Doctors duel over Arizona abortion ballot measure

(The Center Square) – In just two weeks, Arizonans will have the opportunity to vote on whether or not to enshrine one of the nation’s most expansive abortion access measures into the Arizona Constitution. Multiple organizations are speaking out in either support or opposition of Prop. 139, including Arizona obstetricians.

The Committee to Protect Healthcare held a roundtable discussion on Tuesday with three Arizona physicians who stated that Prop. 139 is essential for Arizona women’s healthcare. The official language for the ballot proposition states that a pregnant individual would have access to abortion up until the point of fetal viability which is determined by “the good faith judgment of a treating health care professional [that] the fetus has a significant likelihood of survival outside the uterus.”

Additionally, it provides protections when the pregnant individual’s mental or physical health is in jeopardy, which would again be determined by the treating health care official.

These proponents of Prop. 139 say that it is important that the state not be able to interfere in a woman’s abortion access and that they have seen incidents where women have suffered under the current Arizona law which allows abortion up to 15 weeks unless the woman’s life is in danger.

“We know of Arizona women who have gone to the Emergency Department with serious conditions only to be told that they need to go back to their cars and wait until they are more sick – so sick that they are about to pass out or are unequivocally having major complications,” said Laura Mercer, an obstetrician in Phoenix and past chair of the Arizona chapter of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. “Politicians just shouldn’t be involved in making these critical healthcare decisions for women. Healthcare is too complex, nuanced and individualized to be legislated with broad strokes.”

Patricia Levenson, a family physician in Tucson who works in prenatal care and delivery, cited examples of women who have spoken out in support of Prop.139. These women received abortions before Roe v. Wade was repealed. They were both raped at young ages and did not recognize the initial signs of pregnancy. After discovering they were pregnant, they were able to receive abortions. Under the current Arizona 15-week abortion restriction, they would not have been able to receive an abortion as they were too far along.

“No one should be forced to carry their attacker’s child,” Levenson said.

Other Arizona physicians say Prop. 139 is too broad and that claims that miscarriage care is unavailable under current law are unfounded.

“I treated hundreds of patients with severe late term pregnancy complications, including uncontrolled diabetes and severe eclampsia,” said former obstetrician and abortionist Anthony Levatino in a news conference hosted by Arizona Physicians Against Prop. 139. “I never had to provide an abortion in those cases. The proper treatment is usually early delivery, done fairly quickly.”

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes released a statement a few months ago stating that miscarriage care is safe under current Arizona Law.

“Nothing in the statutory language requires the treating physician to delay providing an abortion as necessary medical care until, for instance, the patient is in sepsis, hemorrhaging, or otherwise at death’s door,” reads Mayes’ statement.

Levantino has performed over 1,000 abortions during his career and said that he is concerned that if Prop. 139 is enacted women and young girls would be able to obtain an abortion pill without having to see a physician or go through the preliminary care currently required in Arizona.

“The danger to Arizona women is not the current 15-week limit on abortion, it’s the reckless way in which Prop 139 is written,” Levatino said. “It leaves abortion law wide open, with no required ultrasound to rule out a deadly ectopic pregnancy, and no required physician, of course, until there is an emergency, then they will be scrambling for a physician, believe me.”

Additionally, he said that post-abortion care is also important, stating that 2-8% of women have complications after an abortion.

However, Levatino noted that there are some emergency post-viability procedures that are not allowed under current Arizona law. One being selective reduction of a twin fetus that has a genetic abnormality. He said that these types of abnormalities are often detected before 15 weeks, though.

Levatino did say that he would support changes to the current abortion law such as allowing necessary fetal reduction after 15 weeks, but that he believes Prop. 139 is unsafe for women.

Prop. 139 is one of 13 ballot initiatives on Arizona’s four-page ballot.