Medically unsupported abortion ‘reversal’ language turns up again in new Ohio bill

Republican Ohio lawmakers announced a new bill on Tuesday to regulate abortion providers, once again mandating specific language that providers would be required to read before an abortion takes place, language that is not accepted by the overall medical community.

State Reps. Jennifer Gross, R-West Chester, and Johnathan Newman, R-Troy, are bringing a bill that would require information on a so-called abortion “reversal” method to be provided to pregnant patients before they receive the first dose in a two-dose medical abortion regimen.

Mifepristone and misoprostol are the two drugs in the regimen, and the information that would be required to be distributed in the bill would say that “it may be possible to reverse the effects if (pregnant individuals) regret their decision and act quickly.”

The bill also requires the Ohio Department of Health to provide information on its website about how to obtain the treatment, how to use it for “reversal,” and the number for a state-funded 24/7 hotline to be used for questions about the treatment.

“This bill is about giving women full, informed choices, consent, not limiting them,” Gross said. “It doesn’t affect a woman’s initial decision to pursue an abortion.”

The sponsors argued that the process uses progesterone, which has been used in pregnancies for decades, though the “reversal” method is not approved by the FDA.

Mifepristone and misoprostol are both approved by the FDA, and have been since 2000.

Asked whether the sponsors had consulted doctors and abortion providers before bringing the most recent bill, Gross and Newman said they’ve met with physicians affiliated with National Right to Life, an anti-abortion organization.

“We’ve consulted with doctors who have been behind promoting this for a number of years, actually,” Newman said.

Members of Ohio Right to Life and the Center for Christian Virtue spoke in support of the new bill at Tuesday’s press conference.

“Decisions about pregnancy and child-bearing are profound,” said David Mahan, policy executive director for the Center for Christian Virtue. “A woman should not be denied information that could lead her to a different choice, especially if she experiences doubt or coercion.”

Kari Snyder, executive director of Ohio Right to Life, said the information was a “simple” way to inform patients, and the bill already had several legislators who have agreed to sign on as co-sponsors.

As bills of this nature have come about across the country, national organizations like the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have criticized the language as misleading and “not based on science.”

Newman referenced a study that was never completed on the effects of abortion “reversal,” a study that ended early due to safety concerns, but Newman blamed the mifepristone as the reason for the safety concerns, not the “reversal” method itself.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists cite several studies that were attempted to explore the effect of progesterone on abortion “reversal,” and said none of the studies proved the safety or efficacy of the method.

“The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ranks its recommendations on the strength of the evidence and does not support prescribing progesterone to stop a medication abortion,” the group said on its website.

The organization added that legislative “mandates” requiring physicians to provide “inaccurate” information constitutes “interference in the patient-clinical relationship and contradicts a fundamental principle of medical ethics.”

The measure is one of many that have been led by Ohio Republicans after the establishment of abortion rights in the Ohio Constitution in 2023 approved by 57% of voters.

Gross, Newman, and Snyder all denied that the new abortion “reversal” bill language contradicts with the constitutional amendment on abortion rights.

“This is purely information, it doesn’t interfere with the decision at all, and if we’re looking at it in a pro-choice lens, it’s an additional step of choice,” Snyder said.

This isn’t the first time the Ohio legislature has brought about the “reversal” language about abortion, either.

In 2019 and 2022, the Ohio House considered similar bills that would have required doctors to provide information about the medically unsupported information, also considered “informed consent” bills by the sponsors.

Those bills didn’t make it through their chambers, and died at the end of the General Assembly term.

Other bills that have been introduced include another attempt at a “personhood” bill, which would create rights under the U.S. Constitution for in-vitro fetuses, effectively banning abortion at conception.

One bill recently passed by the House also follows the “informed consent” line that Republicans are using for many bills that would regulate abortion.

Ohio House Bill 347 requires a physician to meet with a pregnant patient at least 24 hours before an abortion to provide information about the procedure, and creates civil legal penalties for physicians found to violate the bill.

Abortion rights and reproductive health organizations spoke against the bill when it was considered by a House committee, saying the bill discriminates against pregnant individuals because the waiting period does not apply to any other medical procedure. They also said the bill would create further barriers to care for those seeking abortion care.

The 24-hour bill, H.B. 347, is set for a full Ohio House vote that could happen as early as Wednesday.

A similar measure that was passed by the state legislature has been held up in court, with a Franklin County Court of Common Pleas judge citing the state constitutional amendment in blocking enforcement of the 24-hour waiting period as the lawsuit continues to move through the court.

If passed, the bill would move on to the Ohio Senate, which is already considering a bill, Ohio Senate Bill 309, that would require health care providers to provide information to patients informing them of their ability to sue health care providers should any complications arise specifically from a medication abortion.

Medication abortion has seen a rise in use in Ohio, and across the country, due to the ability to use telehealth to access the treatment.

The abortion “reversal” bill will be assigned a number before being considered by a House committee.

Neither Gross nor Newman gave a timeline on the introduction of the bill.