Planned Parenthood urges Beshear to veto abortion-ban ‘clarification,' says it would increase risk
Doctors and medical students with Kentucky Physicians for Reproductive Freedom gather at the Kentucky Capitol to advocate for a full restoration of abortion access, March 12, 2025. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Sarah Ladd)
Planned Parenthood is calling on Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear to veto last week's legislative changes to Kentucky's abortion ban.
Contrary to Republican backers' claims, the amendment would do 'nothing to improve patient safety,' says a release from Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, 'and instead puts pregnant Kentuckians' lives at even greater risk.'
The organization on Monday sent the Democratic governor a letter outlining its objections to House Bill 90. It was hastily amended last week to spell out when medical providers in Kentucky are permitted to end a pregnancy under the abortion ban's exemption for preventing serious physical harm or death.
Sen. Julie Raque Adams, R-Louisville, who presented the bill to the state Senate, cited a 'desperate need for clarity' as the reason for the amendment.
Republican lawmakers attached the abortion amendment to a bill that was originally meant to clear the way for freestanding birth centers in Kentucky. The surprise action came in the final three days before the General Assembly recessed for the 10-day veto-period.
Tamarra Wieder, Kentucky state director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, said the measure 'will put Kentuckians' lives in danger by forcing pregnant patients to suffer through medical crises before they can receive care.'
Planned Parenthood also complains that the Republican-controlled legislature passed the measure with 'virtually no input from the public.'
The bill specifies that medical providers can intervene to provide 'lifesaving miscarriage management,' remove molar and ectopic pregnancies, treat sepsis and hemorrhage and more.
It also leaves the determination of an emergency to 'the physician's reasonable medical judgment.'
Anti-abortion activist Addia Wuchner, executive director of Kentucky Right to Life, told a House committee that the measure clarifies 'what is not an abortion.'
Opponents say the bill's language is misleading.
Sen. Karen Berg, a physician, cited 'misspeak' when voting against the measure in committee last week.
'When you say that 'we're talking about abortions that aren't abortions' — they are abortions,' said Berg, D-Louisville. 'The definition of an abortion is the termination of a pregnancy prior to viability. You can talk about spontaneous abortions, you can talk about elective abortions, you can talk about emergent abortions. They're still all abortions.'
Planned Parenthood's statement also focuses on what it describes as misleading language. 'By codifying anti-abortion rhetoric such as so-called 'maternal-fetal separation' and redefining critical, lifesaving procedures as something other than abortion, HB 90 ignores evidence-based medical standards and forces doctors to ignore their years of training,' the organization said.
Pointing to the bill's redefinition of abortion, Planned Parenthood cites the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Guide to Language and Abortion. The guide says the term 'maternal-fetal separation' is used by abortion opponents 'to justify or to mandate performing medical procedures that carry more risk for the patient, such as cesarean deliveries or inductions of labor, rather than abortion.'
Dr. Virginia Stokes, an OB-GYN who has protested the state's abortion laws with Kentucky Physicians for Reproductive Freedom, said in a statement after HB 90 passed that the clarification 'creates more restrictions now, and could still result in delayed care for patients.'
'In addition to being callous, this bill is not in line with appropriate standards of care for miscarriage management,' Stokes said. 'It does not allow for treatment decisions until the woman's life is already in danger.'
Providers have long criticized the ban on those grounds. Dr. Jeffrey M. Goldberg, the legislative advocacy chair for the Kentucky chapter of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, who worked on the new language, called it 'an acceptable short term solution for dealing with a really serious problem that's in front of us.'
'We already work within statutory restrictions that are, from a medical perspective, very ambiguous,' Goldberg previously said. 'There's a great deal of work to be done. This is not perfect. I don't want to give anybody the illusion that we all think this is great.'
The Republican amendment comes as reports have surfaced across the country, including in Kentucky, of women who say they were denied access to medication to treat miscarriages and other complications because of state abortion bans, leading in some cases to preventable deaths. Kentucky OB-GYNs have said the state's abortion ban is forcing them to violate their oath as physicians and causing 'devastating consequences' for patients.
