Actions Taken On Women's Health-Related Legislation In Iowa, Kansas, Missouri

email to a friend

printer friendly

view / write opinions

rate article

Current Article Ratings:

Patient / Public:		3.13 (38 votes)
Health Professional:		3 (18 votes)
Article Opinions:	0 posts

• Iowa: Gov. Chet Culver (D) on Friday signed a bill (HF 2145) into law that will require all state-regulated health insurance plans that cover vaccinations to cover human papillomavirus vaccines, the Des Moines Register reports. According to the Register, about 40% of state residents who have employer-provided health insurance are covered by state-regulated policies. The state has no jurisdiction over most large employer-provided policies, and the new law also does not cover policies that do not cover other vaccinations. Rep. Janet Petersen (D), who helped lead debate on the measure, said most state insurers already cover the HPV vaccine, adding that the law could force new insurers to provide coverage. Culver said the legislation is a "really good first step," adding, "I'm really proud to sign the bill because I think it guarantees Iowa families access to the HPV vaccine, and there wasn't that guarantee before we signed it into law." Culver would not say whether he supports requiring middle school girls to get the HPV vaccine, and Petersen said she has not heard any serious discussion about such a mandate (Leys, Des Moines Register, 4/19).
  
  
• Kansas: Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D) on Monday vetoed a bill (House Substitute for SB 389) that included a number of antiabortion-related provisions, the Wichita Eagle reports. According to the Eagle, the bill fell two votes short of the two-thirds majority in the Senate that would be required to override a veto and in the House was two votes more than the two-thirds needed for an override (Koranda, Wichita Eagle, 4/22). The bill would expand information physicians must provide to the state when they perform abortions, require that more information be made public and mandate that abortion clinic employees report suspected abuse of underage girls. The measure also would require that a physician meet privately with a woman 30 minutes before the abortion is performed and that the woman provide a written reason for the abortion. The measure also would require a physician to offer a woman the option to see ultrasound images and hear fetal heartbeats if the facility has the equipment. Under the bill, minors seeking abortions would be required to provide identification and proof of state residency. The person accompanying the minor also would be required to provide identification, sign a statement about his or her relationship to the minor and identify the father of the fetus, if possible. The Kansas State Board of Healing Arts would be required to revoke the medical licenses of physicians who break the law, and state social services would be required to publish an annual report of child sexual abuse cases received from abortion providers. In addition, the measure allows a woman who had an abortion after the 21st week of pregnancy and some members of her family to sue for monetary damages if a physician violates the law (Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 4/7). Sebelius in her veto message said that such a suit could be used to block a patient's abortion, "even where it may be necessary to save her life" (Wichita Eagle, 4/22). Sebelius said, "I am concerned that the bill is likely unconstitutional, or, even worse, endangers the lives of women" (AP/Wichita Eagle, 4/21). Rep. Lance Kinzer (R), sponsor of the bill, said he plans to attempt to override the veto when the Legislature reconvenes April 30 (Wichita Eagle, 4/22).
  
  
• Missouri: The House on Thursday approved a measure (HB 1831) that includes several restrictions on abortion rights, the Kansas City Star reports (Noble/Wagar, Kansas City Star, 4/21). The House preliminarily approved the measure last week, but the bill needed another approval in the House before moving to the Senate (Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 4/17). The measure would require a woman seeking an abortion to meet with the physician who is performing the procedure 24 hours prior to discuss the procedure and possible medical risks. Physicians would be required to show a woman a state-produced brochure or video that provides a description of a developing fetus. The brochure or video must include information on brain and heart function and "color photographs or images of the developing [fetus] at two-week gestational increments" from conception to full term (Kansas City Star, 4/21). The bill also would require abortion providers to give a woman an option of seeing an ultrasound of her fetus, as well as instruct her about potential health risks and the option of giving her fetus anesthesia. A woman would need to certify her "informed consent" to an abortion after receiving the required materials. The measure also would require physicians and clinics that perform the procedure to post several signs that state: "There are many public and private agencies willing and able to help you carry your child to term and to assist you and your child after your child is born." The signs would also state: "The state of Missouri encourages you to contact those agencies before making a final decision about abortion" (Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 4/17). In addition, abortion clinics would be required to prominently display a sign that states, "No one can force you to have an abortion" (Kansas City Star, 4/21). The measure would allow felony charges to be filed against a physician who performs an abortion when he or she suspects a woman has been coerced. The charges would carry a punishment of up to seven years in prison. People who threaten to fire or take away a college scholarship from a pregnant woman unless she has an abortion could be charged with a misdemeanor punishable up to one year in jail and a fine of $1,000, according to the legislation. Those who abuse or threaten a pregnant woman to influence her to have an abortion could be charged with additional crimes with enhanced penalties (Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 4/17). Supporters of the measure say it will ensure women seeking abortions are fully informed about the risks of the procedures and will protect them from being coerced, while opponents say it will make abortions less safe and more difficult to obtain (Kansas City Star, 4/21).