ShareThis Page
Pennsylvania lawmakers pushing bill banning Down syndrome abortions |

Pennsylvania lawmakers pushing bill banning Down syndrome abortions

| Wednesday, June 13, 2018 11:15 p.m.
Philadelphia Inquirer
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf speaks July 28, 2016, during the last day of the Democratic National Convention at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. Wolf is expected to veto a bill to outlaw aborting fetuses based solely on a diagnosis of Down syndrome if it passes the Senate.

HARRISBURG — The Republican-controlled Senate came one step closer to considering a controversial bill — which had been thought to be stalled in committee — that would outlaw aborting fetuses based solely on a diagnosis of Down syndrome.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday approved House Bill 2050, introduced by Republican Speaker Mike Turzai of Allegheny and passed in the House in April. Its supporters say it would protect children with a developmental disability. Critics have called it a thinly veiled attempt to roll back abortion rights in the state.

If the full state Senate passes the bill, Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, likely would veto it. He vetoed another measure in December that would have banned abortion 20 weeks into a pregnancy or later, and has said he opposes this one.

GOP state Sen. Scott Martin of Lancaster said Wednesday the latest bill would create a protection similar to a current law that bans abortions based on the sex of the fetus.

“We really need to be protective of the fact that we don’t engage in anything that’s very eugenic,” Martin said. “We’ve seen what that’s done in our country before.”

Down syndrome can be detected in fetuses through blood tests and amniocentesis, a test that samples amniotic fluid in the uterus to detect developmental abnormalities.

Martin said he fears the test could be inaccurate and added that people with Down syndrome can “live just normal, successful lives as so many of us in our communities.”

GOP state Sen. Stewart Greenleaf of Montgomery, who chairs the committee, said, “We don’t want to be in a situation where we’re choosing groups of people who should live and who should not live.”

The bill has been the subject of political maneuvering in recent weeks. When several months passed without any movement in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Turzai proposed tacking this abortion measure onto a human-trafficking bill in the House that was sponsored by Greenleaf. After the Senate committee passed Turzai’s bill on Wednesday, Turzai withdrew his proposal. Greenleaf said he had hoped that would occur.

Asked about the timing of his committee’s vote on the abortion measure, Greenleaf said: “If I don’t get it out now, then we may not be in session. Next week may be our last week to be in session. It’s not just that bill, it’s all the other bills (in committee).”

The Legislature usually takes a break in the summer, returning in the fall.

Asked later in the day whether the bill, the only one that came up for a vote Wednesday before the committee, would be brought to a floor vote, Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, Centre Republican, said the issue had not yet been discussed with other Republican senators.

The bill’s passage was lauded by at least one group that has advocated for the passage of abortion bills in the past.

Michael Geer, the president and CEO of the Pennsylvania Family Institute, said the bill was “an important first step” to protect the lives of people with Down syndrome.

Some Democrats were critical of the bill.

Democratic state Sen. Daylin Leach of Montgomery asked during Wednesday’s hearing how the bill would be enforced once a woman receives the fetus’ diagnosis.

Martin said the only way an abortion could be prevented is if the woman clearly discloses to a clinic that she is seeking the abortion because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome.

That troubled Leach and others on the committee.

“There is no revealing to an abortion clinic . what the woman’s diagnosis was,” Leach said. “Even if the woman has a diagnosis, and even if it is revealed somehow. . If the woman has an alternative reason, they’d still be allowed to get the abortion.

“I’m not sure I understand what the law actually does, and that troubles me,” he added.

Geer said he interprets the bill as one that still allows a woman’s right to an abortion, but restricts the actions of a doctor to pressure a woman to undergo an abortion after receiving a Down syndrome diagnosis for her fetus. He said his group has received numerous responses from parents who allege they were pressured by doctors or genetic counselors to undergo an abortion after this diagnosis.

“This legislation would now teach that that’s no longer the professional thing to do,” Geer added. “We think that respect and dignity begins at the diagnosis (of Down syndrome). We’re excited about this bill, because it helps stop the targeting of unborn children because they have a diagnosis of Down syndrome.”

Pennsylvania’s chapter of Planned Parenthood and the Pittsburgh Center for Autistic Advocacy have previously called the bill “deeply dangerous” and “exploitative.”

“While we vehemently believe that all lives of disabled people are worth celebration and support, we condemn the Legislature’s attempt to force pregnant people to carry unwanted pregnancies while refusing to also support families and individuals with the basic services they need to be fully integrated in our communities and realize their fundamental rights,” Cori Frazer, executive director of the Pittsburgh Center, said in a statement when the bill was advancing through the House in April.

The bill, if passed, could be subjected to a legal test as well.

State Sen. Art Haywood, a Democrat representing parts of Montgomery and Philadelphia Counties, said Wednesday that the bill was “clearly unconstitutional” and did not support its movement out of committee.

Martin said he “would not doubt there will be a legal challenge.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.