When voters enacted the Reproductive Privacy Act by initiative in 1991, they did not create a passive protection for women’s choice.
The law says that the state cannot interfere with a woman’s right to have an abortion. And if it stopped there, the act could have been open to a somewhat laissez faire interpretation — preventing state agencies, officials or state-funded entities from actively blocking a woman’s access to abortion services.
But it didn’t stop there.
The law doesn’t simply assure women they are allowed to seek abortions at any public hospital, it tells them they are entitled to receive abortions services at any state-funded medical facility — if that health center provides any “maternity care benefits, services, or information to women through any program administered or funded … by the state.”
This distinction is at the heart of a court ruling in Mount Vernon this week in a 2015 lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington against Skagit County’s hospital district and Skagit Valley Hospital.
Interestingly, the hospital argued that it has no interest in denying abortion services — it just doesn’t have anyone on staff willing to do the procedures. And the same 1991 state law that protects women’s choice also protects the right of a physician to refuse to perform an abortion.
Instead of providing abortions, the hospital has been referring women to Planned Parenthood.
Not good enough, said Superior Court Judge Raquel Montoya-Lewis. The law says what it says, and that means the hospital must offer abortions on site.
The ACLU and pro-choice groups, not surprisingly, embraced this affirmation of the 1991 abortion rights law. And the ACLU has reportedly warned hospital districts on Whidbey Island and in Jefferson and Mason counties that they could face similar lawsuits.
The hospital districts are caught between two separate rights: Women are entitled to abortion services at their facilities — but members of their staffs cannot be compelled to perform abortions.
It is remarkable that 25 years have passed since these specific protections were written into Washington law, but this conflict has persisted.
Until now, hospital districts like Skagit have handled the situation in a passive manner, conveniently sending women elsewhere for their abortions. This week’s ruling seems to send the message that they must proactively seek out physicians who are willing to perform abortions and give them jobs or privileges at public hospitals.
Today, numerous states are inventing elaborate obstacles for women seeking abortions (and Texas legislators may earn the greatest notoriety, but they are not alone). But with the Reproductive Privacy Act on its books — and with this week’s decision by Montoya-Lewis — our state steadfastly affirms a woman’s choice.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
