Return To Full Article
You can republish this story for free. Click the "Copy HTML" button below. Questions? Get more details.

AMA Abortion Lawsuit Puts Doctors In The Thick Of Debate

The American Medical Association is suing North Dakota to block two abortion-related laws, the latest signal the doctors group is shifting to a more aggressive stance as the Trump administration and state conservatives ratchet up efforts to eliminate legal abortion.

The group, which represents all types of physicians, has tended to stay on the sidelines of many controversial political issues, and until recently has done so concerning abortion and contraception. Instead, it has focused on legislation that affects the practice and finances of large swaths of its membership.

But, said AMA President Patrice Harris in an interview, the organization felt it had to take a stand because new laws forced the small number of doctors who perform abortions to lie to patients, putting physicians in a place where we are required by law to commit an ethical violation.

, set to take effect Aug. 1, requires physicians to tell patients that a procedure involving two drugs taken at different times can be reversed. The AMA said that is a patently false and unproven claim unsupported by scientific evidence. North Dakota is one of several states to pass such a measure.

The AMA, along with the last remaining abortion clinic in the state, is also challenging an existing North Dakota law that requires doctors to tell pregnant women that an abortion terminates the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being. The AMA said that law unconstitutionally forces physicians to act as the mouthpiece of the state.

Its the second time this year the AMA has taken legal action on an abortion-related issue. In March, the group in Oregon in response to the Trump administration's . Those rules would, among other things, ban doctors and other health professionals from referring pregnant patients for abortions.

The Administration is putting physicians in an untenable situation, prohibiting us from having open, frank conversations with our patients about all their health care options a violation of patients rights under the [AMA] Code of Medical Ethics, .

Its an unusually assertive stance for a group that has taken multiple positions on abortion-related issues over the years.

Mary Ziegler, a law professor at Florida State University who has written several books about abortion, said that the AMAs history on abortion is complicated. In general, she said, the AMA didnt want to get into the [abortion] issue because of the political fallout and because historically there have been doctors in the AMA on both sides of the issue.

In recent years, the AMA has taken mostly a back seat on abortion issues, even ones that directly addressed physician autonomy, leaving the policy lead to specialty groups like the , which has consistently defended doctors rights to practice medicine as they see fit when it comes to abortion issues.

Ziegler said it is not entirely clear why the AMA has suddenly become more outspoken on womens reproductive issues. One reason could be that the organizations membership is skewing younger and less conservative. Also, this year, for the first time, .

In its earliest days, the AMA to outlaw abortion in the late 1800s, as doctors wanted to assert their professionalism and clear the field of untrained practitioners like midwives.

Abortion was not an issue for the group in the first half of the 20th century. The AMA became best known for successful fights to fend off a national health insurance system.

, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide, the AMA softened its opposition. In 1970, the AMA board called for abortion decisions to be between . But the organization declined to submit a friend-of-the-court brief to the high court during its consideration of Roe.

In 1997, the AMA, in a surprise move, to ban what opponents called partial-birth abortions, a little-used procedure that anti-abortion forces likened to infanticide. A year later, however found its trustees had blundered in endorsing the bill and had contradicted long-standing AMA policy.

One reason the organization may be moving on the issue now could be the shifting parameters of the abortion debate itself. In 1997, the abortion procedure ban that the AMA endorsed polled well and allowed abortion opponents to paint the other side as extremist, Ziegler said.

Exactly the opposite is true today, she said, as states pass abortion bans more sweeping than those seen at any time since Roe v. Wade. Yet most public opinion polls show a want abortion to remain legal in many or most cases.

As abortion opponents take more extreme positions, the AMA is probably a little more comfortable intervening Ziegler added.

Molly Duane, a lawyer from the Center for Reproductive Rights who is arguing the case for the AMA and North Dakotas sole remaining abortion clinic, said the laws being challenged are something all doctors should be alarmed by. This is an unprecedented act of invading the physician-patient relationship and forcing words into the mouths of physicians.

窪蹋勛圖厙 News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFFan independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

Help 窪蹋勛圖厙 News track this article

By including these elements when you republish, you help us:
  • Understand which communities and people were reaching.
  • Measure the impact of our health journalism.
  • Continue providing free, high-quality health news to the public.
Canonical Tag

Include this in your page's <head> section to properly attribute this content.

Tracking Snippet

Add this snippet at the end of your republished article to help us track its reach.