EXCLUSIVE — A South Dakota state legislator is taking aim at a key argument in favor of legal abortion by combatting misinterpretation and confusion of the state’s restrictions on abortion.
Republican state Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt, who holds a doctorate in nursing and practiced as a nurse anesthetist until she took office in 2021, introduced the “Med Ed Bill” on Wednesday morning to authorize spending for the state Department of Health to make training materials clarifying how the state’s near-total abortion ban ought to be interpreted in cases in which a mother’s life is at risk during pregnancy.
“The abortion topic has really just become this political warzone,” Rehfeldt told the Washington Examiner in an exclusive interview. “What we’re doing in South Dakota [is] putting women and babies first. We’re making sure that, if there is confusion for providers, that we’re stepping up to the plate where other people are not providing clarification.”
Legal abortion advocates argue that states such as South Dakota, which only allows abortion if the mother’s life is at risk, are a danger to women’s health because physicians and healthcare providers must often interpret vague legislation, potentially facing severe criminal penalties if they perform an abortion that does not meet the legal standard.
In South Dakota, performing an abortion that is not life-saving for the mother under “appropriate and reasonable medical judgment” is a Class 6 Felony, with a maximum sentence of two years in prison and a $4,000 fine.
The conversation about what is and is not allowed in states with abortion restrictions is often muddied by abortion industry talking points that falsely claim women may not be able to access care in the event of health emergencies such as ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages. However, neither of those conditions requires abortions, and treatment for them is not affected by abortion restrictions anywhere in the country.
“Our laws have always protected moms and given them the ability to receive treatment for miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy,” said Rehfeldt, clarifying the intent of the legislation. “South Dakota law has been consistent in that and, even now, with this bill, our laws are not changing.”
The “Med Ed Bill” provides the state Department of Health with $100,000 to consult with the state attorney general’s office and healthcare providers to create training materials that explain the standard of care and criteria for practitioners making treatment decisions for pregnant women with life- or health-threatening conditions.
“I think because of the politicization of this topic that it’s easy for providers to be confused,” Rehfeldt said, acknowledging the common criticism. “And I don’t blame some of them for being confused because of the political nature of this conversation.”
Rehfeldt called the extreme position of abortion up-to-birth “homicide,” saying that healthcare providers have an ethical obligation to protect “the health of all patients involved, both the mom and the baby.”
South Dakota’s prohibition on abortion took effect when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022 in a decision that made states the arbitrator of abortion rights rather than the federal government.
In the 2024 general election, South Dakotans could vote on an abortion amendment that would prohibit any legislation from the state restricting pregnancy in the first trimester. The legislature would be allowed to limit second-trimester abortions “only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.”
Rehfeldt said the ballot measure is “the opposite of women’s health” because it removes basic protections for women seeking an abortion, such as requiring facilities to be licensed and having “the appropriate tools that they need to respond in the event of an emergency.”
When asked if she anticipated bipartisan support on the bill through the legislature, Rehfeldt was optimistic.
Kelsey Pritchard of SBA Pro-Life America told the Washington Examiner that Rehfeldt’s bill should have “unanimous approval across the board by both Republicans and Democrats.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“With the aid of the legacy media and in the absence of clear guidance from medical associations, the abortion industry has sown confusion on this fact to justify their political agenda for unlimited abortion, putting women’s lives in danger,” Pritchard said.
“Who can argue with providing medical education?” Rehfeldt said. “I think women’s health should be our priority and not a piece of politics.”