Doctors must tell women of abortion risk, court says

[Freddie Stubbs]

The Florida Supreme Court upholds a nine-year-old abortion informed-consent law.

BY MARY ELLEN KLAS
[e-mail]

TALLAHASSEE - A state law that requires doctors to tell women about the risks of an abortion before performing the procedure is constitutional, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In a unanimous opinion that overturned two lower courts, justices said the ''Women's Right to Know Act'' does not violate a woman's right to privacy, guaranteed under the Florida Constitution. The decision revives the 1997 law, which had been successfully challenged by the Presidential Women's Center, a West Palm Beach-based women's clinic, before it ever took effect.

The center has 15 days to ask for a re-hearing or Florida will join 20 other states with active ''informed consent'' laws aimed at abortion providers, said Bebe Anderson, staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York and an attorney in the case.

The law, passed when Lawton Chiles was governor, requires a doctor to inform patients of the probable gestational age of her fetus and the medical risks of the abortion or of carrying the fetus to term. The patient must then give voluntary, written consent to the abortion before the doctor can perform it.

more: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/14283838.htm

[AllieB]

1. I had a friend who died giving birth to her third child

they don't tell you about those risks, do they?

[liberalnurse]

3. That would require

the physician to be in the room when conception was preformed......:smoke:

[meow2u3]

22. Are you saying only doctors are allowed to watch porn?

:evilgrin:

[abluelady]

13. Exactly

And what about all the risks to the fetus. This is so bogus.

[susanna]

23. On edit, never mind...

the law does allow for informed consent on continuing a pregnancy. Sorry, my bad.

[rodeodance]

2. docs always inform of medical risks, but now giving gestational age --

well, ...this is bantering women I think! and I suspose that was the purpose-make them feel terrible-potential for second thoughts.

[liberalnurse]

4. I disagree.....

They have, the pregnant clients, have a damn good idea how far along they are to begin with.....

[susanna]

24. Not always...

...and as a nurse I am surprised you do not realize this. Many, many women suffer from seriously irregular cycles and have no idea they might be pregnant.

[eyesroll]

5. I do not have a problem with docs giving MEDICALLY ACCURATE risks

So, in other words, if a doctor is required to say "you have an X percent chance of a perforation and Y percent chance of an infection and a point-Z risk of death from an abortion, and here are the same figures for childbirth," fine. If these risks vary by gestational age, then share that information too. Isn't disclosure standard procedure for most elective medical procedures? (I know I had to listen to the risks of anesthesia and infection when I got my wisdom teeth out...and I think my parents signed some "you may get infected" document when I got my ears pierced at Claire's when I was in junior high.)

If the doctor has to say "risks include fetal pain, breast cancer, regret, shame and shunning by your community," well, then, no.

[RaRa]

14. Exactly

it's all too important HOW this information is given. When I had my first ob visit with this pregnacy (over 35 so "high risk"), I had to listen to a huge list of statistics that could scare even the greatest optimist. But it was all data and then I moved on.

[Solly Mack]

15. Precisely. There is a difference between accurate info and intimidation

and scare tactics.

[fasttense]

6. Do they also give the risk of carrying the fetus to term?

If you are going to require that risks for abortion be quantified for the patient, shouldn't the risk of carrying the fetus be quantified as well? That way women would have a comparison number to make a valid decision. But of course they don't really want the mother to make a decision.

[happyslug]

19. The Actual Act says yes:

See my post below for a Copy of the Court Decision which sites the statute in question in full.

Here is the Statute in question:

(3) CONSENTS REQUIRED.--A termination of pregnancy may not be performed or induced except with the voluntary and informed written consent of the pregnant woman or, in the case of a mental incompetent, the voluntary and informed written consent of her court-appointed guardian.

(a) Except in the case of a medical emergency, consent to a termination of pregnancy is voluntary and informed only if:

1. The physician who is to perform the procedure, or the referring physician, has, at a minimum, orally, in person, informed the woman of:

a. The nature and risks of undergoing or not undergoing the proposed procedure that a reasonable patient would consider material to making a knowing and willful decision of whether to terminate a pregnancy.

b. The probable gestational age of the fetus at the time the termination of pregnancy is to be performed.

c. The medical risks to the woman and fetus of carrying the pregnancy to term. :

The statute itself see:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0390/SEC0111.HTM&Title=-%3E2005-%3ECh0390-%3ESection%200111#0390.0111

[JNelson6563]

7. Risk of full term pregnancy is greater.

Those who have given birth, and especially those of us who had complicatins, can attest to that!!

