Connect with us

News

Many state abortion bans include exceptions for rape. How often are they granted?

Published

on

Many state abortion bans include exceptions for rape. How often are they granted?

Dr. Emily Boevers, an OBGYN based in Waverly, Iowa, poses for a portrait at her family’s farm in nearby Tripoli. She says the state’s rape exception requirements threaten the privacy, trust and intimacy of the patient-doctor relationship.

Geoff Stellfox for NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Geoff Stellfox for NPR

After the Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion in 2022, many states that banned the procedure did so with the promise that it would still be legal in some circumstances, including in the event of rape. One study estimates that over 64,000 pregnancies have occurred due to rape in the years since the ruling in states where abortion is banned.

But many people on the frontlines of this issue say getting an abortion in these states after an assault is difficult or – in some cases – impossible.

There is no central database that measures abortions performed because of rape. For this story, NPR looked at state records and talked with researchers, advocates and doctors in seven of the 11 states where abortion is banned but legal in the case of rape. Taken together, these accounts show a patchwork of laws governing rape exceptions, confusion over who qualifies for an exemption and law enforcement’s role in that process, and widespread fear from doctors about performing abortions for assault victims.

Advertisement

Many victims aren’t capable of immediately reporting their rapes

It’s all but impossible to know exactly how many abortions are performed because of rape exemptions. When they report the procedure, doctors aren’t required to include a reason. And an abortion could fall under a different exemption – such as a fetal anomaly or life of the mother.

Existing annual data suggests that in many states, the numbers of known abortions performed due to rape are in the single digits or, in some cases, zero.

One reason for that is because in many states, rape victims who want an abortion are required to report their assault to law enforcement. Advocates and medical professionals who work with rape victims say in the aftermath of an attack, there are more immediate issues to consider than abortion laws.

“It’s just too much for them to manage at that point,” says Katy Rasmussen, a nurse who works with assault victims with the Johnson County Sexual Assault Response team in Iowa. The patients she sees are frequently in shock or dealing with the stigma around sexual assault. If alcohol or illegal substances are involved, Rasmussen says, patients may feel shame or even blame themselves.

Advertisement

“Often, sexual assault survivors just want it to be over,” says Kelly Miller, former executive director of the Idaho Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence. “And so having to go through the trauma of reporting, the trauma of a forensic interview, most survivors opt out of all of that.”

Other advocates point out that many patients are experiencing domestic violence when they are raped. That’s what happened to Laurie Betram Roberts. She says she became pregnant years ago after she was raped by someone she lived with. Reporting him and risking his arrest, she says, could have meant losing her housing.

“We shared a residence,” she says. “There was no domestic violence shelter that would take me because my family was too big.”

Bertram Roberts, who has seven children, did eventually disentangle herself from this man. She now works with people in similar situations as part of her job with the Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund, a nonprofit that helps people get abortion care in that state.

“There’s a perception of good and bad abortions” among people who defend state abortion bans, Bertram Roberts says. “But the truth is the exemptions are all rhetoric and no practical use.”

Advertisement

Last year in Mississippi, there were zero abortions for any reason, according to a recent report from The Society of Family Planning’s WeCount project.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves promised exemptions for rape when the state’s 2022 law went into effect. NPR reached out to Reeves’ office as well as to lawmakers in multiple states who sponsored these bans and to national anti-abortion groups. None of them wanted to speak on the subject of rape exemptions across the country.

One group, Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America, sent NPR a written statement laying blame with doctors and health systems for their confusion and inability to utilize the law. “If there are doctors who are confused about rape exceptions, hospital administrations and health associations should provide clarity,” the statement read.

Some doctors say they feel weaponized and intimidated 

Involving law enforcement makes patients and doctors feel like “potential criminals,” says Jessica Tarleton, an obstetrician in South Carolina, where by law, doctors must report abortions performed because of a rape to their local sheriff’s office.

Advertisement

“Somebody comes into the emergency room who’s been shot, we don’t ask them what they did to be in a position to be shot. We take care of the patient,” says Tarleton. She points out that no other kind of medicine demands doctors legally justify care.

“In the past two years,” she says, “I am aware of one one patient that I was associated with that sought a legal abortion under the rape exception.”

Tarleton tries to offer abortion care whenever she legally can. But she says many doctors in this state are scared and feel they don’t have enough support to provide abortions in a place where it feels legally risky. As a result, she says, many distance themselves from the practice altogether.

‘Now I’m the investigator’

Iowa makes it particularly difficult for rape victims to get an abortion, according to doctors and reproductive rights advocates.

Advertisement

This summer, after a long court fight, the state started enforcing a six-week abortion ban, which makes an exception for certain things like rape. But directions from the Iowa Board of Medicine say doctors – before performing an abortion – must determine whether a rape is legitimate or risk legal consequences for noncompliance.

Dr. Emily Boevers says that so far, she hasn’t had to investigate the circumstances around a patient's rape, but she’s been practicing what she’ll say when that day comes.

Dr. Emily Boevers says that so far, she hasn’t had to investigate the circumstances around a patient’s rape, but she’s been practicing what she’ll say when that day comes.

