A bill to legally protect reproductive and gender-affirming care in Vermont has taken another step to becoming law.
The Vermont House on Friday approved a bill by a 113-13 vote that would prohibit the prosecution of Bermont providers in states that have criminalized certain health care procedures. The bill now heads to the Senate
Republican lawmakers proposed an amendment that would have extended the protections to providers that refuse to abortion or gender affirming care. But it failed was shot down because they are already protected under federal law.
Supporters of the bill cited passage in November of a constitutional amendment guaranteeing reproductive liberty as a reason to offer legal protections for providers.
The sponsor of H.89, Rep. Martin Lalonde, D-South Burlington, says it “would reduce legal risk for providers of healthcare that is legally protected in Vermont.”
Jessa Barnard, executive director of the Vermont Medical Society, said there are limits to what lawmakers can do to prevent prosecutions of laws in other states. But, Bernard said, “anything we can do to help protect patients’ rights to access services here in the state, but also our members here caring for patients out of state or maybe getting services via telehealth.”
House Speaker Jill Krowinski, a former employee of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, said in a statement that access to reproductive and gender-affirming care is under attack in many states.
“Now is our time to use all the tools at our disposal to ensure that Vermonters are protected,” she said.
Mary Hahn Beerworth, executive director of Vermont Right to Life, says the bill doesn’t protect providers who object to the treatment.
“Let’s say a provider sees that same child coming back constantly, can we investigate that?” she asked. “Or is that all shrouded in legal protection for the provider?”
Despite her staunch support, Lucy Leriche of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, said the bill’s protections will only go so far.
“Patients do bare most of the risk because it’s the patients for the most part coming to states that are hostile,” Leriche said.
Despite the concerns, David Cohen – a professor of law at Drexel University – says the potential sigh of relief for providers will bode well for the patients.
“By protecting the provider, you are helping the patient because the provider is going to feel more comfortable caring for a patient, and that helps the patient,” he said.