Abortion funding; repealed. (HB62)

Introduced By

Del. Mark Cole (R-Fredericksburg) with support from co-patrons Del. Mark Dudenhefer (R-Stafford), and Del. Bob Marshall (R-Manassas)

Progress

√
 Introduced
√
 Passed Committee
√
 Passed House
☐
 Passed Senate
☐
 Signed by Governor
☐
 Became Law

Description

Funding for certain abortions.  Repeals the section authorizing the Board of Health to fund abortions for women who meet the financial eligibility criteria of the State Plan for Medical Assistance in cases in which a physician certifies that he believes that the fetus would be born with a gross and totally incapacitating physical deformity or mental deficiency. View Full Text »

Status

02/16/2012: passed committee

History

  • 12/19/2011 Committee
  • 12/19/2011 Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/12 12100460D
  • 12/19/2011 Referred to Committee on Health, Welfare and Institutions
  • 01/18/2012 Impact statement from DPB (HB62)
  • 01/23/2012 Assigned HWI sub: #4
  • 01/26/2012 Subcommittee recommends reporting (4-Y 1-N)
  • 01/31/2012 Reported from Health, Welfare and Institutions (12-Y 9-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/01/2012 Read first time
  • 02/02/2012 Read second time and engrossed
  • 02/03/2012 Read third time and passed House (64-Y 35-N)
  • 02/03/2012 VOTE: PASSAGE (64-Y 35-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/06/2012 Constitutional reading dispensed
  • 02/06/2012 Referred to Committee on Education and Health
  • 02/16/2012 Reported from Education and Health with amendment (8-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
  • 02/16/2012 Rereferred to Finance
  • 02/28/2012 Passed by indefinitely in Finance (9-Y 6-N) (see vote tally)

Comments

Danielle B writes:

I think that people, should be assisted. if they cant afford an abortion they wouldnt be able to afford to take care a kid properly. or the medical bills that would come along with it. also i believe that abortions should be illegal if completly needed for extreme measures. if a mother cant properly care for the baby, plce it in a well foster home who can.

Posted 16 months ago.
Dianne Rencsok writes:

If a handicapped child is born to a woman who meets the financial criteria for Board of Health funding, who do you think is going to cover the cost of that child's care, whether medical, foster, educational. Is this supposed to show monetary savings or moral judgement? It would only increase taxpayer costs and add to the problems already facing the poorest in our community.

Posted 16 months ago.
Michael writes:

Well, public funding of the abortion of a handicapped child of poor parents is certainly one way to address poverty and the problems facing the handicapped. We won't have any more poor, handicapped people if we kill them all first, right?

Posted 16 months ago.
Anne writes:

It is prodominately the woman's right and the family's right to decide if they would be mentally and financially capable to uphold the responsibilities. No one else can tell the woman and her family what is best for her. If she decides not to have this child, then it is best for her to be able to get it in a safe and an affordable way.

Posted 14 months ago.