Geoff Stellfox for NPR


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Geoff Stellfox for NPR

It’s an unusual level of detail for doctors to collect and document, even among the other 10 states that include exemptions for rape.

“Now I’m the investigator trying to decide if the details of the incident constitute rape as per Iowa Code,” says Dr. Emily Boevers, who works in Waverly, a town of 10,000 in northeastern Iowa. She says these requirements threaten the privacy, trust and intimacy of the patient-doctor relationship. “I’m supposed to maintain a therapeutic, caring relationship with this patient while I query all these details,” Boevers says.

So far, she hasn’t had to investigate the circumstances of assault with a patient, but she’s practicing what she’ll say when that day comes. “Unfortunately, our government mandates that I must ask you some questions,” she plans to say. “If you are able to answer these, I might be able to help you.”

Advertisement

Those who enforce the laws might not always know the laws

In some states, there is little clarity on rape exemptions even among those officials charged with enforcing the laws.

Idaho outlaws abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and when the life of the mother is threatened. To get an abortion, sexual assault victims have to produce a police report for medical providers.

When the state’s ban went into effect in 2022, victim advocates quickly pointed out that law enforcement agencies don’t release police reports until a case is closed – preventing victims from accessing timely care. The following year, the Idaho Legislature amended the bill’s text so that rape victims are entitled to receive, upon request, a copy within 72 hours of the report being made.

But agencies appear to follow these requirements unevenly.

Advertisement

Boise State Public Radio reached out to 56 law enforcement agencies across Idaho about their protocols to assist rape victims since the ban. A handful said they complied with the 72-hour amendment and said their in-house victim advocates were available to help victims throughout their process.

Many others seemed unfamiliar with the amendment. Several public records departments said they would automatically deny requests for copies of a report on an open case, regardless of who made it. One agency realized it hadn’t been complying with the 72-hour law after it went into effect and had unknowingly denied records to rape victims.

Local agencies said they had received no guidance from the state.

Advocates say this murky process compounds a system of reporting that’s already unwelcoming to victims.

“Survivors generally don’t report to these systems that were never created to be centered around survivors in the first place,” says Miller, the former head of the Idaho Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence. “It’s just unrealistic to expect that survivors will access these systems just for the purposes of being able to gain access to an abortion as a result of a pregnancy from a sexual assault.”

Advertisement

State records suggest there were fewer than 10 abortions for any reason last year in Idaho.

Providers of rape-exception abortions often are shielded by big institutions

Only a handful of doctors interviewed for this story reported performing rape exception-abortions with any consistency. Those who did all worked at major academic medical institutions.

Dr. Nisha Verma in Georgia estimates she sees someone who has been raped or experienced incest who meets the exception standard “every couple weeks.”

Verma isn’t an official spokesperson and didn’t want to be identified using her institution’s name. But she says her employer has protocols and task forces to assist doctors in managing their legal risk. That helps mitigate doctors’ fears of losing their medical license, being fined or going to jail.

Advertisement

“At my institution, we have really again worked to create a system that helps us as doctors feel more supported and protected,” Verma says.

But for most people who work with victims, it’s not simply a question of how to get abortion exemptions. Some states, for example, are also constrained by a shortage of providers willing even to deliver babies, let alone perform legally risky procedures.

“The question is,” says Bertram Roberts of the Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund, “If you got an exemption in Mississippi, who’s going to perform your abortion?” The state has a significant shortage of obstetricians.

Bertram Roberts says she’s never seen anyone in that state get an exemption – for any reason, let alone rape.

Advertisement

News

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Published

on

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.

She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.

Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.

But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”

Advertisement

“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”

As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.

She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.

The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

Published

on

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

The U.S. Supreme Court

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.

The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.

Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”

Advertisement

Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.

The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.

And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

Published

on

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

An explosion and fire drew a large emergency response on Friday to a lumber mill in the Midcoast region of Maine, officials said.

The State Police and fire marshal’s investigators responded to Robbins Lumber in Searsmont, about 72 miles northeast of Portland, said Shannon Moss, a spokeswoman for the Maine Department of Public Safety.

Mike Larrivee, the director of the Waldo County Regional Communications Center, said the number of victims was unknown, cautioning that “the information we’re getting from the scene is very vague.”

“We’ve sent every resource in the county to that area, plus surrounding counties,” he said.

Footage from the scene shared by WABI-TV showed flames burning through the roof of a large structure as heavy, dark smoke billowed skyward.

Advertisement

The Associated Press reported that at least five people were injured, and that county officials were considering the incident a “mass casualty event.”

Catherine Robbins-Halsted, an owner and vice president at Robbins Lumber, told reporters at the scene that all of the company’s employees had been accounted for.

Gov. Janet T. Mills of Maine said on social media that she had been briefed on the situation and urged people to avoid the area.

“I ask Maine people to join me in keeping all those affected in their thoughts,” she said.

Representative Jared Golden, Democrat of Maine, said on social media that he was aware of the fire and explosion.

Advertisement

“As my team and I seek out more information, I am praying for the safety and well-being of first responders and everyone else on-site,” he said.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending