On March 23, the New Hampshire State House passed two bills aiming to protect the right to an abortion in the Granite State.
HB 88 looks to enshrine the right to an abortion in the state of New Hampshire, while HB 224 aims to repeal criminal and civil penalties against reproductive healthcare providers in the state. The bills both passed, with Democrats mainly in support and Republicans primarily in opposition.
It’s very disappointing that last year’s legislative session saw the first modern abortion ban in the state of New Hampshire. According to Seacoastonline, the state legislature snuck in a 24-week abortion ban with a narrow exception into the state’s budget. Instead of issuing a veto for the poorly-written measure, Gov. Chris Sununu chose to sign it and waited for the legislature to take further action.
Thankfully, the legislature ended up adding more exceptions and removed an ultrasound requirement from the original language, but problems still remain. As it stands today, the law still allows for criminal and civil penalties for healthcare providers, which HB 224 aims to remove.
It is my belief that no doctor or healthcare professional would perform an abortion at such a late stage in pregnancy without a severe risk to the life of the mother, or if the fetus was certain to have severe complications/death. The bill allowed for some of these exceptions, but including civil and criminal penalties is simply ludicrous. Healthcare professionals know best in terms of their field, and we don’t need legislators passing needless restrictions, which frankly discourage people from pursuing the field of reproductive health entirely.
We’ve seen how vaguely written laws regarding reproductive healthcare take a toll on lives, especially in states like Texas, which has a six-week ban with an unspecified exception for “medical emergency.” According to ABC News, the Texas law also threatens doctors with felony charges if they carry out an abortion.
The effects of the restrictive law can be seen in the story of Elizabeth Weller, a Houston, Texas woman, in an article written by Carrie Feibel of the National Public Radio (NPR). Weller’s pregnancy was wanted, but later on in her pregnancy she learned that she was suffering from a premature rupture of membranes, a condition that affects about 3% of pregnancies. Later on in the article, Weller describes how her pregnancy rapidly deteriorated.
Despite signs of encroaching illness and a near-certainty the baby would not survive, doctors weren’t initially able to terminate her pregnancy due to the law. “To them my life was not in danger enough,” Weller said. After things inevitably got worse for Weller, an ethics panel finally decided that they would be able to terminate the pregnancy.
I will be the first to acknowledge that New Hampshire is in a much better place than Texas or Missouri in terms of reproductive freedom, but the threat of legal penalty for carrying out a procedure that has saved lives is ridiculous. Additionally, New Hampshire should enshrine the right to an abortion. Just last year, Vermont voters overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment to do just that. New Hampshire should not become an island of regressive policies among its more progressive neighbors.
The pair of bills will now head to the State Senate, where they may face an uphill climb. The State Senate is composed of 14 Republicans and 10 Democrats. A slightly different version of HB 88 – SB 181 – was rejected 14-10 on a strictly party-line vote in early March. The right to an abortion should not be a partisan issue, but, unfortunately, New Hampshire legislators view it as such. Both bills had a hearing before the State Senate’s Judiciary Committee on April 6.
I urge anyone who feels strongly about access to reproductive healthcare to reach out to their state senator in support of these bills. The fight for abortion rights is far from over in the Granite State.
Nathan Hope can be contacted at
nhope@kscequinox.com
