Virginia House Approves Measure Requiring Fetal Anesthesia To Be Offered for Abortion Procedures Beyond 20 Weeks
Main Category: AbortionArticle Date: 07 Feb 2005 - 16:00 PDT
'Virginia House Approves Measure Requiring Fetal Anesthesia To Be Offered for Abortion Procedures Beyond 20 Weeks'
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
|
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
The Virginia House of Delegates on Friday approved 72-20 a bill… (HB 1524) that would require physicians to anesthetize fetuses at 20 weeks gestation or beyond before performing abortion procedures, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports (Smith, Richmond Times-Dispatch, 2/5). The measure, which was sponsored by state Del. Richard Black (R), includes exceptions for when a pregnant woman refuses anesthesia for her fetus or if fetal anesthesia could endanger the health of the pregnant woman. Black said that the cut off of 20 weeks gestation was selected because it is a time when medical information indicates that fetuses might be able to feel pain. Black last year proposed legislation that would have required anesthesia of all fetuses aborted at three months gestation or beyond, but the measure failed in a Senate committee after passing in the state House (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 2/2).
Senate Committee Rejects Bill Requiring
Stricter Regulation of Abortion Clinics
The Virginia Senate Education and Health Committee on Thursday rejected
9-6 a bill (SB 839) that
would have mandated stricter regulation of abortion clinics, the Washington
Post reports (Helderman, Washington Post, 2/4). The House on Tuesday approved similar
legislation (HB
2784) that would have increased health standards in order to make the clinics comply with hospital standards. Currently,
abortion clinics are regulated like doctors' offices, which do not undergo routine state inspection. Under the House measure,
clinics performing 25 or more first-trimester abortions annually would have to be licensed and meet the same standards as
ambulatory surgery centers. The licensure also would have required specific staffing arrangements and wide doorways to allow
the passage of gurneys, among other requirements (Kaiser Daily
Reproductive Health Report, 2/2). About 200 abortion-rights advocates opposed to the bill attended the committee
meeting on Thursday, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports (Smith,
Richmond Times-Dispatch, 2/4).
Senate Committee Approves Embryonic Stem Cell Research Bill
The state Senate Education and Health Committee on Thursday approved 10-5 a bill (SB 1194) that would create
a fund for embryonic stem cell research in the state, the Post reports. The measure, sponsored by state Sen.
Russell Potts (R), would call for $1 million in state funds and allow the state to administer private funds to Virginia's
academic institutions for the research. A number of bill opponents testified against the measure, saying embryonic stem cell
research is unethical because "it exchanges one life for the promise of another," according to the Post. The
state Senate Finance Committee is expected to consider the bill and decide whether state money should be appropriated for the
fund, the Post reports (Washington Post, 2/4).
House Committee Approves One, Rejects Two
Abortion-Related Bills
The Virginia House Courts of Justice Committee on Friday approved a bill (HR 1810) 18-0 that would prohibit the
sale of tissue from aborted fetuses. The bill, which was sponsored by state Del. Robert Marshall (R), was amended so that it
"mirrors" federal law, which allows fetal tissue to be donated for research purposes, according to the
Times-Dispatch. The committee rejected 19-1 two bills sponsored by Marshall that would have classified abortions
as "consumers transactions," which would subject the procedures to state consumer-protection laws, the
Times-Dispatch reports (Richmond Times-Dispatch, 2/5). The first bill (HB 2350) would have required abortion
clinics to meet state consumer-protection requirements, including facility cleanliness, sterilization, fire protection,
evacuation, staff credentials, equipment and maintenance of facilities and equipment (Bill summary, 1/11). The second bill
(HB 2352) would have required
doctors who perform abortion-related procedures to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and screen women for
possible physical and psychological "complications" before performing a procedure, according to the
Times-Dispatch. The committee on Friday approved a bill (HR 1812) sponsored by Marshall that
would prohibit the execution of a pregnant woman (Richmond Times-Dispatch, 2/5).
"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork.org kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or
sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is
published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family
Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Visit our abortion section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
25 May. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/19746.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/19746.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
Add Your Opinion On This Article
'Virginia House Approves Measure Requiring Fetal Anesthesia To Be Offered for Abortion Procedures Beyond 20 Weeks'Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.




