Ohio House advances a 24-hour abortion waiting period bill, with pro-abortion activists opposing the decision
The Ohio House Health Committee advanced a bill to require a 24-hour abortion waiting period last week, and while pro-abortion advocates claimed that the measure could force doctors to indirectly harm women seeking an abortion, proponents of the measure said it wouldn’t stop or delay anyone who wants an abortion.
House Bill 347 would require a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion takes place, according to Cleveland.com. The committee approved the measure by a 9-3 vote, casting votes along party lines.
During the consultation that can take place by phone, virtually, by email, or in person, a physician would be required to inform a woman about the abortion procedure, the risks of both the abortion method and carrying a pregnancy to term, and alternatives such as adoption, the news sources reported.
There is an exception to the rule in cases of miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, or medical emergency, Cleveland.com reported. Any physician who does not follow the rules would face a civil penalty, the Ohio Capital Journal reported.
The Journal added that Ohio’s State Medical Board would also be authorized to create rules “specifying adverse physical or psychological conditions arising from abortion that a physician must disclose as possible complications when meeting with the pregnant woman as part of the informed consent process.”
A Cleveland.com report framed the bill as failing to meet the standard established by Ohio’s 2023 Reproductive Freedom Amendment, which prohibits Ohio from directly or indirectly preventing abortion. However, Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman, R-Lima, told Signal Ohio that he doesn’t think that HB 347 would defy the amendment.
“If somebody wants to get an abortion, this isn’t going to stop them or really even delay them,” he told the outlet.
Huffman also told Cleveland.com that he expects the bill to pass the House.
“I expect we are going to advance that legislation,” he said. “I think making sure that medical patients have information is very important.”
Huffman then told Cleveland.com that he thinks that “making sure that medical patients have information is very important.”
“I spent a large part of my legal career doing medical malpractice defense work, and one of the things we always had to look at was the informed consent sign,” he added.
State Rep. Jennifer Gross, R-West Chester, a committee member, also supported the bill, previously saying that it allows a pregnant woman to have “an opportunity to look at all the data” in a situation that she said is “not coerced or rushed,” the Ohio Capital Journal reported.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, however, opposed the recent bill, telling Cleveland.com that medication abortion “reversal” treatments are not based on science and do not meet clinical standards. The organization added that these “unfounded legislative mandates” that require physicians to provide such information “represent dangerous political interference and compromise patient care and safety.”
As expected, abortion advocates, including Abortion Forward Deputy Director Jaime Miracle, also opposed the bill, saying that a “24-hour waiting period will harm patients by creating additional barriers to care and increasing costs of the procedure.”
“For anti-abortion members of this legislature, this is a feature, not a flaw. The goal of this legislation is not to ensure informed consent. It is to make it harder for people to access the care they need,” Miracle said.
Signal Ohio reported that the state House also recently passed two bills that allegedly oppose abortion more indirectly. House Bill 324 would require patients seeking the “abortion pill,” along with certain other medications, to physically visit a doctor first, and House Bill 485 would require schools to show students grades 5-12 a video on fetal development produced by an anti-abortion advocacy group.
