Bill would have required hospital admitting privileges and the name of a backup doctor

 

Several counties in Indiana have passed legislation to serve women suffering from abortion-related complications.  St. Joseph County attempted to enact the Patient Safety Ordinance with the same intention, but on March 10 the St. Joseph County Council struck it down.  The bill would have required abortion doctors to have admitting privileges in the local hospital, or required them to make public the name of a backup doctor in order to address complications that might arise after an abortion procedure.

“Bill 69-14 was a common-sense, reasonable, and bi-partisan effort to add a modicum of local oversight and accountability to our local abortion industry,” Daniel Herbster, one of the bill’s sponsors, explained to the Rover.

“After hearing about the Kermit Gosnell travesty and seeing Allen County pass a similar ordinance, my co-sponsors and I felt a local patient safety ordinance would be appropriate,” he continued.  “Over the many months Bill 69-14 was being considered, much evidence came to light about problems with our own local abortion provider which powerfully illustrated why this bill was necessary.”

“The purpose was to ensure better overall care for women who might have complications from abortions,” said James O’Brien, another co-sponsor of the ordinance.

“That would have been accomplished by either requiring the abortion doctor to have admitting privileges at a local hospital or by having a backup doctor, which the Indiana law provides a requirement for either of those at a local hospital, but then to actually require the backup doctor to be identified so people would know who to call if there’s a problem,” he told the Rover.  “Right now, the patient isn’t told who the backup doctor is.”

Typically, if complications arise after a procedure, the doctor can address the issue himself or can admit the patient to the local hospital.  However, the abortion doctor for St. Joseph and surrounding counties, Dr. Ulrich G. Klopfer, resides in Illinois, thus making it difficult for him to treat complications.  The bill would have allowed him to admit patients to the local hospital directly, or it would have made known the name of the backup doctor so patients could receive care more easily.

The state law of Indiana already requires abortion doctors to have either admitting privileges or a backup doctor, but the name of the backup doctor does not need to be made public.

Jeanette Burdell, Program Director of St. Joseph County Right to Life, told the Rover, “The purpose of the Patient Safety Ordinance was to strengthen the state law, which requires abortionists to have hospital admitting privileges or a physician designee (back-up doctor) who does.”

However, as O’Brien said, “The state law requires the doctor to have admitting privileges or a backup doctor.  The state law is kind of a one-size-fits-all, and it applies everywhere. The state doesn’t have any specific local considerations.”

Other local legislative bodies have passed ordinances like this one, such as in Fort Wayne, where a similar law was passed, challenged, and upheld.  Supporters of the bill believed that the ordinance would have helped state law accomplish its goal.

“[T]he law does not accomplish all that it intended because even hospital staff and on-call ER doctors do not know who to call when they receive the abortionist’s patients,” Burdell explained.  “The back-up doctor relationship, which is meant to lend medical oversight and peer review to the abortionist, is merely an arrangement on paper.”

Opponents of the bill argued that it was redundant to state law and presented unnecessary burdens to women seeking an abortion.

Herbster contended, however, that localities do have an interest in regulating abortions: “Much of the opposition to this bill stemmed from a resistance to any inconvenience on obtaining an abortion despite extensive case law, including Roe v. Wade, showing that local governments have a legitimate interest in reasonable restrictions on abortion,” he stated.

Geoffrey Cly, the backup doctor in Allen County for Klopfer, submitted written testimony to the hearing in St. Joseph County, arguing that this ordinance was necessary.  His statement explained that he treated women with complications after abortion procedures, and cited one example of a 20 year-old woman who had to have a complete hysterectomy and lost her fertility.

“This could have been prevented with proper emergency on-call coverage and quality oversight,” Cly writes in his testimony.  “This bill would correct that problem by requiring admission privileges and notification of the hospital where the patient can receive follow up care.”

Burdell claimed that accountability for doctors is essential, and abortion doctors should not be exempted from this standard.

“Unlike most doctors in our area, Dr. Klopfer is a lone practitioner, with no governing board, no medical partners, no other medical associations, and for all intents and purposes, no working hospital privileges,” she said.  “If the designated back-up doctor had attended to these patients, Dr. Klopfer would at least receive peer review in the form of professional feedback.”

Because of the high number of complications after abortion procedures that have had severe consequences for patients, Dr. Klopfer is no longer allowed to practice in Lake or Allen Counties, but he still practices in St. Joseph County.

Though the bill as originally conceived received bipartisan support, when it came to a vote, Democrats and Republicans split over the issue.  This outcome came as a surprise to O’Brien and Burdell because the Democrats who voted against the ordinance previously supported the bill.

“St. Joseph County Right to Life routinely surveys local candidates at election times.  Since 2008, the surveys have included the questions that pertain to core tenants of the Patient Safety Ordinance,” Burdell stated.  “Five of the six current county council members had responded in Right to Life candidate surveys that they would support such legislation.”

O’Brien discussed the disconnect between constituents and their representatives on this issue.  “I know plenty of local Democrats who were supportive of the ordinance, but their elected party folks apparently were not,” he said.

Herbster also expressed his dissatisfaction: “It is disappointing that my colleagues didn’t see the need for this bill and broke campaign promises in the process.”

Though the ordinance failed on the county level, O’Brien sees a possibility of enacting similar legislation on the state level, which would simply require abortionists to have admitting privileges.

“Given the local political dynamic I think it is much more likely to be addressed at the state level,” O’Brien said.  “That is not to say that at the county level it couldn’t be adopted, but it looks to me like that is unlikely given the elected officials’ failure to follow through on their previous statements or campaign positions.”

Hailey Vrdolyak is a junior political science and theology major who always leaves her desk light on, much to her roommate’s annoyance.  Take a side by emailing her at hvrdolya@nd.edu.