Massachusetts lawmakers have approved significant legislation that would alter the state's existing framework for abortions performed after 24 weeks of pregnancy. The bill, titled the "Prioritizing Patients’ Access to Care Act" (H.5595), seeks to replace specific statutory restrictions with a standard that relies on the professional judgment of the physician providing care. The measure passed the state House of Representatives on July 22 with a 119-33 vote, followed by approval in the Senate on July 31. The legislation has now been sent to Governor Maura Healey (D) for her signature.
"The legislation would allow abortion throughout pregnancy based on the judgment of the physician performing the procedure." — Kelsey Pritchard, Communications Director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America
Current Massachusetts law permits abortions after 24 weeks only under certain specified circumstances. These include serious risks to the patient’s life or physical or mental health, the diagnosis of fatal fetal conditions, or cases where survival after birth would necessitate extraordinary medical intervention. The newly passed legislation would remove these explicit statutory conditions, instead allowing later abortions to proceed based solely on the medical judgment of the attending physician.
Supporters of the bill contend that the legislation is crucial for addressing medically complex pregnancies and ensuring that Massachusetts residents do not need to travel to other states to receive necessary care. State Representative Lindsay Sabadosa (D), a key sponsor of the bill, emphasized that medical decisions should primarily rest with patients and their physicians, rather than being dictated by lawmakers. According to The Center Square, Sabadosa stated the measure would empower doctors to provide care tailored to their medical judgment and the unique circumstances of individual patients.
Similarly, State Senator Robyn Kennedy (D), another proponent, highlighted that the bill would expand access to reproductive care, allowing patients to receive treatment within Massachusetts. Senate President Karen Spilka echoed these sentiments, asserting that patients facing difficult medical decisions should have the ability to receive care from trusted physicians within their home state. Medical organizations have also voiced their support, noting that later-stage pregnancies can present serious and complicated medical circumstances that require flexible approaches. Dr. Luu Ireland, chief medical officer of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, told MassLive that every pregnancy experience is distinct, and decisions regarding continuation or termination should be made by patients in consultation with their doctors. Reproductive Equity Now, an advocacy group, stated that the previous 24-week restriction had compelled dozens of patients annually to seek care outside Massachusetts after receiving severe medical diagnoses. Proponents collectively argue that the existing exceptions fail to encompass every potential medical situation that may arise in the later stages of pregnancy.
Conversely, opponents argue that the legislation would dismantle critical safeguards governing abortions performed after 24 weeks, positioning Massachusetts among the states with the least restrictive late-pregnancy abortion laws in the nation. Kelsey Pritchard, communications director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, expressed concerns to The Center Square, stating that the bill would effectively permit abortion throughout pregnancy based solely on the judgment of the performing physician. Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of SBA Pro-Life America, also criticized the legislation, advocating for federal protections for unborn children.
The Catholic bishops of Massachusetts have publicly denounced the proposed changes, describing the removal of legal restrictions on later abortions as a radical and morally objectionable measure. They have urged Catholics to pray for a greater respect for human life. Republican State Representative Kelly Pease voiced his reservations regarding both the scope of the bill and the expedited manner in which it advanced through the Legislature. As reported by Fox News, Pease specifically raised concerns that the proposal could eliminate protections for pregnancies in which a fetus might be capable of surviving outside the womb.
If Governor Healey signs the measure into law, Massachusetts would join several other states and the District of Columbia that permit abortions later in pregnancy without the specific statutory restrictions currently in place under Massachusetts law. The legislative action underscores the ongoing national debate surrounding abortion access and the role of state law in regulating medical procedures at various stages of pregnancy. Governor Healey's office did not respond to requests for comment prior to the publication of these reports. The outcome of the governor's decision is anticipated to have significant implications for reproductive healthcare policy within the state.
