Local leaders hopeful abortion case expands exemptions

Local women organization leaders said while Indiana’s near-total abortion ban should be overturned they are pleased that a Planned Parenthood case to expand medical exemptions is being heard by a judge.

Special Judge Kelsey Blake Hanlon presided over a 3-day bench trial that ended Friday to address a case brought by abortion providers to broaden access to abortions under the state’s near-total ban.

Julie Storbeck, Indiana National Organization for Women President, said the organization supports the lawsuit because Indiana’s near-total abortion ban was not decided based on medicine.

“We look forward to the whole law being completely overturned at some point, and we’ll continue to work on that and support all efforts to have the law overturned in whole. But meanwhile, until we can get to that point, we totally support this suit,” Storbeck, of Valparaiso, said. “We are cautiously optimistic that the courts will rule in our favor and expand the exceptions.”

Deborah Chubb, executive director of the Indiana Women’s Action Movement, said while it is important for abortion providers to go to court to expand access for abortion care it is also frustrating that they must.

“This whole discussion feels like such an academic exercise. The point is that women make very responsible, rational decisions about how many children they can gestate, birth and raise,” Chubb, of Michigan City, said.

Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers are asking Hanlon for a preliminary injunction expanding the medical exemptions and blocking the hospital-only requirement.

The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the ban in June, ending a broader legal challenge brought by the same plaintiffs, but said the state’s constitution protects a women’s right to an abortion when her life or health is at risk.

The plaintiffs say the ban’s exceptions for protecting health are written so narrowly that in practice, many doctors won’t end a pregnancy even when a woman’s condition qualifies under the statute.

According to the complaint, the ban does not account for conditions that may threaten health later in a pregnancy, after giving birth or for conditions that may exacerbate other health problems. The health and life exception allows for an abortion up to 20 weeks into the pregnancy.

The plaintiffs also want women to be able to have abortions if medically indicated for psychological reasons. The current statute explicitly rules out the threat of self-harm or suicide as a “serious health risk,” which is another reason why the plaintiffs say the state’s definition is unconstitutional.

Only a few hospitals, largely in the Indianapolis area, provide abortions and usually at a higher cost than at clinics, the complaint says. Doctors prescribing medication must observe the woman swallowing the pills, delaying abortions for patients who don’t live nearby.

Storbeck said the cost for an abortion can be in the thousands at a hospital, while the cost for an abortion can cost a couple hundred dollars at a clinic.

The state has called the providers’ claims “vague and ambiguous” in court filings, and denied that Indiana infringes on any legal rights.

If a patient requests or needs an abortion, that decision should be made between the patient and a doctor, Storbeck said.

“How did we get to the point where a doctor, their decision in a life or death situation, their decision when dealing with the health of their patient is dismissed for someone who has no background and no knowledge of pregnancy and reproductive rights,” Storbeck said.

The challenge was filed in politically liberal Monroe County, home to Indiana University’s main campus, but Democratic judges handed off the case until it landed before Hanlon, a Republican elected in a neighboring, conservative Owen County.

Indiana became the first state to enact tighter abortion restrictions after the U.S. Supreme Court ended federal abortion protections by overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2022. The state law also allows exceptions for rape, incest and lethal fetal anomalies in limited circumstances.

Since the ban took effect, abortions in the state have dramatically dropped. According to the latest report from the state health department, 46 abortions were reported in the last three months of 2023, down from 1,724 during the last quarter of 2022.

Chubb said if state officials want to increase the number of births in the state the legislature should pass bills that improve access to prenatal care, paid maternity leave and the medical cost of birth.

“There are just so many things that policymakers could do if their goal was to increase the number of births,” Chubb said.

The way to address the state’s near-total abortion ban is for voters to elect those who support legalizing abortion to the state legislature and other state offices. Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jennifer McCormick recently held a series of town halls across the state, including one in Merrillville, that focused on reproductive rights.

“Even if this exception for the health for the mother is expanded to some extent because of this case, that does not cure the problem of women being denied full and equal citizenship under our state constitution,” Chubb said.

Storbeck said voters should research their candidates in the general election and vote for candidates who support reproductive rights.

“That’s the only way we’re going to get out of this, is if we vote,” Storbeck said.

akukulka@chicagotribune.com