Interested Party testimony
House Bills 417 and 419
House Health and Aging Committee
February 10, 2016
Chariwoman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Huffman, Ranking Member Antonio and members of the House Health and Aging Committee, thank you for allowing me to testify before you today on matters of great importance to all Ohioans, specifically House Bill 417 introduced by Representatives McColley and Koehler, and House Bill 419, introduced by Representatives Sears and Ginter.
I am Barry Sheets, legislative consultant for a number of pro-life organizations in Ohio. I speak today on behalf of Ohio ProLife Action, Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati, and Cleveland Right to Life. Our organizations applaud the introduction of these bills in relation to the revelations that have occurred from the investigation conducted by our Ohio Attorney General's office into the practices of abortion provider Planned Parenthood's Ohio affiliates.
We believe strongly in making sure Ohio's statutes are clearly drawn in order to protect the dignity and humane disposal of the remains of unborn children. In that, after reviewing the proposals before the committee today, we would make the following suggestions for amendment to the legislation. The majority of these suggestions are relative to HB 417, but would also stand for HB 419 if one bill is chosen as a vehicle over the other, with reference to the provisions of the one bill being incorporated into the other:
1. There is a problem with the definition of the term “cremation” in the Ohio revised code as it relates to the legislation, which calls for the cremation or internment of fetal remains.
HB 417 Sec. 3728.01 (B) says, "’Cremation’ has the same meaning as in section 4717.01 of the Revised Code.” However, cremation as it is defined in the ORC 4717.01 line M reads:
"Cremation" means the technical process of using heat and flame to reduce human or animal remains to bone fragments or ashes or any combination thereof. "Cremation" includes processing and may include the pulverization of bone fragments.
This definition of cremation used in this bill would permit Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers to continue to send aborted babies to medical waste disposal companies and having the babies incinerated along with other “medical waste” (ie. amputated limbs, diseased organs, knee caps, etc). “Cremation” for purposes of this section of the ORC should be defined differently to make sure that the aborted children don’t just go to medical waste incinerators but to licensed and/or certified funeral home crematoriums.
2. Sec. 3701.341(3) (current law) - “Humane disposition of the product of human conception”
This current language, already found to be problematic in relation to the definition of “humane”, will also likely create an issue with the phrase “product of human conception” in that this could also include amniotic fluids, placental tissue, and umbilical cord blood, all of which have legitimate medical uses. We are sure it is not the intent of the Assembly to incorporate all of these “products” within this legislation.
A suggested change would be to, for purposes of this legislation, define product of human conception as "the remains of an unborn human individual", which would not include those external "products", or to specify in section 3728.01( C) that “fetal remains” does not include the amniotic fluids, placental tissue, umbilical cord or cord blood.
3. Sec. 3728.01 (C) - does “fetal remains” have a gestational age presumed?
By Ohio Administrative Code language which has been in place since 1975, ( division E), fetus is defined thusly: "Fetus" means the developing conceptus from fourteen (14) weeks after the first day of the woman's last menstrual period until birth. This appears that the rule exempts unborn infants from conception to 12 weeks (roughly) of development. Would this also apply within this to-be-created section of code?
However, Ohio Revised Code 3705.01(B)(1) defines fetal death thusly: “ "Fetal death" means death prior to the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a product of human conception, irrespective of the duration of pregnancy, which after such expulsion or extraction does not breathe or show any other evidence of life such as beating of the heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles.”
The Revised Code definition would take precedence over the Administrative rule definition. It would be our request to use language referencing fetal death directly in the definition of fetal remains.
4. Sec. 3728.09 - Language is vague and ripe for loopholes. Couldn’t an abortion facility claim that any process of cremation or interment involves "extraordinary expense", and thus require the mother to pay? It is unclear how “extraordinary expense” might be defined.
5. Sec. 3728.14 of HB 417 and Section 3701.3411 of House Bill 419 –
We would respectfully ask for an amendment to add a further mechanism for gathering specific information that could help with clarifying what the Attorney General's report found ambiguous, that of the actual final disposition of each aborted child: “ODH will provide statistics on final disposition determinations made in its annual Induced Abortions in Ohio report”.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important initiative. We hope that consideration will be given to these requested amendments, and that the then-amended legislation would be presented for a vote of this committee. I would be happy to take any questions.