Ultrasound and Scope of Practice

A measure that would require women seeking an abortion to get an ultrasound exam and have the option to view the scan was revived Wednesday.
State law already requires sonograms for any abortion done more than three months into a pregnancy. The proposed bill would extend that provision to the first trimester, when most abortions take place.
Under the proposed law, doctors must allow the woman a chance to see the scan, unless she signs a waiver declining that option. Doctors also would be required to provide information on fetal development.
The bill provides exceptions to the ultrasound requirement in cases of medical emergencies or when the woman can provide documentation that she's a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence or human trafficking.
Proponents of the measure argue that the ultrasound provision helps women make informed medical decisions and helps doctors prevent complications.
Opponents argue the provision is a veiled effort to create an added hurdle for women. They say doctors -- not the Legislature -- should make the decision to perform an ultrasound.
Personally, I am surprised that organized medicine would support such a measure which clearly provides the legislator the authority to dictate how a doctor should practice medicine.
We struggle every year to prevent the expansion of the scope of practice.
Now,legislators WITHOUT medical training or license to practice medicine is telling us HOW to practice medicine?
I urge all of my colleagues to STOP this measure!
Contact your legislator and ask them NOT to support this legislation.

Posted on Thu, Mar. 19, 2009
Ultrasound abortion provision revived in Florida House

BY BREANNE GILPATRICK
A measure that would require women seeking an abortion to get an ultrasound exam and have the option to view the scan was revived Wednesday, after the state Senate rejected a similar proposal last year in a dramatic 20-20 tie vote.
Following more than an hour of debate, the House Health Care Regulation Policy Committee cast a party-line vote in favor of the bill, with Republican supporters saying the ultrasound provision helps women make informed medical decisions and helps doctors prevent complications.

''I think that any time that anybody has more information when they're going in for a medical procedure I think that's a good thing,'' said Rep. Anitere Flores, a Miami Republican who is sponsoring the bill along with Rep. Rachel Burgin, R-Brandon.

Opponents argue the provision is a veiled effort to create an added hurdle for women. They say doctors -- not the Legislature -- should make the decision to perform an ultrasound.

''I think that this is a very difficult decision that women make and we should not continue to put hurdles up and chip away at current law,'' said Rep. Kelly Skidmore, D-Boca Raton, who voted against the bill along with Rep. Ari Porth, a Coral Springs Democrat.

State law already requires ultrasound scans -- also referred to as sonograms -- for any abortion done more than three months into a pregnancy. The proposed bill would extend that provision to the first trimester, when most abortions take place.

Under the proposed law, doctors must allow the woman a chance to see the scan, unless she signs a waiver declining that option. Doctors also would be required to provide information on fetal development.

The bill provides exceptions to the ultrasound requirement in cases of medical emergencies or when the woman can provide documentation that she's a victim of rape, incest, domestic violence or human trafficking.

Lawmakers in several other states also have proposed bills imposing various ultrasound requirements. Ultrasounds are currently required before all abortions in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and South Dakota. This is the third year in a row that the Florida Legislature has debated similar ultrasound bills. The proposal cleared the GOP-dominated House in previous attempts but failed once because the Senate would not take up the issue, and most recently when seven Republican senators joined 13 Democrats to defeat the bill.

This year, Sen. Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando, is sponsoring the Senate version of the proposal.

Some of the bill's supporters believe the measure has a better chance of passing this session because at least one of the senators who previously voted against the bill has been replaced by a more conservative member.

However, the bill is set to pass through the Senate Health Regulation Committee, where five of the committee's eight members say they are opposed to the bill or have voted against it in the past.

Breanne Gilpatrick can be reached at bgilpatrick@MiamiHerald.com