On Kentucky's political right the amendment is being applauded. Richard Nelson, the executive director of the conservative Commonwealth Policy Center, said the final version of HB 90, calling it 'clearly pro-woman and pro-child as it acknowledges the unborn as a 'child' and asserts that 'the right to life is the most fundamental human right, forming the basis for all other rights.''
Kentucky legislature approves late-breaking 'clarification' of state abortion law
'The bill legalizes free-standing birthing centers and brings much-needed clarity to health professionals who were previously uncertain about what constitutes an abortion under Kentucky law,' he said.
Beshear's office did not respond to a Tuesday inquiry about his plans for the bill.
Speaking last week about the abortion portion of HB 90, Beshear said: 'One question I'm going to have is: Is it more or less restrictive than the current understanding in the medical community that we have right now?'
If he vetoes it, the Republican supermajority can easily override him when lawmakers return to Frankfort on March 27-28 to wrap up the session.
Mary Kathryn DeLodder, the director of the Kentucky Birth Coalition, said the abortion additions were not something her organization worked on. The Kentucky Birth Coalition worked for years to make freestanding birth centers a reality in the state.
'We are very happy that the bill is passed,' DeLodder said. 'It's interesting to see the discussion not be about birth centers anymore. The conversation has changed, because the bill has changed, and in one way, it's nice that nobody's arguing about birth centers anymore.'
HB 90 still would lift the certificate of need requirement for freestanding birth centers, thus removing a process some have criticized as a 'competitor's veto.'
Freestanding birth centers are health care facilities that are meant to feel like a home. They do not offer c-sections or anesthesia. They are for low-risk pregnancies, and not every pregnancy will qualify for such a birth.
CON attempts to certify that there is a need for a service, be that extra beds in a hospital, an extra MRI machine or a new facility altogether, like a freestanding birthing center.
CON laws are meant to control health care costs by limiting duplicate services, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). Without CON, hypothetically, a community could have many duplicates of the same service. That could force a facility — such as a hospital — to raise prices to compensate for underutilized services brought on by that competition.
Anticipating the end of the certificate of need requirement, several people have already expressed interest in opening a birth center, DeLodder said. She still has concerns about the portion of the bill that requires a medical doctor to oversee the centers.
'There are some physicians who we know are supportive of birth centers, but how many of them are there out there, and how many of them will be willing to become a medical director is yet to be seen,' she said. 'And as people work to develop those relationships in different areas of the state where they wish to open birth centers … I think time will be the only thing that will tell whether that's going to end up being a challenge or not.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump supporters, this is what you're cheering as his deportation scheme unfolds
For the past several days, Los Angeles has been alive with protests over President Donald Trump's immigration agenda. These largely peaceful demonstrations are vital to democracy. They're also infuriating Trump and Republicans. They've upset the president so much, in fact, that he deployed the National Guard and 700 U.S. Marines to the city against the wishes of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. On the campaign trail for reelection, Trump threatened the 'largest deportation operation in American history.' Whether he's actually achieving that doesn't really matter; the terror he's instilling in immigrant communities is unlike anything I've seen in my lifetime. In the wake of these protests, it is important to remember why people are upset in the first place. Protesters are angry that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is indiscriminately targeting people, and these people, who are being arrested and deported, have no access to due process. They are angry, and they are allowed to voice their frustrations. While nearly half the country voted for this terrifying regime, half the country wanted anything but this. It's deeper than what's happening in Los Angeles. It's what this administration is doing all over the country. For those who still support Trump's plan, here is what you are supporting. What's particularly alarming about what's happening in Los Angeles is that it flies in the face of the Republican fight for states' rights. Apparently, it's fine when abortion is left to the states, but protests must be managed by the federal government. In fact, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem once called out former President Joe Biden for even thinking about federalizing the National Guard in Texas in 2024. Now, she's cheering on Trump's actions in California. The cognitive dissonance is astounding. Opinion: Trump is so busy wasting $134 million on LA invasion he forgot to lower prices I am glad people are protesting Trump's horrific immigration policies. I am glad folks are standing up for their neighbors, because whether you like it or not, undocumented people are contributing members of your community. But the truth is that if you're excited about the federal government invading California, then you stopped caring about states' rights. Since Trump was inaugurated for his second term, ICE