Opponent of abortion amendment says its vague language poses a danger to women
As executive director of A Woman’s Choice, a pregnancy center in Lakeland, Rebecca Klein is open about her moral objections to abortion.
But Klein thinks that even Florida residents who don’t oppose the procedure should resist signing a petition calling for a vote on a proposed constitutional amendment that would establish abortion rights.
Calling the language of the 49-word proposal dangerously vague, Klein suggested that many Floridians who sign petitions to place it on the 2024 ballot probably don’t understand the measure’s full implications.
'Women need to have access': Advocates in Polk County make final push to get abortion amendment on ballot
Klein also worries that some Floridians sympathetic to abortion rights might not recognize the irrevocability of a constitutional amendment.
“And so, one of the things I'm going to be trying to get out there is understanding that if this passes, the only way to undo it is through another constitutional amendment,” Klein said. “It has a permanency that undoes all existing law related to this issue. And that's pretty significant.”
For example, while the proposal states that Florida could still impose parental notification before a minor has an abortion, it would invalidate a law passed in 2021 requiring parental consent in such cases, unless a court intervenes.
“And so, again, the average citizen, do you realize that if you sign this and you vote for this, a 13-year-old can get an abortion without her mother ever giving consent for that, and maybe notified but the notification doesn't in any way impact whether the abortion happens or not?” she said.
Klein is especially troubled by what she considers vague references to fetal viability in the measure and its allowance of abortions “when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”
Viability refers to the stage at which a fetus has developed enough to survive outside the womb. Medical experts generally identify that as a gestational age of 23 to 24 weeks, but Klein worries that the term is subjective and not clearly defined in the proposed amendment.
Klein is even more concerned about the reference to protecting the patient’s health. Noting that “healthcare provider” does not necessarily mean doctor, she pointed out that proponents of abortion rights often say it should be a decision made by a woman and her doctor.
Allowing abortions for undefined reasons of health could extend the right through an entire pregnancy, Klein warned, including so-called partial-birth abortion. That contentious phrase refers to a second-trimester procedure, medically known as standard dilation and evacuation, that is banned by federal law.
Klein said she consulted a representative of the Florida Family Policy Council, a nonprofit that opposes abortion, who said the “patient’s health” clause could allow abortions for concerns about mental health or anxiety. The representative suggested that the phrase “healthcare provider” could empower a psychologist, a podiatrist or even an abortion clinic nurse or secretary to authorize an abortion.
Summing up the proposed amendment, Klein said: “It's radical. It's extreme and changes things in a way that is dangerous to women.”
Gary White can be reached at gary.white@theledger.com or 863-802-7518. Follow on X @garywhite13.
This article originally appeared on The Ledger: Opponent: Abortion proposal has dangerously vague language
