Molly Smith, a board member for the anti-Issue 1 group Protect Women Ohio, called the initiative “extreme.”
“The practice of late-term abortion is so barbaric that Republicans and Democrats agree it should be banned,” Smith said in a statement. “The groups behind Issue 1, including the ACLU, clearly missed the memo: Abortion-on-demand up until birth is too extreme for Ohioans. Period.”
This question was also a major point of contention in a debate on Issue 1, which was released on Oct. 15, hosted by the Ohio Debate Commission.
Mehek Cooke, a spokeswoman for Protect Women Ohio, emphasized the same argument during the debate.
“It’s determined case-by-case, so now you’re letting the abortionists decide when viability exists,” Cooke said. “This is extreme. It’s allowing for late-term, partial birth abortions.”
Desiree Tims, the president and CEO of Innovation Ohio, who defended the initiative’s language, accused the pro-life movement of spreading “misinformation” about the language and encouraged voters to read the entirety of the proposal.
“Fetal viability should be determined by a physician, someone who’s actually studied medicine, [and] not someone who got voted into office at the state House,” Tims said during the debate.
“Fetal viability — that should not be determined by any politician on the state House floor. There are reasonable limits [and] the language is clear. I encourage you to also read it for yourself.”
On the issue of health exceptions, Tims said “that’s between the doctor and the patient.” She argued that “politicians shouldn’t be defining health” and that “physicians studying health care, every doctor will tell you every pregnancy is different.”
No clear protections for parental consent for abortion, opponents say
The language that guarantees reproductive freedom rights to “every individual” has also led to concerns that the proposal could affect parental rights. Under current Ohio law, a minor needs parental consent to obtain an abortion in most cases.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Barb Driehaus, a spokeswoman for the Ohio chapter of Democrats for Life, said in a statement that “by repeatedly using the word ‘individual,’ never ‘adult,’ ‘woman,’ or ‘person over 18,’ Issue 1 allows minors to legally obtain abortions without parental consent or even parental notification,”
“An abuser could coerce the minor victim and Issue 1 will make it easier to cover up the crime,” Driehaus continued. “Even those who favor expanded abortion laws ought to vote ‘NO’ on Issue 1.
Cooke, the spokeswoman for Protect Women Ohio, asked during the debate earlier this month why the measure’s draftees didn’t use the word “woman” in writing the policy.
“If this was truly about abortion, they would have used the word ‘woman’ instead of ‘individual,’” Cooke said. “They would have stated that there was an age limit to perform an abortion. They don’t do that. They’re taking away parental consent and notification.”
Tims disputed that interpretation, arguing that children will still need parental consent, and again encouraged voters to read the language.
“There isn’t any language that includes anything about children,” Tims said. “In fact, children will still have to receive parental consent for any medical procedure.”