion is not considered family planning. Nationally, Planned Parenthood alone receives half a billion dollars in federal taxpayer money to perform STI testing, cancer screening and contraceptive counseling and distribution. Technically, family planning money is not be used in the performance of elective abortions, but each dollar received by abortion providers for other services augments the fiscal bottom line of the abortion provider.

History
There have been numerous efforts throughout the United States to defund Planned Parenthood specifically as they are the nation’s largest abortion provider. There have been budgets that have attempted to reduce or eliminate funding directly from the state to organizations that provide abortions. This bill would create a legislative avenue to permanently redirect the funds rather than having to negotiate it out of each annual budget.

**********

Choose Life License Plate
S.B. 163 – Sen. Patrick Colbeck

H.B. 4222 – Rep. Shane Hernandez

Current Status

Sadly, on June 30, 2017. Governor Snyder vetoed the Choose Life Plate! There will be no attempt to override the Governor’s veto.

S.B. 163 passed the House on May 25, 2017 with a vote of 65-43. Several pro-choice representatives gave testimony against the bill and several pro-life representatives gave testimony in favor of the bill. Ultimately, the bill passed mostly along party lines with two Democrats voting in favor of the bill. S.B. 163 was voted out of the House Transportation Committee along party lines on May 16, 2017. On May 9, 2017, the House Transportation Committee heard testimony regarding S.B. 163. RLM provided written testimony as they were unable to testify in person because the committee haring coincided with their Legislative Day. Christen Pollo, the executive director for Students for Life of Michigan testified in person on behalf of the Choose Life Plate. Again, bizarre testimony from the opposition included claims that pregnancy resource centers are “baby snatching organizations.” The full Senate voted in favor or S.B. 163 mostly along party lines on April 27, 2017. Pro-choice Senators offered several amendments and gave testimony against the bill. Pro-Life Senators gave excellent testimony and each amendment was voted down. The Senate Transportation Committee voted to approve S.B. 163 along party lines on April 18, 2017. Testimony was given by RLM which addressed claims that pregnancy resource centers were “baby snatching organizations that positioned themselves near college campuses in order to secure white babies from educated women!” Several committee members asked probing questions of the Planned Parenthood representative and RLM’s legislative director. S. B. 163 and H. B. 4222 were introduced on February 15, 2017, and were referred to the Senate and House Transportation Committees, respectively.

Description

S. B. 163 & H.B. 4222 create the Choose Life Michigan fund within the Michigan Treasury where funds from the sale of specialty “Choose Life” license plates will be deposited. Funds generated by the sale of “Choose Life” plates in Michigan will be directed to the Choose Life Michigan fund. The board of the non-profit pro-life committee, Choose Life Michigan, will then dispense the money to organizations that submit grant proposals for specific abortion prevention projects. The bill stipulates that the funds will be used to promote alternatives to abortion, including adoption, provide practical support to pregnant women, and conduct outreach to at-risk populations regarding positive pregnancy options.

Background

Twenty-nine other states offer “Choose Life” specialty plates. Over 21 million dollars have been raised nationwide from the Choose Life plates to aid in life affirming alternatives to abortion. Michigan is the only state along the I-75 corridor that doesn’t have a Choose Life plate, and it has been one of the most requested items by our members. While Governor Snyder claimed he wasn’t going to sign any specialty plate legislation, he has signed four bills into law during his tenure – Breast Cancer and Cervical Cancer Awareness, Ducks Unlimited, Donate Life and Boy Scouts.

History

Various forms of this legislation have been introduced in the past seven previous sessions. Governors Granholm and Snyder have effectively blocked passage of the previous bills over those 14 years.

**********

Clinic Licensing Enforcement Act

S.B. 164 – Sen. Patrick Colbeck

Current Status

S.B. 164 was introduced on February 15, 2017, and referred to the Senate Oversight Committee.

Description

P.A. 499 of 2012 – the Pro-Life Omnibus Law – requires that abortion clinics that publicly advertise and perform at least 120 abortions per year must be licensed as a free-standing outpatient surgical facility. Currently, clinics are allowed to remain open while working to become compliant with the heath and safety standards required under the law. S.B. 164 will reverse the standard and require that clinics will be closed and will not have their licenses renewed until they are compliant with the law.

History

It took almost three years after the passage of the 2012 clinic licensing law for the last of Michigan’s remaining abortion clinics to pass inspections and become licensed. However, the inspectors often five clinics a list of thing that must be done in order to bring a clinic into compliance and give those clinics several weeks and several chances to meet those requirements while allowing them to remain open for business. Unfortunately, some abortion clinic operators have learned how to play “cat and mouse” with the inspectors and put off necessary repairs, updates and health standards.

