The legislation up for a vote Wednesday would instead leave the decision to end a pregnancy at 24 weeks or later up to “the professional judgement of a physician” alone.
Its emergence comes as other states, mostly Republican-led, have severely restricted abortion access in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade. Some more liberal states, including Massachusetts, have countered by bolstering existing laws that, for example, protect online and mail access to abortion amid fears of future restrictions.
State Representative Christine Barber, who sponsored the legislation, said it was prompted by the number of people who traveled outside Massachusetts to receive a later-term abortion.
“Patients have to leave to other states, leave their support network, and pay out of pocket,” Barber, a Somerville Democrat, said. “You should be able to get care that your doctors are recommending here in Massachusetts.”
Barber specifically referenced the harrowing journey made by Kate Dineen, who in 2022 traveled to Maryland for an emergency abortion after 24 weeks, the Globe reported.
At 33 weeks, Dineen’s baby suffered a catastrophic stroke in utero and there was a 50 percent chance he would die before birth, her doctor said. Dineen and her husband drove 500 miles to a clinic in Maryland ― one of a handful in the country that performs late-in-pregnancy abortions ― and paid about $10,000 out of pocket for the procedure.
Current Massachusetts law allows abortions after 24 weeks only in cases of “a lethal fetal anomaly or diagnosis . . . or grave fetal diagnosis that indicates that the fetus is incompatible with sustained life outside of the uterus without extraordinary medical interventions.”
Barber said such a ”strict legal framework” doesn’t take into account the “number of complicated medical conditions where a doctor and patient decide to have an abortion,” Barber said.
Dr. Megan Evans, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Tufts Medical Center, said another factor to consider is the equity of care. While some parents in need of a later term abortion do travel to other states, those who can’t afford to are “essentially forced to continue a pregnancy” that could be dangerous, Evans said.
“These decisions should be between the patient and her physician, not tied into hospital lawyers and political rhetoric,” said Evans, who also leads Tufts’s Women’s Health and Longevity Program. “And we never want patients that we cared for to have to leave the state, especially when it’s not equitable.”
Claire Teylouni, interim executive director of Reproductive Equity Now, said that while changes to state law have expanded patient access to reproductive care later in their pregnancies, “patients are still being denied care here in Massachusetts.”
Her organization estimates that dozens of patients annually leave the state to seek care elsewhere for later-term abortions.
“No statutory exceptions framework is ever going to be able to accommodate all of the nuances of pregnancy,” Teylouni said.
“Here in Massachusetts, we are already a hub for later care in the Northeast,” she added, “and so by advancing this legislation, we do think that Massachusetts will be even more of a hub and a leader on this type of care.”
The legislation has the support of the Massachusetts Health & Hospital Association, Barber said. Steve Walsh, a former House lawmaker, leads the influential hospital group.
Emily Dulong, the organization’s vice president of government advocacy and public policy, said in a statement the legislation would “provide clarification for the small number of cases in which clinical complexities and legal restrictions do not align.”
The association and four of the state’s biggest hospital systems — Beth Israel Lahey Health, Mass General Brigham, Tufts Medicine, and UMass Memorial Health — sent a letter to House Speaker Ron Mariano earlier this week supporting the legislation. The health care leaders wrote that the current framework governing abortion care after 24 weeks “does not adequately meet the needs of patients.”
Meanwhile, an antiabortion group, Massachusetts Citizens for Life, urged the public earlier this month to contact legislators to vote down the bill among others, saying the legislation would “impact the protection of human life and families.”
State Representative Lindsay Sabadosa, the bill’s cosponsor and a Northampton Democrat who once worked as a volunteer with the Abortion Rights Fund of Western Massachusetts, said she has heard from doctors and advocates that in some months, as many as 10 women can leave Massachusetts to seek abortion care out of state.
“The numbers may not be enormous, but the effect this bill will have will be tremendous,” Sabadosa said.
Massachusetts Democrats have, for years, taken steps to further bolster reproductive rights in the state.
In 2022, in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning abortion legalization to the states in its landmark Dobbs ruling, Massachusetts lawmakers updated state law to broaden abortion access. Since then, the number of abortions performed here has doubled.
Then-governor Charlie Baker, a Republican, signed that bill into law, shielding providers who perform the procedure in Massachusetts from being prosecuted by other states.
In 2023, under Governor Maura Healey, Massachusetts also took the unusual step of creating a stockpile of 15,000 doses of mifepristone, or medication abortion.
House lawmakers are pushing the new legislation ahead of a self-imposed July 31 deadline, by which bills need to pass in each chamber and enter negotiations between chamber leaders to remain alive before the end of the two-year legislative session on Jan. 5.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Senate President Karen Spilka said she “looks forward to reviewing” the legislation.
Samantha J. Gross can be reached at samantha.gross@globe.com. Follow her @samanthajgross. Anjali Huynh can be reached at anjali.huynh@globe.com.
