South Dakota House committee passes bill to clarify abortion law

A bill intended to clarify South Dakota's 'life-of-the-mother' abortion exception passed a legislative committee on Monday by a vote of 10-2.

Key Takeaways:

• A South Dakota House committee has passed a bill to amend the state's pro-life law.

• The amendment bill lists procedures that are not considered abortions.

• Supporters say the bill will clarify the existing law regarding medical treatments during pregnancy.

• Opponents claim the bill will only further confuse doctors and that abortion must be legal at all times to avoid any possible confusion.

The Details:

Since 2022, South Dakota has protected the majority of preborn children from abortion, with the only exception being babies whose mothers experience life-threatening medical emergencies.

The law states that abortion is prohibited "unless there is appropriate and reasonable medical judgment that performance of an abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant female."

Some abortion supporters, however, claimed the wording was confusing.

The new bill, House Bill 1257, amends the law by listing treatments that are not considered abortion, including miscarriage care and treatment for an ectopic pregnancy. The amended version states:

"Abortion," the intentional termination of the life of a human being in the uterus, provided the term does not include:

(a) Medical treatment that is provided to a pregnant female and results in the accidental or unintentional death of the unborn child;

(b) Treatment to resolve a miscarriage;

(c) The treatment or removal of an ectopic pregnancy;

(d) The removal from the uterus of a deceased unborn child; or

(e) Any medical procedure performed for the purpose of saving the life or preserving the health of the unborn child...

In addition, it adds a definition for "medical emergency," which it explains to be:

"any condition which, on the basis of the physician's good faith clinical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of a pregnant woman as to necessitate the immediate abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function..."

Supporters of the bill say it was created to combat the misinformation surrounding the law, including the assertion that it lacks clarity.

“We should still take that lie off the table and make it resoundingly clear that in the future, abortion does not include ectopic pregnancy management, miscarriage management and the like,” Ian Fury said, testifying on behalf of Governor Larry Rhoden’s office. 

The Opposition

• The stridently pro-abortion American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists opposes the bill, claiming it only makes the law more confusing by defining what's not an abortion. It claims this could lead to the unintentional classification of other pregnancy procedures as abortions because they are not listed.

• The pro-abortion American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota also opposes the bill. Samantha Chapman, the organization’s advocacy manager, said, "In order for our laws to address all the possible circumstances that someone who is pregnant might face, we need to repeal the total abortion ban and make access to medical care the rule, not the exception."

Understanding the definition of abortion would take care of any so-called confusion.

To be clear, induced abortion is the direct and intentional killing of a preborn child. If the procedure is being carried out with the intent to cause the child's death, then it is an abortion. For example:

• A D&C with the intention of killing the embryo = abortion.

• A D&C with the intention of removing an already deceased, miscarried child and related pregnancy tissue ≠ abortion.

South Dakota law defines abortion as "the intentional termination of the life of a human being in the uterus." Therefore, this should be clear.

• Miscarriage care does not carry an intent to kill.

• Ecoptic pregnancy treatment does not include an intent to kill.

• Delivering a stillborn baby does not include an intent to kill.

• Preterm delivery for a medical emergency regarding the mother or child does not include an intent to kill or cause the baby's death.

The Bottom Line:

Attempting to clarify pro-life laws will never satisfy pro-abortion groups that only wish to see abortion available on demand at any time during pregnancy.

The American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota gave away the true goal of all the legal wrangling; it wants intentional killing of preborn human beings to be legal at any point in pregnancy, for any reason — and it is promoting this by way of the false idea that it is the only way to ensure women get medical care during pregnancy.

The South Dakota House now has the bill in its hands.