Medical exceptions for abortion addressed in Texas House Committee
AUSTIN (KXAN) -- On Monday, the Texas House Public Health Committee took public testimony on a bill to clarify medical exceptions for abortion in the state of Texas.
The Life of the Mother Act, or HB 44, clarifies some of the language in the current bill that dissuades doctors from performing life-saving care on a woman because it would require her to have an abortion. In doing so, it’s hoped that physicians will feel more confident in acting on their reasonable medical judgment to provide this care.
“The Life of the Mother Act has brought together all of the major pro-life groups: the doctors, the hospitals, Republicans, Democrats, and people that are on both sides of the abortion issue,” said bill author Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, at the hearing. “And it's simple, we do not want women to die from medical emergencies during their pregnancies.”
Following the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Texas took steps to ban abortions throughout the state with few exceptions. In light of medical instances that created uncertainty about when it is appropriate to intervene to save the life of the mother or the fetus, proponents on both sides argue that the bill’s exceptions remain too restrictive.
The potential consequences are high. Doctors face up to 99 years in prison, a minimum fine of $100,000 and the loss of their medical license if found guilty of performing an illegal abortion. In addition, they could face expensive civil lawsuits under the Texas Heartbeat Act, also known as Senate Bill 8, which allows any citizen to sue anyone they believe performed or helped facilitate an abortion for a minimum of $10,000.
“HB 44 does not change the state’s stance on elective abortion, it simply clarifies the law and provides additional protection when physicians exercise reasonable medical judgment to protect the life or the health of a pregnant patient,” said Dr. Deborah Fuller from the Texas Medical Association in her testimony.
One of the ways the bill does this is by removing the phrase “life-threatening,” clarifying that the exception to the state’s abortion ban is when there is a threat to the life of the mother or a risk of the substantial impairment of a major bodily function. The phrase “life-threatening” was a point of confusion for physicians who were unclear if “life-threatening” referred to the immediate state of the patient or their state sometime in the future. The removal of this language would reduce hesitation in these scenarios.
Brooke Knudtson Stroud testified about her experience with the consequences of this hesitation. Knudtson Stroud lost her pregnancy in 2023 after finding a near rupture in her fallopian tube. Despite showing warning signs and reporting them to her physicians, she was told her symptoms were normal until it was too late.
“Something I've learned through it all is I’m my only advocate and that's why I’m here to support HB 44. Because this isn’t about politics, it’s about common sense, making sure women like me—daughters, wives, aspiring mothers—get the care we needed,” said Knudtson Stroud at the hearing.
In addition, the bill explains that physicians who exercise reasonable medical judgment when determining their course of action in these cases will not be subject to disciplinary action.
The Public Health committee left the legislation pending, before recessing as the House convened in the chamber. The committee reconvened this afternoon after the end of the House floor session.