Background

The clinic licensing law has worked to put the worst of Michigan’s abortion clinics out of business. The 17 surgical abortion clinics that remain open in the state have had to submit to inspectors by the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and have to comply with the standards of a Free Standing Outpatient Surgical Facility. Those standards protect the health and safety of women who regrettably seek abortion services. In order to prevent clinics from slipping through the cracks and allowing violations of the health and safety standards, requiring clinics to close until they are compliant seems a better practice than allowing them to remain open in violation of those standards even while working to become compliant.

History
Over the years, stories of deplorable conditions at some abortion clinics have made headlines. The “House of Horrors” operated by Kermit Gosnell in Pennsylvania is one example. Another is the now closed clinic in Muskegon, Michigan. With common sense legislation, these kinds of deplorable conditions will never again occur in the state.

**********

Heartbeat/Miscarriage Awareness Act

H.B. 4467 – Rep. Lana Theis

Current Status
H.B. 4467 was introduced on March 30, 2017 and referred to the House Health Policy Committee

Description
H.B. 4467 adds section 17015b to the informed consent for abortion section of the public health code. It states that before an abortion can be performed, the doctor must attempt to detect a fetal heartbeat and allow the women to hear the heartbeat if she chooses. In addition, the bill requires the doctor to inform the woman of the likelihood of experiencing a spontaneous miscarriage based on the lack of fetal heartbeat and gestational age.

Background
Detection of a fetal heartbeat provides valuable medical information. First it confirms a pregnancy and rules out false positive pregnancy tests. Second, it determines the position of the fetus within the uterus as opposed to an ectopic pregnancy which occurs in about 2% of all pregnancies. Third, it confirms that the unborn child is living and has not spontaneously died prior to a natural miscarriage. Often a women has a positive pregnancy test, but the baby doesn’t develop which will lead to a natural miscarriage. Miscarriage occurs in approximately 15% of all confirmed pregnancies. Once the fetal heartbeat is detected, the rate of spontaneous miscarriage crops to below 5%. Detecting the fetal heartbeat will reduce the number of unnecessary abortion procedures and spare women the agony of making an abortion decision when she will inevitably experience a miscarriage. Lastly, it gives the woman one more concrete sign that she is carrying a living human being in hopes that she will change her mind and choose life.

History
Bills banning abortion following the detection of a fetal heartbeat have been introduced in several states; however, those few states that have passed Heartbeat bans have yet to have them go into effect due to legal challenges.

The Heartbeat Informed Consent Bill was introduced by Michelle Bachman at the federal level, but it has had no traction. Other states have passed heartbeat informed laws similar to H.B. 4467 have tied them to ultrasound viewing laws and have not seen credible legal challenges.

**********

Prenatally Diagnosed Conditions Act

S. B. 367 – Sen. Jim Marleau

Current Status
S.B. 367 was introduced on May 9, 2017 and was referred to the Senate Health Policy committee.

Description
The Prenatally Diagnosed Conditions Act is a two-part bill that will address both fatal prenatal conditions as well as other conditions that are diagnosed prenatally. This act creates a database of medically accurate information about the prenatally diagnosed conditions, links to support groups, and provides information about intervention services. The physician will refer a woman who has been given a prenatal diagnosis to a website where she can receive medically accurate and up to date information. In the event that the diagnosis is fatal (one in which it would not be surprising if the baby died within one year), the doctor will refer the mother to a perinatal hospice program. S.B. 367 addresses both the fatal and non-fatal conditions by creating a clearinghouse website where experts populate information.

Background

Prenatal screening for genetic abnormalities is routinely done as part of standard prenatal care. The tests used to be invasive, expensive, and not extremely accurate. Now, however, the tests required only a blood sample and can be done as early as 10 weeks gestation. Too often when a woman is given a prenatal diagnosis, the first information she receives is an abortion referral. Sadly, the majority of babies diagnosed prenatally with Down Syndrome are aborted. This bill is an attempt to help avoid eugenic “search and destroy” abortions and offer life-affirming hope to couples.

History

A federal version of the Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act was passed by Congress in 2008. It was signed by President Bush and is currently the law of the land. It is much more limited in its scope as it only addresses instances where children with Down Syndrome are prenatally diagnosed. Unfortunately, there has never been any money allocated for its implementation. It was originally introduced by Sam Brownback and Ted Kennedy and enjoyed bi-partisan support.