has arrested more than 100,000 undocumented migrants. The vast majority of the people being detained in ICE facilities have no criminal convictions. People reporting for their immigration hearings – as they have been instructed to do by the U.S. government – have been arrested. So were people at a Los Angeles Home Depot looking for work. To Trump and the people within his administration, every undocumented immigrant is a criminal. It's not just undocumented immigrants who are being taken in. Take Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legal U.S. resident who was wrongly deported to a maximum security prison in El Salvador and only recently returned to the United States to face federal criminal charges. There are also student protesters, like Mahmoud Khalil, who have been detained by immigration officials because they dared to speak out against what's happening in Gaza. Republicans are now afraid of words. Opinion: After LA, Trump hard launches new First Amendment – only MAGA can protest These arrests have become too much for a select few Trump supporters who still have a conscience. Florida Sen. Ileana Garcia, one of the founders of 'Latinas for Trump,' recently called out the inhumane actions of Trump and White House adviser Stephen Miller. 'This is not what we voted for,' Garcia wrote. 'I have always supported Trump, @realDonaldTrump, through thick and thin. However, this is unacceptable and inhumane. I understand the importance of deporting criminal aliens, but what we are witnessing are arbitrary measures to hunt down people who are complying with their immigration hearings ‒ in many cases, with credible fear of persecution claims ‒ all driven by a Miller-like desire to satisfy a self-fabricated deportation goal.' Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. I hate to break it to Garcia, but this is exactly what she and others voted for. This is what America's 'largest deportation operation' was always going to look like – it was never going to just be the 'worst of the worst.' But her latest reaction is a sign that supporting Trump now means something different. It now means supporting rounding up people following the legal process just to make yourself feel better with a fake sense of "securing the border." Under Trump, immigration officials have essentially done away with due process in the interest of meeting deportation goals. They've made it clear they want no part of following the law or the process for deporting people. That's too much work. They'd rather defy the courts, then play the victim when the courts rule against them. Opinion: Republicans, be so for real. This embarrassing government is what you wanted? That's what happens when you arrest people on their way to immigration hearings. That's what happens when you deport people to jurisdictions outside of the United States. It is what happens when you circumvent the rules to achieve a goal, and it should terrify everyone. Regardless of what Trump and Republicans think, the right to due process for everyone is enshrined in the Constitution. If the president can take away the rights of a vulnerable group of people, who's to stop him from infringing on the rights of U.S. citizens in the future? Again, Republicans, you still want this? You want people to be stripped of their rights? You want a federal government imposing itself on states? You want people deported indiscriminately? Congratulations, then. You're doing it. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump lied. ICE nabs law-abiding immigrants, not criminals | Opinion
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What exactly does Donald Trump think the federal government is supposed to do?
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. There are some major contradictions in President Donald Trump's view of what government should do to help and protect Americans as expressed this week. He promised to 'wean' the country off federal disaster relief and wind down FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Cleaning up after hurricanes, wildfires and earthquakes should be a state function, he said. 'A governor should be able to handle it, and frankly, if they can't handle it, the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't be governor,' Trump told reporters on Tuesday. Trump seized control of California's National Guard from Gov. Gavin Newsom, federalizing troops and putting them on the streets of Los Angeles over the objections of local and state leaders. He has threatened to send troops to other cities throughout the country. Critics, including Newsom, accused Trump of an illegal authoritarian overreach. California has sued the administration to end the callup of Marines and National Guard. Trump's actions had the effect of inciting more unrest instead of quieting it, according to the state's leaders. 'These are the acts of a dictator, not a president,' Newsom said on social media. He is primed to roll back California's looming ban on the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035, at least according to Rep. Kevin Kiley, a California Republican. Expect lawsuits. California's Environmental Protection agency has enacted its own climate change policy because the federal government, which has switched from Democrats to Republicans in recent elections, has been unable to stick to one. Trump is also trying to dismantle climate change efforts enacted by Democrats under President Joe Biden. Trump is trying to end the Department of Education in part because he says he wants to return more power over education to the states. At the same time, he's threatening state universities and school systems that want to prioritize a diverse environment. Trump has done all he can to