But of course you don't see anyone demanding court orders for doctors to tell women about that.

Julie

[radwriter0555]

17. Yes. Giving birth is far higher risk than abortion.....

Go figure.

[Bridget Burke]

8. I'd be surprised if no "informed consent"...

Is signed before an abortion takes place. There ARE some health risks--even if, as mentioned, the risks of pregnancy & childbirth are greater.

But let's be sure that the risks mentioned are real--not lies cooked up by the anti-choice crowd. And let's be sure that no delay is involved. In Texas, the patient must make a clinic visit, then wait 24 hours before the abortion. This can be a real problem if the clinic is a long distance from home--as is often the case in Texas. And if the women has job and/or family responsibilities.

[JuniperLea]

9. Doctors take an oath

That should be enough.

I was told of pregnancy risks all three times I had a baby, I don't get it. I had nine and ten pound babies... the doctors never got gestational age right, always saying they were older than they really were and then tried to convince me that the 9 pounder with a full head of hair and ultra long fingernails was premature. Brother!

Government shouldn't be in the uterus business.

[BootinUp]

11. Generally I agree with that n/t

[Solly Mack]

10. I've seen actual aborted fetuses - up close and personal

Yeah, they're gross. Yeah, it's messy. Yeah, it's sad.

Guess what? I still support abortion - cause I support women.

The other day I signed a consent form declaring that I understood that I could start to hemorrhage during a surgical procedure - but as the medical procedure was important to my overall health, there was no hesitation in signing.

So for all those assholes that think their intimidation tactics are going to work? Fuck you.

[JuniperLea]

12. I would not choose it for myself

In fact, I hate the mere thought of abortion. But I support a woman's right to choose.

There are too many "good" reasons to have an abortion that would most likely never be heard if abortion is made illegal again.

[Karmakaze]

16. This is GOOD, not bad!

People read this article closely! I am sure no one is arguing that medical procedures should be carried out without the patient knowing the risks of that procedure. So I will ignore that argument for now.

If you look at what the article says, you will see that the ruling has basically defined what the law means - informed consent of the MEDICAL risks! What is wrong with that? In fact that is no different from any other medical procedure.

Lewis noted, however, that as the case evolved through two trial courts and two appeals challenges, the state changed its position on how to interpret what risks it considered relevant for a doctor to discuss with a patient. Lewis noted that in oral arguments the state ''conceded'' that the law applies only to medical risks.

That concession was enough to persuade Chief Justice Barbara Pariente to write a concurring opinion that took the state to task for its failure to make the position known earlier.

In other words, this ruling has GUTTED any anti-abortion stance to this law. The only risks that are legally REQUIRED to be told to the patient are MEDICAL risks. Not social risks, MEDICAL risks. In other words, NOTHING HAS CHANGED. The judge has forced the government to define the risks to be told to the patient as medical only, and even chastised the government for not making that clear from the beginning.

Now the law can NOT be used to force abortion providers to inform of any other kind of risk than they already were, and it is not just a law anymore, but case law as well! This means that it would be basically impossible to argue in front of a judge that the law extends to any other kind of risk.

[happyslug]

18. Here is the Decision (In PDF Format)

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2006/sc04-2186.pdf

[Triana]

20. Are they required to tell women the risks of childbirth, too?

If not, why not? It's at LEAST as risky.

[happyslug]

21. Under the statute, yes they do have to warn of taking the child to term

See my post below for a Copy of the Court Decision which sites the statute in question in full.

Here is the Statute in question:

(3) CONSENTS REQUIRED.--A termination of pregnancy may not be performed or induced except with the voluntary and informed written consent of the pregnant woman or, in the case of a mental incompetent, the voluntary and informed written consent of her court-appointed guardian.

(a) Except in the case of a medical emergency, consent to a termination of pregnancy is voluntary and informed only if:

1. The physician who is to perform the procedure, or the referring physician, has, at a minimum, orally, in person, informed the woman of:

a. The nature and risks of undergoing or not undergoing the proposed procedure that a reasonable patient would consider material to making a knowing and willful decision of whether to terminate a pregnancy.

b. The probable gestational age of the fetus at the time the termination of pregnancy is to be performed.

c. The medical risks to the woman and fetus of carrying the pregnancy to term. :

The statute itself see:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0390/SEC0111.HTM&Title=-%3E2005-%3ECh0390-%3ESection%200111#0390.0111