Providers file legal challenge to Indiana ‘abortion reversal’ disclosure requirement

  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

A Bloomington abortion provider has joined with organizations including Planned Parenthood and Whole Woman’s Health Alliance in a lawsuit challenging an Indiana law requiring providers to inform patients about the possibility of “reversing” a medication abortion. The providers say the requirement forces doctors to provide patients with medical misinformation.

All-Options Pregnancy Resource Center in Bloomington is the lead plaintiff in the suit filed Tuesday against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, the Indiana Department of Health, the Indiana Medical Licensing Board and the prosecutors of Lake, Marion, Monroe, St. Joseph and Tippecanoe counties. Among other claims, the suit challenges House Enrolled Act 1577, which the Legislature passed this year. It requires doctors to inform patients about medication-abortion reversals.

The complaint describes the reversal disclosure requirement as “a bogus claim that may lead some patients to have an abortion based on the mistaken belief that they can later undo its effects.” The plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction against the law, scheduled to take effect in July, while the case proceeds.

“Every day we help Hoosiers overcome barriers to find the abortion care they need,” Parker Dockray, executive director of All-Options, said in a statement. “Indiana needs more access and compassion, not more restrictions. HB 1577 is a step in the wrong direction and we’re proud to be challenging it along with our partners.”

The complaint also challenges a provision of HEA 1577 prohibiting medication abortions via telemedicine. Also, Senate Enrolled Act 3 prohibits abortions via “telehealth.”

“Despite our constant efforts to warn Indiana legislators and Governor Holcomb that this law is unconstitutional and would inevitably be challenged in the courts, elected officials yet again put politics ahead of women’s health,” said Ken Falk, legal director of the ACLU of Indiana. “These restrictions would put Hoosiers at risk while ignoring science and the rights of medical providers.”

The case was filed in the Indianapolis Division of the Indiana Southern District Court. Plaintiffs’ counsel include lawyers with the ACLU of Indiana, the ACLU in New York, the Lawyering Project in New York, Jack Law Office in Greenfield, Planned Parenthood Federation of America in New York and Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai’i, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky Inc. in Seattle.

The case is All-Options, Inc.; Whole Woman’s Health Alliance; Alison Case, M.D.; Women’s Med Group Professional Corp.; William Mudd Martin Haskell, M.D.; and Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai’i, Alaska, Indiana, and Kentucky, Inc. v. Attorney General of Indiana, et al., 1:21-cv-1231.

This story will be updated.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}