strong-arm American institutions into ending diversity programs that are a reaction to the country's complicated racial past and is instead treating the inclusion of trans women in gendered sports as a major civil rights issue. The standoff between Trump and Newsom is in some ways the inverse of relationships between past Democratic presidents and Republican governors. While Trump is foisting troops onto Los Angeles over Newsom's objections, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, launched Operation Lone Star, which mobilized his state's National Guard to patrol the border and set up obstructions in spots when he felt federal authorities under Biden were not doing enough. Biden officials never threatened to arrest Abbott, however. Trump officials have warned mayors and Newsom against impeding federal immigration authorities. Abbott, for his part, took the initiative to put the Texas National Guard on standby as anti-deportation protests spread around the country. For instance, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders — who was Trump's first-term press secretary — was denied a request for tornado relief funds earlier this year. Sanders was ultimately able to obtain the funds by publicly lobbying and then calling Trump with a direct and personal appeal, as CNN's Gabe Cohen wrote. It would be interesting to see whether Newsom, a Democrat who has previously tangled with Trump, would be as successful. Trump has a history of denying assistance to California. He did it during his first term. In April, CNN reported that when billions of dollars in disaster funding were stalled, Republican governors had better luck at unfreezing them. The White House may already be cutting FEMA out of the equation, according to Cohen's report. He wrote that there have been multiple instances this year when FEMA has not been immediately notified that the White House had approved disaster relief packages, which led to delays in getting the funds out. Regardless, FEMA's normal way of doing business — approving aid based on nonpartisan formulas and the extent of damage — has been replaced by Trump's preferences. If a version of Trump's sweeping policy bill passes through Congress this year, it will also rewrite the social contract by which the federal government helps the lowest-income Americans. States would have to spend more to help provide health insurance through Medicaid programs, but they would also have to impose new work requirements, and millions of Americans would lose health insurance. Spending on food stamps, now called SNAP benefits, would be cut. Trump clearly wants the government to do less. Less foreign aid. Less scientific research. Less income taxes. Less responsibility to fund the social safety net. Except where he wants more. More defense spending. More tariffs (which are actually taxes). More military parades. More deportations.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Former VA Secretary McDonough to host town hall countering DC parade
Former Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough will host a military and veterans town hall in Minnesota on Friday evening as part of the Democratic National Committee's counterprogramming to the Washington military parade touted by President Donald Trump this weekend. The event — part of the party's 'People's Town Hall' series — will be held in the Twin Cities and also feature Rep. Kelly Morrison, D-Minn. McDonough served as the top VA administrator for former President Joe Biden's four years in office and stepped down from the Cabinet post in January. He has largely stayed out of the public spotlight since then. In a statement, DNC officials said the event is designed to 'honor our military members and veterans and protect the care they so bravely earned.' They'll also draw a contrast to the parade, which is centered around the Army's 250th anniversary but will take place on Trump's birthday and feature a massive procession of military equipment by the White House. Army officials have downplayed the parade's links to Trump, calling it an event to help boost public awareness of the service's history and current missions. Army plans for Trump birthday parade include 6,600 troops: Report But the size and scope of the event have ballooned since the White House intervened in planning earlier this year, with an estimated price tag of more than $40 million. This week, Trump said the event would feature 'thousands and thousands of soldiers' and 'a lot of those Army airplanes flying over the top, and tanks all over the place.' Local city officials have expressed concerns about heavy Army vehicles damaging Washington roadways, while critics of Trump have compared the event to shows of military might usually seen in foreign dictatorships. The parade and associated events are expected to bring tens of thousands of tourists to Washington for a day of military-themed celebrations, Army officials said. DNC officials have not announced plans for a formal protest of the parade, although local law enforcement is expecting some protesters along the parade route and in the nation's capital on Saturday. Before serving as VA Secretary, McDonough was White House Chief of Staff and Deputy National Security Advisor under former President Barack Obama. The Minnesota event is expected to focus on concerns surrounding the Trump administration's plans to cut staffing at VA offices. Current VA Secretary Doug Collins has proposed trimming more than 80,000 employees from the department workforce in the coming months, a cut of more than 15%. Democratic lawmakers have decried the proposal, insisting it will hurt benefits and services. Collins has disputed that claim, promising that front-line workers will not be impacted.