The following article was originally published in the Ohio Capital Journal and published on News5Cleveland.com under a content-sharing agreement.
Supporters of a bill to require physicians to read state-mandated language regarding a drug used for medication abortion told an Ohio Senate committee the bill is not about punishment, but about accountability.
Those speaking to a Senate Health Committee on Wednesday about Senate Bill 309 represented anti-abortion groups and members of pregnancy resource centers. Pregnancy resource centers are often religiously-affiliated, and typically don’t discuss abortion or promote pregnancy above other options, some with the use of state funding.
The committee heard from women who argued that physicians should be held responsible for complications and severe side effects that may happen with mifepristone, one medication in a two-drug regimen used to conduct a medication abortion. Some even said the bill could be broadened to include accountability for physicians when it comes to other medications.
“When I have given medications, when I have been to a physician with my own children, informed consent is the ideal, but it is not happening, not consistently, in the way that it should be,” said Alyssa Thomas, the medical manager for Pregnancy Decision Health Centers.
S.B. 309 would require physicians to provide a scripted statement to patients indicating their legal ability to hold physicians, facilities, and even drug manufacturers liable for any complications that were not divulged before the drug was administered. The bill specifically addresses mifepristone, and no other medications.
Physicians and abortion rights advocates have said the bill duplicates informed consent that is already a part of their medical training, and could create mistrust between patients and doctors, while doing nothing to address medical safety.
Advocates also cite decades of medical studies that have shown the drug to be generally safe, and adverse effects to be statistically rare.
Supporters of the Ohio Senate bill predominantly point to one study that has been cited in other state legislation that could regulate abortion procedures, a study that abortion rights researchers say was not peer-reviewed, and notes emergency visits for any reason as part of “adverse effects” counts for mifepristone.
“What we’re really looking at – is this safe, what does the information show us,” said state Sen. Beth Liston, D-Dublin. “I’m seeing widely used medication with lots of safety data behind it.”
Katie Deland, of anti-abortion group Ohio Right to Life stood by the study that they say shows more risk in the medication, saying it was “a well-backed study.”
Anti-abortion advocates said the data in the study proved mifepristone needs to be further regulated, and the Senate bill would create further protections for women. Those who spoke to the committee said they’ve seen increases in women expressing a lack of knowledge of the side effects, and shared individual stories of women they said have had severe symptoms from the abortion drug.
The Ohio Department of Health’s most recent yearly abortion report said there were a total of 21,829 induced abortions in the state in 2024. Of those, based on required post-abortion care reports for complications, 196 had complications, less than 1% of all abortions in the state.
Democrats on the committee pushed against the concept of the bill and what the bill would do in a state for which 57% of voters approved constitutional protections for reproductive rights, including abortion, in 2023.
“We all know that our Ohio Constitution says that we can’t be discriminating for reproductive health care and abortion care, and what I see, this is a specific bill discriminating for only that purpose,” Liston said.
Deland said the bill “does not ban abortion, it does not ban access to abortion, it does not restrict abortion.”
“It truly is just information,” Deland said.
Liston asked Deland if the legislature should be requiring physicians to read this statement for other, “objectively much higher-risk medications.”
“I think that’s something to look at,” Deland said. “I think that’s probably where we are in America right now with this MAHA movement. Both sides of the aisle, you’re looking at Big Pharma, what is going on, what are we ingesting, what don’t we know?”
“MAHA” refers to “Make America Healthy Again,” a Trump administration movement to overhaul health standards, led by Department of Health & Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Democratic committee member Sen. Catherine Ingram, of Cincinnati, pushed further for supporters to talk about the bill’s lack of language when it comes to information about the procedure. She sees the mandated language to be read by physicians as just a legal liability statement.
“My concern is not that we don’t want them to have this information, we absolutely do, but I also do believe people … can make those choices for themselves, and they should be informed,” Ingram said. “This bill, and the language … does not do what needs to be done.”
As a physician herself, Liston said she struggles to accept a “pre-prepared state statement as being informed consent” rather than an individualized conversation between patient and doctor.
“I really struggle with the lack of any ability to make medical judgments or decision-making in this bill,” Liston said.
The bill has a likely chance of being passed through the majority Republican committee and the supermajority Republican General Assembly, which has passed similar legislation and leaned toward anti-abortion regulations in the past, despite the constitutional amendment. Among other currently active legislation lead by Republicans is a bill seeking to create “personhood” for fetuses through the U.S. Constitution, that would bypass the state constitution’s language.
Republican Senate Health Committee member Sen. Kristina Roegner thanked the supporters of the bill for “fighting for life.”
