The court fight is over a provision of the new Kansas Telemedicine Act, which will if it stands enable Kansans in areas without handy hospitals or access to medical specialists who work in far-away or out-of-state medical centers to be treated over visual internet hookups. Like those you see on TV ads, where the grandparents and children look at and talk to each other.
That Telemedicine Act is seen as a potential life-saver for some Kansans who can’t get to a big city hospital’s specialized treatments or emergency diagnoses.
That remote telemedicine physician may be able to diagnose an illness that the local health-care provider doesn’t have the specialized training to recognize. That happens in real life.
Well, the whole telemedicine bill passed by last year’s Legislature was generally liked by the Legislature. The Senate passed the bill 32-6, the House 107-13 on the same day last spring, and the governor—that’s Gov. Dr. Jeff Colyer—signed it into law.
Sounded good, except that the measure turned out to be a vehicle for a scrap over abortion. Of course.
Here’s the key:
The bill says that “nothing in the Kansas telemedicine act shall be construed to authorize the delivery of any abortion procedure via telemedicine.”
The Center for Reproductive Rights, on behalf of the Trust Women Foundation of Wichita, has challenged that provision of the new law, asserting that it puts women, and rural women, at a disadvantage. The group wants the anti-telemedicine abortion language to be rejected, or nullified.
But it gets more complicated, a lot more complicated. Antiabortion lobbyists fought to get a so-called “nonseverability” provision in the bill, and succeeded. That narrowly targeted provision says if any specific part of the bill is found to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court, the rest of the act is untouched, still law.
…Except for that provision dealing with “not authorizing any abortion procedure via telemedicine.” If that “not authorizing” section is struck down by a court, then the whole telemedicine act is voided.
That puts pro-choice challenges such as the one being considered now in the position of win and telemedicine loses, lose and the rest of telemedicine with its social and geographic support will start quickly.
That telemedicine abortion is basically using the telemedicine interview and health records check to determine whether a woman can obtain a couple pills that cause an abortion without the need for physical presence of a physician.
Those pills, called abortifacients, are pretty safe and don’t require hands-on doctor-patient interaction. That’s why they are used in a large percentage of first-trimester abortions.
This comes down hard. For those who oppose abortion it means that a decision rejecting the Trust Women lawsuit to allow women more decision on their health keeps telemedicine on track. A victory for those who see the issue as one of women’s rights: a win could kill telemedicine in Kansas.
Whatever the decision in the Shawnee County Courthouse, count on an appeal of the ruling and an effort by both pro-choice and antiabortion forces to fight it out in the Legislature next session. That’s a fight that lawmakers don’t want to have this year when it will undoubtedly stretch into next year, and the upcoming legislative elections.
Lots at stake here…
Syndicated by Hawver News Company LLC of Topeka; Martin Hawver is publisher of Hawver’s Capitol Report—to learn more about this nonpartisan statewide political news service, visit the website at www.hawvernews.com