OKLAHOMA CITY - A bill requiring doctors who perform abortions to report a host of new information on women seeking the procedure is unconstitutional, two women claim in a lawsuit filed Tuesday.
Former state Rep. Wanda Stapleton and Shawnee resident Lora Joyce Davis allege in their lawsuit filed in Oklahoma County that the measure violates a constitutional requirement that legislative measures deal only with one subject.
Besides new reporting requirements, House Bill 1595 prohibits abortions based on the gender of the fetus, redefines several abortion-related terms and creates new reporting responsibilities for several state agencies. It was passed by the Legislature this year and is scheduled to take effect Nov. 1.
"Anti-choice forces will stop at nothing to prevent women from having access to abortion services, including resorting to a cheap legislative trick that's quite clearly unconstitutional," said Jennifer Mondino, a staff attorney at the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing the two women. "These 'bundled abortion restrictions' have nothing to do with protecting the people of Oklahoma and everything to do with lawmakers who have political agendas trying to make it harder for women to get abortions and harder for doctors to provide them."
The Center for Reproductive Rights successfully challenged a 2008 abortion law, which was overturned last month. Oklahoma County District Judge Vicki Robertson ruled that law violated the constitution's single-subject rule. The state attorney general's office has appealed that ruling to the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
But Rep. Dan Sullivan, the House author of the 2009 bill, said all the sections of the bill deal with the same subject-abortion.
"They're all part and parcel of the same event," said Sullivan, R-Tulsa. "When it comes to protecting life, that seems to be a unifying subject in that bill."
Sullivan said he believes the bill will withstand a constitutional challenge, but added, "If the courts tell us otherwise, we'll be back to fight another day."
The new law when it goes into effect will require abortion doctors to provide information on their female patients, including age, race, marital status, number of previous pregnancies and the reasons given for seeking an abortion. The information gathered from 37 separate sections of questions would then be provided to the Oklahoma State Department of Health, which would be required to produce an annual report on abortions performed in Oklahoma.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
leimapapa 2 years, 7 months ago
Dear internet people, I've been a really good boy this year. People say mean things that I don't agree with and they should be punished. Or instead of punishing them you could reward me. I would like my reward in the form of some candies and a new bike. Don't let me down OU Daily.
Cambrian 2 years, 7 months ago
This law is a direct violation of a a patient's right to privacy and is unconstitutional in that it is an invasion of privacy. Since when does the government of Oklahoma have the right to see anyone's personal health information? An abortion is a medical issue just like any other medical procedure and therefore should be kept between a woman and her doctor. Imagine if you had to fill out a public survey every time you got a vaccine, or saw a doctor for a cold, the flu, or to get Viagra. How would people feel if there entire medical history was made public record for everyone in their office to see? This law has only one purpose and it's not to protect a woman's health. The law is meant, and I think Representative Sullivan proves it with his statement, to discourage women from having an abortion. Anti-abortionists have failed to overturn Roe V. Wade and this is a sorry attempt to win a battle that is futile in every attempt. I have no doubt that this ludicrous bill will be overturned even if it has to go all the way to the United States Supreme Court.
mustafa 2 years, 7 months ago
Eightbitgirl- Whats a matter aren't you proud of your abortion? Perhaps you don't know but clowns like you used to claim that abortion was sooo harmless to the woman that every capable woman should have at least one abortion just to make the political statement that they control their own bodies. Since you believe there is no such thing as Post Abortion Syndrome surely you've had and abortion by now. Why then aren't you be proud to boast about it. But then since you only charge eight bits a throw perhaps you can't afford it.
JJanowiak 2 years, 7 months ago
Dear online editor, please ban mustafa for calling a feminist poster a cheap whore who couldn't afford an abortion. This stupid subhuman animal does not deserve to be using the internet.
cketrick 2 years, 7 months ago
This article fails to mention that all this gathered info will be put online.
http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/10/07/okla_abortion/
eightbitgirl 2 years, 7 months ago
Regardless of how you feel about abortion, this is a gross violation of HIPAA. It would be all too easy to identify a woman in a small town based on the information they're planning on making available. When did scarlet letters become the norm again? I am far too angry to make a coherent statement about this, other than this has squat to do with anything but shaming women into carrying unwanted or problematic pregnancies to term.
zaylyn 2 years, 7 months ago
To be fair, I propose: Statistical Reporting of Abortions Act II, also known as: “What’s Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander,” requires the following information to be collected about the FATHER of the unborn child and posted on a public website:
In addition, in an effort to influence the mother’s decision about the abortion, all fathers will be required to offer to contribute $10,000/year for 18 years toward the cost of raising the child.
I am sure that this information would be much more useful in devising policies to reduce abortions than the information to be collected from the mother!