**********

Citizens Accountability Act

S.B. 376 & S.B. 377 – Sen. Rick Jones

H.B. 4592 – Rep. John Reilly and H.B. 4593 – Rep. Bronna Kahle

Current Status
S.B. 376 & 377 were introduced on May 10, 2017 and referred to the Senate committee on Health Policy. H.B. 4592 & 4593 were both introduced on May 4, 2017 and referred to the House Health Policy Committee. S.B. 376 & H.B. 4592 are identical bills as are S.B. 377 & H.B. 4593.

Description

P.A. 208 of 1999 requires doctors who treat a woman suffering from an abortion complication to report it to the state health department. There were 26,395 abortions in Michigan in 2016 and only 37 reported complications. The law is obviously not being followed as the reported rate of complications is .001%. The Citizens Accountability Act would allow any individual who has knowledge of a woman being treated for an abortion complication to file a “Notice of Compliance” regarding Public Act 208. this notice would be filed simultaneously with the physician or facility treating the complication, the abortionist if he or she did not treat the complication, and the state Department of Community Health. Because the current law does not require medical examiners to report deaths caused by abortion complications, and because a woman died from an abortion complication in 2015, a second bill was introduced to require reporting by medical examiners as well as treating physician. S.B. 377 and H.B. 4593 will require county medical examiners to report abortion complications,

Background

P.A. 208 and 1999 was passed in order to hold abortion providers to the same standards that other doctors are held and require them to report all complications from abortion. Doctors are required by law to report complications, omissions and accidents to the Department of Community Health. Abortion providers had not previously been required to report any complications, so studies have show abortions as being extremely safe with very few complications. Even with the reporting law, the absurdedly low number of reported complications allow abortion proponents to site the alleged safety of abortion.

There have been numerous reports of ambulances arriving at abortion clinics by sidewalk counselors, Operation Rescue and 40 Days for Life volunteers, yet the complication rates reported to the state remain consistent. This bill will seek to remedy the unrealistically low complication rates being reported by allowing those citizens with actual knowledge of a complication to report it.

History

Shortly after the reporting requirement contained in P.A. 208 of 1999 became effective, it was evident that the abortion providers and emergency room physicians were not complying with the law. Versions of the Citizens Accountability Act have been introduced for several legislative sessions. Due to P.A. 499 of 2012 which requires abortion clinics to be licensed and inspected, we are hopeful that the Citizens Accountability Act will pass this session. In addition, a young woman died in 2015 as a result of an abortion complication. Her death highlights the fact that abortion is never safe for the unborn child and is often not safe for the woman.

**********

Dismemberment Abortion Ban

S.B. 391 & S.B. 392 – Sen. Tom Casperson

H.B. 4552 & H.B. 4553 – Rep. Laura Cox

Current Status

H.B. 4552 & 4553 were introduced on April 27, 2017 by Representative Laura Cox. The bills were referred to the House Law and Justice Committee. S. B. 391& 392 were introduced by Senator Tom Casperson on May 18, 2017 and were referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. They are identical bills to H.B, 4552 and 4553. These bills amend the partial birth abortion ban that was enacted in 2011.

Earlier Legislative Action

Dismemberment abortion bans have been put in place in seven states. In four of the states, the law is not currently enforced due to legal challenges. This is the second time the dismemberment abortion ban has been introduced in Michigan. This bill will amend the current partial birth abortion ban which has been in effect for years. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the partial birth abortion ban law in 2007 with its Carhart vs. Gonzales decision.

Description

Dismemberment abortion is the name given to a common second trimester abortion called the dilation and evacuation abortion or D & E abortion. This type of abortion is typically performed on unborn babies from 13 weeks through 24 weeks gestation. During this procedure, the abortion provider inserts a grasping forceps through the woman’s cervix and into the uterus to grab a living fetus. The doctor grips a fetal part with the forceps and pulls it back through the cervix and vagina. the friction causes the fetus to tear apart. For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus as it is pulled through the cervix and out of the woman. The unborn baby is torn apart limb from limb. The fetus can be alive at the beginning of the dismemberment process and can survive for a time while its limbs are being torn off. The violent and dehumanizing nature of dismemberment abortion undermines the public’s perception of the appropriate role of a physician and confuses the medical, legal, and ethics duties of physicians to preserve and promote life.

