Women's Health Advocates Deliver Over 17K Petitions Opposing Clinic Regs to State Board of Health

by: ProgressVA

Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 13:17:04 PM EDT

Women's health advocates delivered over 17,324 petitions and comments to the Virginia Board of Health Thursday, opposing proposed regulations that could shut down women's health centers and endanger access to safe and legal abortion in the Commonwealth. Virginians from across the state have took action to express outrage over new, burdensome regulations that prioritize ideological agendas over evidence-based medicine. In July, the Board voted to amend the proposed regulations, the most repressive in the nation, to "grandfather in" existing clinics from draconian building regulations unrelated to patient safety. That amendment would allow clinics to remain open and continue to provide thousands of Virginia women life-saving cancer screenings, STD testing, family planning services, and safe, legal first trimester abortions. Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is misrepresenting the law and misguiding the Board of Health in an attempt to bully them into shutting down clinics against their will. By threatening to refuse to "certify" the Board's authority, the Attorney General has forced the Board to reconsider legally sound and medically correct regulations in order to advance a political agenda.

"Political agendas have no place in the doctor's office or governing decisions that should rely solely on evidence-based medicine," said ProgressVA Executive Director Anna Scholl. "The Board's mission statement declares they are the 'primary advocate and representative of the citizens of the Commonwealth', not agents of politicians' political agendas. Virginians have made their voices clear: base the regulations on evidence-based medicine. We hope the Board chooses to represent the will of the public and votes to uphold the grandfather amendment."

(More below)

Background:

FACT: The Attorney General's office does not have "veto power" over the Board of Health's decisions.

• Virginia law does not give the Attorney General's office veto power over the Board's policy decisions about what to include in the final rules. By threatening to refuse to "certify" the Board's authority, the Attorney General has claimed veto power over the Board's policy decisions.
• As an elected official without medical expertise, a Virginia Attorney General and his/her office does not have the legal authority to decide upon the specifics of public health and medical regulations.
• In this scenario, the Attorney General only has the responsibility to "certify" on the public record whether the Board has the authority to adopt rules under consideration.

• All Virginia doctors who provide abortion in Virginia are regulated by the Virginia Board of Medicine (see "Laws Governing Medicine"). Virginia doctors who provide abortion must meet the same medical standards as similar outpatient procedures performed in the state, including some dental procedures, colonoscopies, laser eye surgeries and some cosmetic procedures.

• Nationally, abortion is one of the safest outpatient medical procedures performed in the U.S. today. "Fewer than 0.3% patients experience a complication that requires hospitalization" (Guttmacher Institute Fact Sheet, 2011).

FACT: The 2010 Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities manual only applies tonew facilities, not existing ones.

• At the heart of the proposed regulations of first-trimester abortion in Virginia is the 2010 Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities. This manual provides guidance fornew hospitals to meet particular building requirements, such as size of hallways and particular ventilation systems. This manual does not apply to existing health care facilities.
• The McDonnell administration's draft permanent regulations of women's health care centers in Virginia that provide first-trimester abortion attempted to apply these guidelines to existing women's health care centers, not just new ones. The Board of Health, under Virginia law, has never applied the guidelines in this way - in each and every past instance, the Board has applied the guidelinesonly to new buildings.