This commentary was written by Anna Cleary, a registered nurse who works in the operating rooms at University of Vermont Medical Center.
I am writing today from a place of deep concern. I have read a few pieces that have been, in my opinion, very misguided about abortion and Article 22.
I have been a nurse for 13 years, working in a large hospital that performs (among many procedures) abortions. It has become commonplace for some within the anti-abortion community (including one of the Vermont House candidates in my district) to state the following: “[Article 22] will not allow for healthcare workers to opt out of performing an abortion for reasons of conscience.”
I reached out directly to our legislators to inquire if this was true. The response that I received was that Article 22 does not have any language written into it that would force a health care provider to perform abortions.
The intent of Article 22 is to preserve the status quo of abortion access/care as it stands right now. I cannot speak to what is happening in other hospitals, but at UVM Medical Center, where I have been working for 13 years, the “status quo” is this: There is a written policy that states that any employee can object to participating in providing care on the basis of moral, religious or ethical grounds. This includes abortion but extends to things like organ procurement cases, the administration of blood products, etc. The only time that an employee would be expected to participate in care that compromises their moral, ethical or religious beliefs is if there were literally no other providers available and the refusal of care would cause injury/harm to the patient.
Most abortion cases can be scheduled for a specific time and date. At my hospital, there is now a specific day of the week when most abortions are performed. This allows for the selection of health care providers who don’t object to providing care for patients receiving an abortion.
Bottom line: Utilizing the knowledge that I have obtained from actual experience working within a well-regulated institution that performs abortions, I don’t believe that the statement that Article 22 will force health care providers to perform abortions is truthful. I believe that this is a fear tactic.
Additionally, I would like to shed light on why abortions may occur later in pregnancy. Twenty weeks into a woman’s pregnancy an ultrasound is performed. It is during this ultrasound that some serious fetal abnormalities can be detected (things like the fetus is missing both kidneys, extreme Spina bifida, fatal cardiac malformations, etc). The pregnant woman is presented with a diagnosis or guided to further testing and options are discussed.
The woman then needs time to process this heartbreaking news. If she chooses to terminate the pregnancy, she needs to ensure insurance coverage for this procedure or make available funds of her own. This woman then needs to schedule an abortion at a healthcare facility. The steps that I outlined above take time… quite a bit of time. As we all know, gestational weeks continue to accumulate during this process. This is why I believe selecting a certain gestational “cut-off” is not appropriate. Every woman’s situation can be so different.
Finally, I’d like to make an honest suggestion or plea. I think that it would be an incredibly meaningful thing if we could all (pro-life and pro-choice communities alike) stop funneling our money, time and energy into the debate over abortion. Instead, we could leave the decision to have an abortion (or not!) between a woman and her doctor. Then we could take all of these precious resources and start improving the lives of the millions of children in need living outside of the womb. Please take a moment to think about the impact that would have. It would be a beautiful thing.