Background

The D & E abortion is the most commonly performed type of second trimester abortion. There were 1,670 D & E abortions done in Michigan in 2016 or about 4-5 per day. With the Center for Medical Progress videos highlighting the trafficking of fetal organs and tissues at Planned Parenthood, the reality of D & E abortions is once again on the forefront of the public conscience. Researchers are eager to obtain fetal tissue from later gestational-aged babies, so the D & E abortion method becomes the necessary tool for abortion providers.

History

The D & E abortion procedure was a focus of discussion during the Supreme Court’s decision on the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. The procedure itself was discussed at length and references to it were included in the majority opinions. Justice Kennedy said this about dismemberment abortions: “a procedure itself laden with the power to devalue human life.” This type of abortion has been used since 1973.

**********

Prenatal Protection Sentencing Guideline

H.B. 4500 – Rep. Pamela Hornburger

Current Status

H. B. 4500 is currently in the Senate Judiciary Committee awaiting a hearing. It was passed by the House on November 9, 2017 along party lines with one endorsed Democrat voting in favor of the bill. On Sept. 19, 2017 testimony was heard in the House Judiciary Committee. RLM provided testimony. The bill was reported out of committee along party lines. H.B. 4500 was introduced on April 20, 2017 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee.

Description

H. B. 4500 is a technical bill that will codify that an embryo or a fetus will be considered a victim for the purposes of determining sentencing for a crime which involved a pregnant woman.

Background

The Prenatal Protection Act has been in place since 1998. It states that it is a crime to intentionally or unintentionally harm an unborn embryo or fetus except by actions taken by the mother or her doctor. It includes charges for the death of a pregnant woman which results in the death of her unborn child as well as causing a stillbirth or miscarriage of an unborn child through criminal or negligent actions. H.B. 4500 simply places into statute the ruling found in the case of People vs. Ambrose (Mich COA 2016) by declaring that for sentencing purposes, and embryo or fetus may be considered a person when determining the number of victims of a crime.

History

There have been a number of egregious cases that have lead to the need to place legal protections over the unborn child when they are the victims of crimes. Those crimes can range from involuntary vehicular manslaughter when a drunk driver hits a pregnant woman and causes a miscarriage to assault with a deadly weapon in an attempt to cause a pregnant woman to miscarry. In some states, there is no legal protection for unborn victims of crimes.

**********

Stillborn Child Tax Equity

H.B. 4522 – Rep. Mary Whiteford

Current Status

H.B. 4522 was introduced by Rep. Mary Whiteford on April 25, 2017 and referred to the House Tax Policy Committee.

Description

This bill will enable families that experience a stillbirth after 20 weeks to claim a child deduction on their state income taxes in the year of the stillbirth. This is intended to help families cover the costs of prenatal care or the funeral arrangements incurred. This cannot take away the grief for the loss of a child, however it can help ease the financial burdens of the stillbirth.

History

In 2006, Governor Jennifer Granholm signed into law P.A. 319 which was the stillborn child tax credit. It allowed for a one-time credit to be take on the state income tax return for the year of the stillbirth. However, in 2011, Governor Rick Snyder cut the tax credit along with a number of other credits in an effort to address Michigan’s economic downturn. H.B. 4522 differs from the original tax credit in that it allows for a one-time deduction rather than a simple credit.

**********

Abortion Injury Statute of Limitations

H.B. 4620 – Rep. Klint Kesto

Current Status

H.B. 4620 was introduced by Representative Klint Kesto on May 17, 2017 and referred to the House Committee on Law and Justice.

Description

This bill will enable women who have suffered an abortion-related injury to bring charges against the doctor whenever she discovers the injury or whenever she feels ready to press charges. There is currently a three-year statute of limitations on bringing a lawsuit. H.B. 4620 will remove the statute of limitations.

Background

Some women who suffer an abortion-related injury fail to seek justice in a timely fashion. In some cases, the woman doesn’t know she was injured and the injury isn’t discovered for several years, often when she attempts to become pregnant again or during an exam. In other cases, the woman is either ashamed of the abortion and feels she deserves the injury or, she doesn’t want to admit that she has had an abortion, so she doesn’t report the injury or seek restitution.

**********

Patient Protection Act

S.B. 597 & S.B. 598 – Sen. John Proos

H.B. 5075 – Rep. Tristan Cole & H.B. 5076 – Rep. Jeff Noble

Current Status

S.B. 597 & 598 were introduced on September 28, 2017 and were referred to the Senate Oversight Committee. No hearing has been scheduled on the bills.

