The Republic, March 28, 2012 by John Hanna
TOPEKA, Kan. — A bill designed to give Kansas health care providers greater legal protections if they refuse any involvement in abortion moved Wednesday toward passage in the state House, despite concerns that it could lessen access to birth control.
The House gave the measure first-round approval Wednesday on a voice vote, and final action is set for Thursday. The House has a large anti-abortion majority, and the legislation is expected to pass and go to the Senate, which has yet to consider it.
Kansas already has laws that say no person or hospital can be forced to participate in abortions or sterilizations or be penalized for refusing. This year’s measure extends “conscience” protections to health care facilities other than hospitals and says providers couldn’t be required to refer patients for abortion care or to prescribe or dispense abortion-inducing drugs.
The anti-abortion group Kansans for Life is pushing the measure, and Kathy Ostrowski, its legislative director, said the bill is written so that doctors or pharmacists couldn’t be penalized for refusing to provide birth control if they had a reasonable belief that it terminates pregnancies. The proposed protection is broad enough to cover moral objections, she said.
“We have professionals who have religious concerns that are not covered in state law,” Ostrowski said. “They would have some protections from losing their jobs.”
Still, during the House’s debate Wednesday, supporters of the bill suggested that fears of women not being able to obtain birth control bills or other widely used contraceptives were unfounded.
The House Judiciary Committee sponsored the bill; Chairman Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican, said he wanted to go further to specifically cover birth control and didn’t. Rep. Jan. Pauls, a Hutchinson Democrat who opposes abortion, said even if some doctors and pharmacists wouldn’t dispense birth control, patients have plenty of choices, including mail-order and Internet pharmacy services.
But Sarah Gillooly, a lobbyist for Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, said doctors could not only refuse to prescribe birth control, but refuse to help patients find providers who would. Abortion rights advocates also suggested the bill could prevent sexual assault victims from receiving emergency medications to block pregnancies.
“It’s particularly harmful to rural women and women who live in small towns with just one hospital and pharmacy,” Gillooly said.
The anti- abortion group Kansans for Life is pushing the measure, and Kathy Ostrowski, its legislative director, said the bill is written so that doctors or pharmacists couldn’t be penalized for refusing to provide birth control if they had a reasonable belief that it terminates pregnancies.
Backers of the bill said health care providers face pressure from some employers to accept surgical abortions and abortion-inducing drugs as “mainstream” health care. They also said health care facilities need broader protections from lawsuits for refusing to do abortions or to prescribe drugs that terminate pregnancies.
They noted that the state’s “conscience” laws were enacted more than 40 years ago.
“At that time, there wasn’t any such thing as a chemical abortion,” Ostrowski said. “It’s time for an update.”
___
The anti-abortion “conscience” bill is House Sub for SB 62.
___
Online:
Kansas Legislature: legislature.org”>http://www.kslegislature.org
Kansans for Life: http://www.kfl.org
Planned Parenthood chapter: kansas-mid-missouri/”>http://www.plannedparenthood.org/kansas-mid-missouri/
War on Women 
Posted on March 28, 2012