Rape, incest exceptions should not be included in abortion bill, SC House panel suggests

A South Carolina House panel says it won’t recommend rape and incest exceptions for draft legislation that seeks to outlaw nearly all abortions performed in the state but will suggest lawmakers keep exceptions for the life and health of the mother.

The House panel made those recommendations in a 9-3 vote Tuesday as part of a working draft — H. 5399 — that’ll be debated in the next few weeks by the House Judiciary Committee.

Three of four Democrats on the panel voted against the recommendations: Chandra Dillard, Rosalyn Henderson-Meyers and David Weeks.

The panel’s chairman, Rep. John McCravy, R-Greenwood, said the goal of the recommendations is to end abortion as birth control. He emphasized, despite contrary opinions by medical professionals who testified to the same committee this month, that it will not “endanger the health care of women.”

The panel’s recommendations follow a nearly seven-hour public hearing on July 7 centered on providing exceptions to a total abortion ban. The panel chose not to have another public testimony hearing — a move that sparked backlash from abortion rights advocates.

“We’ve heard many moving personal testimonies,” said McCravy, who at times appeared to get emotional. “But even more importantly, we’ve heard many key misconceptions about the clear and unambiguous law of our current fetal heartbeat (six-week) law that’s now in effect.”

South Carolina currently allows for abortions until fetal cardiac activity is detected, which typically occurs around six weeks. The law, which took effect June 27, replaced the state’s previous abortion law that allowed abortions up to 20 weeks.

The six-week ban allows exceptions for rape, incest, life of the mother and fatal anomaly of the fetus.

A lawsuit against the six-week ban was filed last week by Planned Parenthood, Greenville Women’s Clinic and two physician plaintiffs, citing violations against the state’s constitutional right to privacy, equal protection and due process.

Although the greater impact of the lawsuit is yet to be felt, the plaintiffs are requesting a temporary restraining order that would prevent enforcement of the six-week ban, which would allow post-six-week abortion services to resume in the state.

House panel members sound off on abortion restrictions

The draft recommendations proposed by the House panel include a host of conditions around the mother’s life exception, such as a miscarriage, molar pregnancy and abruptio placentae.

McCravy said the health conditions named in the working draft are not an exhaustive list.

The draft also does not seek to restrict in vitro fertilization or contraceptives, and it does not criminalize people for getting abortion. It does, however, include criminal penalties for those who perform illegal abortions.

Restrictive provisions on traveling to another state for an abortion are not included in the draft. McCravy said such a provision would infringe on other states’ sovereignty.

An effort by Rep. Josiah Magnuson, R-Spartanburg, to further restrict any proposed legislation, such as adding criminal consequences for obtaining medication that would induce an abortion, was debated by the panel but was quickly quashed and criticized by colleagues, including Republicans, who said the additions would undermine state laws.

State Rep. Micah Caskey, R-Lexington, commended the working draft for addressing his two major concerns: a women’s right to self-preservation and protection of IVF. He also highlighted the evolving nature of the recommendations as it heads to be debated by the 25-member House Judiciary Committee, which will draft legislation that will eventually be voted on the House floor.

The Senate is expected to consider the bill passed by the House, in addition to receiving public testimony likely to be heard by the full Senate Medical Affairs Committee.

“I think anyone who goes out of here today and says this is the final version does a great disservice to our friends and neighbors across the state,” Caskey said. “And so, I think it’s important that we not take a snapshot and hold it up as a final product.”

State Rep. Chandra Dillard, D-Greenville, posed questions on the preparedness of South Carolina to support the anticipated increase in childbirth. She mentioned Medicaid, postpartum health care and food benefits as different aspects the Legislature will need to address.

She also said that she would have liked to hear from hospital system and foster care workers to understand the impacts.

“Roe v. Wade has been the law of this land for 50 years. I don’t believe we can answer South Carolina’s issue on how it’s going to impact us in two meetings.” Dillard said. “It’s going to take more time.”

House Majority Leader Davey Hiott, R-Pickens, called the recommendations Tuesday a “good working document,” saying he hopes the Legislature won’t have to revisit the debate every year.

“I don’t believe we’re gonna revisit this thing every year on the floor of the House and having a discussion about abortion bills. I believe this is it for a long time,” Hiott said. “If we don’t get it right, we got nobody to blame but ourselves.”