H.B. 5075 & 5076 were introduced on October 10, 2017 and were referred to the House Committee on Families, Children, and Seniors. A hearing on the bills was held on November 9, 2017, but no vote was taken. RLM testified in favor of the bills.

Description

S.B. 598 & H.B. 5075 are identical bills that provide patients, patient advocates and families protection against hospitals or doctors gaining guardianship over a patient without providing notice to the family about a hearing. In addition, the bills would required the doctor or medical facility to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the patient advocate or family is not acting in the best interest of the family before a guardian can be appointed. Lastly, S.B. 598 & H.B. 5075 create a rebuttable presumption in law that it is in the best interest of a patient to remain living.

S.B. 597 & H.B. 5076 are also identical bills that will require medical personnel to obtain affirmative consent prior to withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment including but not limited to placing do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in a patient’s file.

Background

The number of end of life calls on related issues coming into the RLM Legislative office has steadily increased over the past several years. They now receive more end of life calls than abortion calls. Stories told by numerous people about their loved ones having their authority to make medical decisions for their family member stripped away by the courts because the hospital gained guardianship over a patient without notifying the family seemed unbelievable until the number of similar calls began to increase. Similarly, RLM received several calls about secret DNR orders being placed on patients as well as other forms of life-sustaining treatment being withheld.

Simon’s Law was recently passed in Kansas, named after a special needs baby whose parents discovered a DNR order had been placed in their child’s medical record without their knowledge or permission. Their law requires a parental consent for withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments from minors. H.B. 5076 and S.B. 597 would apply to all patients.

History

In Michigan, a patient advocate law was passed in 1990 and has given patients the opportunity to name someone who can make medical decisions for them in the event they become incapacitated. The law states that a guardian can’t be appointed while the patient has a patient advocate. However, if the family is not told of the hearing and the court is unaware of a patient advocate, guardians are sometimes appointed despite objections from the family. Michigan’s Do-Not-Resuscitate Procedure Act was passed in 1996. The DNR law was designed for those individuals for whom death from cardiac arrest would be a better option given their medical condition or frailty. However, the decision to place a DNR on a patient’s file was always meant to be the patient’s decision, not the doctor’s or medical facility’s. 

**********

Safe Delivery Baby Box

H.B. 5750, H.B. 5953 & H.B. 5954 – Rep. Bronna Kahle
H.B. 5751 – Rep. Daire Rendon

Current Status

On May 16, 2018 the full house took up the Safe Haven Baby Box legislation and passed it out with broad bipartisan support and a vote of 97-11. The bills are now in the Senate committee on Families, Children and Seniors. A hearing will likely take place in the fall. A hearing was held on May 2, 2018 and all four bills were voted out of the House Families, Children and Seniors Committee with a 9-1 vote on May 10th. H.B. 5750 and 5751 were introduced on March 22, 2018 by Representatives Bronna Kahle and Daire Rendon respectively and were referred to the House Committee on Families, Children and Seniors. H.B. 5953 and 5954 are compendium bills that were introduced on May 9, 2018 by Representative Bronna Kahle.

Description

H.B. 5750, 5751, 5953 and 5954 modify the existing Save Delivery of Newborns Act by allowing for specialized baby boxes for the purpose of safely surrendering a newborn. In addition, the bills will increase the current age of surrender of the infant from 72 hours old 30 days old. The baby boxes will be climate controlled, will lock upon closing, and will trigger an alarm for a rescue worker to retrieve the newborn.

Background

Safe Delivery Laws have been enacted in all 50 states and have worked to save babies who would otherwise be abandoned. Every year stories of dead infants found abandoned in garbage containers, in the woods or in public toilets shock the public. The Safe Delivery law was designed to allow a woman to anonymously surrender her newborn baby up to 72 hours old with a hospital, fire station or police department. No criminal charges are brought, and no questions are asked. The baby is then placed for adoption. The woman or the father of the baby can change their minds and request that the infant be returned within 28 days of surrender.

History

Michigan passed the Safe Delivery of Newborns Act in 2006. Since that time, over 200 infants have been safely surrendered and placed for adoption. Currently, Indiana and Arizona have Safe Delivery Baby Boxes. Around the world, leaving a baby in a box on the doorstep of a church or convent has been going on for centuries. In order to provide a safe and anonymous option for women in crisis, many countries have adopted safe delivery laws.

**********

Vaccine Informed Consent

S.B. 1055 – Sen. Tonya Schuitmaker

Current Status

S.B. 1055 was introduced on June 7, 2018 by Senator Tonya Schuitmaker and referred to the Senate Health Committee.

