Tennessee judges say doctors can't be disciplined for providing
emergency abortions
Send a link to a friend
[October 18, 2024]
By KIMBERLEE KRUESI
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A three-judge panel on Thursday ruled that
Tennessee doctors who provide emergency abortions to protect the life of
the mother cannot have their medical licenses revoked or face other
disciplinary actions while a lawsuit challenging the state's sweeping
abortion ban continues.
The ruling also outlined specific pregnancy-related conditions that
would now qualify as “medical necessity exceptions” under the ban, which
currently does not include exceptions for fetal anomalies or for victims
of rape or incest.
“This lack of clarity is evidenced by the confusion and lack of
consensus within the Tennessee medical community on the circumstances
requiring necessary health- and life-saving abortion care,” the ruling
stated. “The evidence presented underscores how serious, difficult, and
complex these issues are and raises significant questions as to whether
the medical necessity exception is sufficiently narrow to serve a
compelling state interest.”
The judges determined that the following medical conditions now fall
under the state's abortion exemptions: premature rupture of the amniotic
sac that surrounds the fetus; inevitable abortions; fatal fetal
diagnoses that result in severe preeclampsia or mirror syndrome
associated with fetal hydrops; and fatal fetal diagnoses leading to an
infection that will result in uterine rupture or potential loss of
fertility.
The abortion law initially only explicitly stated that ectopic or molar
pregnancies qualify as exemptions, as well as doctors who use their
“reasonable medical judgement” in order to “prevent the death of the
pregnant woman or to prevent serious risk of substantial and
irreversible impairment of a major bodily function.”
The ruling is a win for reproductive rights advocates who have argued
that the Volunteer State’s abortion ban, which has been in effect since
2022, is too vague and unfairly puts doctors at a high legal risk of
violating the statute.
However, the judges also said that because they are a chancery court,
they do not have the jurisdiction to block the criminal statute inside
the ban — where violators face felony charges carrying a prison sentence
as high as 15 years.
This means that while doctors will not face disciplinary actions from
the Attorney General's office and the Tennessee Board of Medical
Examiners, they could still risk criminal charges under Thursday's
ruling.
[to top of second column]
|
The lawsuit was initially filed last
year by a group of women and doctors asking the judges to clarify
the circumstances in which patients can legally receive an abortion.
Specifically, they requested the court to include fatal diagnoses.
The Center for Reproductive Rights, which is
representing the women and doctors, argued that the GOP-dominated
General Assembly wrote Tennessee's abortion ban so overly broad and
vague that doctors have no choice but to operate in fear that their
decisions on whether to perform an abortion will be second-guessed,
undermined and potentially be used to bring career-ending charges
against them.
Among the plaintiffs is Rebecca Milner, who learned she was pregnant
with her first child in February 2023 after several years of
unsuccessful fertility treatments.
According to court documents, Milner was told at a 20-week
appointment that the amniotic fluid surrounding her baby was low. A
specialist later said that her water had broken likely several weeks
before and that nothing could be done to save the baby.
Yet her doctor said that Tennessee’s abortion ban prohibited
abortion services in her situation and Milner was forced to travel
to Virginia for an abortion and returned to Tennessee with a high
fever. Doctors told her that she had an infection and that the delay
in getting an abortion allowed the infection to worsen.
The state's attorney had countered that doctors don't want their
medical decisions questioned by the government and attempted to
dismiss the case by arguing the plaintiffs didn't have standing to
sue. The judges largely denied that request, but agreed to dismiss
one of the women who joined the lawsuit because she underwent
surgery that prevents her from becoming pregnant again.
“The State’s position from the outset has been that Tennessee’s
Human Life Protection Act allows pregnant women to receive all
necessary care to address serious health risks,” said Attorney
General Jonathan Skrmetti in a statement. "The court’s limited
injunction order mirrors that understanding. We all agree that
doctors should save lives and protect their patients.”
The legal challenge in Tennessee is part of a handful of lawsuits
filed across the U.S. in Republican-dominant states after the U.S.
Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion in
2022.
All contents © copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved
|