Karysse Trandem: Florida women don’t need abortion on the ballot this November

The Florida Supreme Court will soon determine whether a radical pro-abortion ballot initiative nullifying all common-sense protections for the unborn will appear on the November ballot.

There are several reasons why it should not — primarily because it is a political ruse to enshrine abortion on demand into the Florida constitution on the pretext that it is necessary for women’s “health” when, in fact, it harms women. I can testify from my own experience as a board-certified OB/GYN with over 16 years of experience and my current practice in Florida that this ballot initiative is both unnecessary and dangerous — especially since Florida law already protects women’s health and safety.

The so-called “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion” stipulates that: “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s health care provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

There are several red flags in this language.

First, the amendment’s heavy-handed support from radical abortion interest groups Planned Parenthood and the anti-parent American Civil Liberties Union is telling. These organizations were behind the damaging passage of initiatives in Ohio and Michigan that enshrined abortion on demand, up until birth, into their states’ constitutions and now allow minors to receive abortions and sex change operations without parental consent. Tellingly, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU refused to support another abortion ballot initiative in South Dakota because it didn’t go far enough. Their support for Florida’s proposed ballot initiative should deeply concern all Floridians who want reasonable protections for women and children.

Secondly, the language of the proposed Florida initiative is intentionally vague to allow for unrestricted abortion on demand. For example, the amendment would allow abortions after viability if a “health care provider” — it doesn’t specify whether a doctor or even a nurse — deems it necessary for a woman’s “health.” Abortionists often exploit the ambiguous word “health” to justify abortions at any point for physical, mental, or even emotional “health” reasons. In the words of the infamous late-term abortionist Dr. Warren Hern, “Pregnancy is not a benign condition. Every pregnancy is a threat to that woman’s life … “

Moreover, many abortionists have no qualms interpreting “viability” however they’d like. In the words of Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood for the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri: “There is no particular gestational age. There are some pregnancies in which the fetus will never be viable … My practice includes abortion care through the point of viability and as we previously discussed that could be at any point.”

Similarly, Dr. Hern agreed that “the viability of a fetus is determined not by gestational age but by a woman’s willingness to carry it.”

Yet even without the broad and intentionally vague language, the entire pretext for the ballot amendment is a sham. Proponents argue that the amendment is necessary to protect women’s health from abortion limits. Florida’s Heartbeat Bill, however, like literally every other piece of pro-life legislation in the books, already protects women by offering exceptions for the life of the mother. I know this firsthand from my practice as an OB/GYN in Naples, where the law allows me to treat every patient who comes to me — whether they are suffering a miscarriage, an ectopic pregnancy or worse.

The truth is Florida’s Heartbeat Bill not only protects babies with beating hearts, it also protects women from the physical and mental health risks of abortion and provides funding for assistance for expecting families. The Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion, however, jeopardizes Florida’s women and children — all based on the offensive pretext that it’s necessary to protect women from Florida’s pro-life laws.

Based on my experience, questions about emergency care for women are due to confusion about what the law allows, not because of pro-life laws themselves, but because of misinformation spread by the pro-abortion lobby. In the face of constant pro-abortion deception, it’s critical for Floridians to see through the lies stating pro-life laws “harm women’s care,” and to step up to protect women and children.

The free, life-affirming state of Florida must not join the ranks of Michigan, Ohio, Kansas and other states whose ballot initiatives have allowed political ideology to infect and weaponize health care at the expense of innocent lives.

___

Dr. Karysse Trandem is an associate professor of Ob/Gyn at the University of Central Florida, CEO of Canopy Global Foundation, and National Medical Director at Save the Storks.