Several physicians are voicing concerns about a Utah law (SB 234) that requires anesthesia or painkillers be administered to a woman who seeks abortion care at or after 20 weeks of pregnancy, the New York Times reports.
The law is set to take effect on May 10 (Healy, New York Times, 5/4).
Law details
The law is based on the medically unfounded claim that fetuses can feel pain at that point of pregnancy. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the past has stated that it opposes fetal anesthesia legislation.
Under the law, abortion providers are required to tell a woman the scientifically unsubstantiated claim a fetus might be able to feel pain after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The measure includes narrow and medically insufficient exceptions. Specifically, physicians are exempt from the anesthesia mandate if the woman seeking abortion care is at risk of death or serious physical harm, or if another physician agrees that the fetus has a fatal anomaly. Physicians are also exempt from the bill's requirement if another physician confirms in writing that the use of anesthesia on the fetus would kill or cause permanent harm to the pregnant woman (Women's Health Policy Report, 3/29).
Utah is the first state to implement a fetal anesthesia law. According to the Times, officials with the state health department said it would permit physicians to independently determine what type of anesthesia or painkillers to administer to comply with the law.
Doctors cite concerns, confusion
Twenty-four physicians have written a letter to the Utah Legislature expressing their objection to the law, the Times reports. In the letter, they cited scientific research that indicates a fetus does not experience pain at 20 weeks into pregnancy. Further, the physicians noted that it is common to induce labor when terminating pregnancy after 20 weeks. They questioned why they should be required to administer painkillers or anesthesia when inducing labor to terminate a pregnancy when they do not do so for women who are giving birth.
Alexandra Grosvenor Eller -- a Salt Lake City-based physician and assistant professor at the University of Utah -- stated, "This is an egregious attempt to tell us how to practice medicine." Grosvenor Eller, who was among the letter signatories, added, "I can't think of any other area where the Legislature tells us what medications to give to patients."
Leah Torres, an OB-GYN who provides abortion care in Utah, said, "You're asking me to invent a procedure that doesn't have any research to back it up ... You want me to experiment on my patients."
Critics of the law also have raised concerns that it does not clearly define what the state considers a fetal anesthetic, the Times reports.
For example, Torres questioned whether the anesthesia or painkillers often administered to a woman seeking a surgical abortion -- which automatically pass on to the fetus -- meet the law's requirements. Other physicians asked if only anesthesia injected directly into the fetus suffices. Torres stated, "We don't know what to do," adding, "How do we not break this law?"
Abortion-rights advocates and physicians have said the vague requirement forcing a woman to take an undefined medication could compromise her health.
In addition, they have said the law burdens the doctor-patient relationship. Citing her experience providing abortion care after 20 weeks to women whose fetuses have severe anomalies, Grosvenor Eller said, "For the Legislature to tell me how to counsel that woman -- these conversations are hard enough" (New York Times, 5/4).
