SB 333’s waiting period requirements threaten women’s health
April 17, 2002
Passage of Senate Bill 333 by the Alabama Legislature has dealt a serious blow to women’s health and women’s reproductive rights.
The numerous restrictions SB 333 places on the right to abortion compromise women’s health and restrict women’s constitutional right to abortion. The most egregious of the restrictions requires a woman to receive biased and demeaning counseling 24 hours before she may obtain the abortion procedure.
The waiting period required by SB 333 threatens women’s health. According to the American Medical Association, “[m]andatory waiting periods [and other barriers] have the potential to threaten the safety of induced abortion.” Because 93 percent of Alabama counties have no abortion provider, many women must travel long distances to reach the nearest abortion clinic. Women in Alabama now must either make two trips to an abortion clinic or must wait to get the required information in the mail. As a result, the 24-hour waiting period could delay the procedure for as long as 10 days to two weeks. The delay often pushes a first-trimester abortion into a second-trimester abortion, making a routine procedure more complicated and increasing medical risks.
“Arguments that SB 333 protects women’s health are false and deceptive. In reality, waiting periods only delay the procedure and increase the risks of complications” said Maggie Garrett, an attorney with the ACLU of Alabama. “In addition, SB 333 delays the procedure even when such a delay conflicts with the best medical judgment of the doctor.”
The waiting period also makes abortion prohibitively expensive. Women who must take more than one trip to the clinic will have double the costs for travel, lodging, and childcare and will have to take additional time off from work. And, because the waiting period may push a first-trimester abortion into a second-trimester abortion, the cost of the abortion itself can cost between $600 and $800 more than it would otherwise cost.
The biased counseling requirement is demeaning to women and violates the doctor/patient relationship. The standards of the medical profession and Alabama regulations require health care professionals to provide patients with accurate unbiased information regarding medical procedures. Regardless, SB 333 sets out specific information that an abortion clinic must convey to a patient. The specific information the legislation requires health care professionals to provide reflects an assumption that women are unable to make decisions in their own best interest.
“The fact that the bill is called the Women’s Right to Know Act is an insult to women,” said Maggie Garrett, “because the bill replaces information the medical doctor and the patient deem relevant to the woman’s decision with biased counseling materials designed to discourage the woman from having the procedure. This bill, contrary to its proponents’ claims, does nothing to advance women’s health. Instead, it simply makes it harder for women to get the medical care they need.”
###