Senate OKs 2 bills restricting abortions

By Howard Fischer
Capitol Media Services
Published/Last Modified on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 3:06 PM MDT


PHOENIX — State lawmakers gave final approval Tuesday to spelling out what a judge must and may consider when deciding if a minor is mature enough to have an abortion without telling her parents.


The 18-12 vote came over objections of foes who said it would throw additional barriers in the path of girls who, for whatever reason, choose not to involve at least one parent in the process. But Sen. Linda Gray, R-Glendale, said it simply codifies in statute the standards already mandated by the state Court of Appeals.

HB 2263, which already has passed the House, now goes to Gov. Janet Napolitano.

Moments later, the Senate voted 21-9 to enact a new law making “partial birth” abortions again illegal in the state. Arizona’s original law, adopted in 1997, never took effect after a federal judge concluded it was unconstitutional.

Since that time, though, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a federal law banning the practice where a live fetus is partially delivered but killed during the process. Cathi Herrod, lobbyist for the Center for Arizona Policy, said HB 2769 mirrors that federal law.

That bill also now goes to the governor.

In separate action Tuesday, the House voted 32-28 to ban nurse-practitioners from performing abortions.

HB 2269, which now goes to the Senate, is specifically aimed at Planned Parenthood, where Rachael Chanes said a nurse practitioner now performs more than half of the abortions at the organization’s Tucson facility. Chanes, vice president of community services, said the two doctors now available there could not keep up with the demand.

“Women are not going to get the services they need in a timely fashion,” she said.

Rep. Linda Lopez, D-Tucson, was more direct, saying the change will return Arizona to the days when abortion was illegal and “women were denied any legal right to make medical decisions about their on bodies.” She said it making the procedure less available won’t result in fewer abortions.

“There will be women ... who will resort to back-alleys or their own self-induced abortion,” Lopez said.

“Once again there will be unnecessary deaths and needless pain and suffering women because our government is choosing to interfere with every woman’s legal right to control her own body.”

But Rep. Marian McClure, R-Tucson, said this isn’t about taking away women’s rights. McClure said she doubts that a nurse-practitioner would have the skills to deal with emergencies that can arise during an abortion.

And Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said Lopez has it backward.

“This bill is about keeping the back alleys out of the abortion clinics,” he said. Kavanagh said lawmakers have a legal responsibility to ensure that people who perform certain medical procedures are qualified.

Gubernatorial press aide Jeanine L’Ecuyer would not say what Napolitano will do with either of the two bills that gained final Senate approval Tuesday.

Comments

Write a Comment

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Douglas Dispatch is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in douglasdispatch.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Douglas Dispatch. The Douglas Dispatch does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Douglas Dispatch spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
   









Contact Us

Email the Editor
530 11th Street (85607)
P.O. Drawer H
Douglas, AZ 85608
tel: 520.364.3424
fax: 520.364.6750