Letter: Further regulations not based in evidence

This weekend, The Advocate posted my letter to the editor on Louisiana’s state health department’s issuing of “emergency” abortion regulations:

RH Reality Check posted my op-ed today on the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in McCullen v. Coakley, a challenge to a Massachusetts buffer zone law:  – See more at: http://blog.prochoice.org/#sthash.PLSOfYGo.dpuf
Regarding your recent article, New abortion clinic rules are opposed,

Although the state health department has agreed to rescind one of the more extreme provisions, which would have required a 30-day waiting period for women seeking abortion care, the proposed regulations would still dramatically reduce access to safe, quality abortion care for women in Louisiana.

There is no medical justification for imposing new “emergency” regulations on abortion providers in the state. Abortion is already one of the safest medical procedures provided in the United States, and providers in Louisiana are currently in compliance with extensive state regulations.

The proposed regulations do nothing to ensure or improve patient safety. Instead they are calculated to close clinics under the guise of legitimate regulation. Fortunately, people in Louisiana can see through this tactic. Many Louisianans have already contacted the department of health about these regulations, which prompted the removal of the 30-day waiting period.

We urge the department of health to put women’s health first by adopting commonsense policies that are based on evidence not ideology.

Share this Post