Dr. Amy Chapman and Dr. Tyler Handcock: Texas' opportunity to undo abortion ban's damage

(Chapman and Handcock are obstetrician/gynecologists who own a private practice in Austin.) With bill filing underway in advance of the 88th Texas Legislature kicking off in January, we are keeping a close eye on what’s being proposed for abortion access. As obstetrician-gynecologists practicing for more than two decades in Texas, we are deeply concerned about access to timely, medically necessary reproductive and gynecological care not just for our patients but for anyone needing them. We are encouraged that some lawmakers are fast out of the gate to file bills adding exceptions for rape and incest to Texas’ current abortion ban. We are also encouraged that there are bills filed to allow a pregnant patient and their doctor to make a decision about abortion care that considers lethal fetal anomalies and the preservation of the pregnant patient’s physical or mental health. These are humane exceptions to what is a draconian ban on all abortions. We are also heartened to see the joint resolution filed by Rep. James Talarico (D-Round Rock), which, if passed, would give the decision on abortion access in the state to the voters directly.

As physicians, our first rule is to do no harm. Adhering to that principle is increasingly difficult when lawmakers tie our hands and limit our ability to care for patients. Anyone performing an abortion from the moment of fertilization faces life in prison and civil penalties of no less than $100,000 plus attorney’s fees. While pregnant individuals themselves are protected from criminal prosecution, they can be subject to the state’s vigilante law that incentivizes their fellow citizens to file state civil actions for minimum damages of $10,000 against anyone suspected of aiding in an abortion. Make no mistake, these broad bans impact all our patients. We see patients with lethal or life-limiting fetal diagnoses who have their choice to terminate the pregnancy taken away. We have patients in menopause who need medications for non-pregnancy, non-abortion-related procedures denied access to those medications because they are also used for abortions. These are heartbreaking and utterly unnecessary situations. In addition, in the days and weeks after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs vs. Jackson ruling, we had exponentially more patients seeking permanent sterilization because they so fear an unplanned pregnancy.