Description

S.B. 1055 will require medical personnel to inform patients if the vaccine they are planning on receiving has been developed on a cell line derived from an aborted baby and if an ethical alternative exists. In addition, the state website will be required to maintain a list of all the vaccines that have been created on fetal cell lines and any ethical versions that are available. The state will update the Vaccine Information Statement or VIS with this information. Doctors are required by law to provide patients with a VIS for each vaccine. Patients will be informed that they have the option to decline the vaccine.

Background

Many people are horrified to find out after the fact that the vaccine they or their child received was produced using cell lines derived from aborted babies. Even many doctors are unaware of this fact. This bill will serve to notify the public how certain vaccines are created and whether or not an alternative exists. In a free society, people have the right to know about not only the safety and efficacy of every vaccine, but also about how those vaccines were created. With broad public knowledge, it is possible that pressure will be applied to pharmaceutical companies to research and develop vaccines that have no fetal tissue involvement.

History

As we saw with the videos put out by the Center for Medial Progress, fetal tissue is taken from aborted babies, obtained by procurement companies and used by researchers. The use of aborted babies in medical research has been ongoing for decades, but most people are unaware that many of the common, required immunizations are developed on cell lines that were created using aborted babies. The two most commonly used cell lines were derived from abortions that took place in the 1960s. Proponents of these abortion tainted vaccines point to the fact that these abortions took place long ago. What they fail to realize is that new cell lines from recent abortions are actively being developed. Until the demand for vaccines that are ethically created exists, researchers will continue to exploit the tiniest humans for financial gain.

**********

Telemedicine Abortion Ban Sunset Repealer

S.B. 1198 – Sen. Tom Casperson

Current Status

S.B. 1198 is currently on the House floor awaiting final passage. The telemedicine abortion ban sunset repealer was voted out of the House Health Policy Committee on December 4, 2018 along party lines with a vote of 9-5. On November 19, 2018, the full Senate approved the bill along mostly party lines and a vote of 25-12 with one excused. The bill was amended on the floor to clean up a technical difficulty with the wording. On November 27, 2018, the Senate Health Policy Committee voted the bill out along party lines. Right to Life of Michigan presented testimony in support of the bill. S.B. 1198 was introduced by Senator Casperson on November 8, 2018.

Description

S.B. 1198 removes a sunset provision on the telemedicine abortion ban. The bill will remove the “sunset” and allow the ban to remain in place indefinitely. If the bill is not passed, the ban on telemedicine abortions will lift or sunset, and they will no longer be illegal in the state.

Background

Medical abortions are on the rise throughout the state and the country. Last year chemical abortions accounted for 9,422 abortions or 35% of all the abortions in the state. Women who use the abortion pill (not to be confused with the morning after pills – these are two very different drugs) can expect to have a “failure” between 2 and 7%, depending on the gestational age of the baby and will need follow-up care to complete the abortion. In 2016, the FDA approved changes to the abortion pill which allows it to be used up to 10 weeks gestation; the higher the gestational age of the baby, the more likely a complication or abortion “failure” will take place.

Telemedicine places a barrier between women and follow-up care because the doctor could be hundreds of miles away leaving the woman vulnerable. With between 188 – 659 women potentially needed follow-up care, banning telemedicine abortions is common sense and a safety issue. With increased gestational age limits for the abortion pill and the potential for more follow-up care, the telemedicine abortion ban is needed now more than ever.

History

In 2012, Michigan placed a preemptive ban on telemedicine abortions in the state. At that time, the Governor asked that the ban sunset or lift at the end of his term. The ban will expire on December 31, 2018 unless we repeal the sunset. The FDA approved Mifeprex, the abortion pill, for use in the US in 2000 and placed heightened safety requirements on the drugs called a REMS or Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy. This REMS states that Mifeprex must only be dispensed in a clinic, hospital or medical office by or under the supervision of a certified prescriber. This provision has been in place and continues to be the FDA requirement for the abortion pill.

The REMS precludes the use of telemedicine for medical abortions. However, several groups including the manufacturer, Danco Pharmaceuticals, Planned Parenthood, and the National Abortion Federation wanted the REMS removed and petitioned the FDA to remove it. In 2016, the FDA evaluated clinical trial data, peer-reviewed studies and took input from experts in the field and concluded that the REMS is still necessary and that the abortion pill must only be distributed by the provider in the clinic.