State actions on reproductive health issues in 1996.

In 1996, state actions in such diverse areas as health care, welfare reform, education and the environment attracted national attention as they increased the states' involvement in setting the country's social agenda. Many of these initiatives were results of the federal government's giving more power and responsibilities back to the states, while in other instances, the states acted independently to assert authority over policy issues in which they had a particular interest. As has been the case in the recent past, reproductive health policy and the provision of services proved to be an area of concern to state legislators and officials in 1996. In particular, two key issues pertaining to reproductive health--abortion services and postpartum hospital stays--were the focus of a high level of legislative activity.

Although a majority of the hundreds of reproductive health--related legislative initiatives launched in 1996 were not implemented or even considered by the end of the year, significant trends emerged that heightened awareness of fertility-related matters and their impact on women's reproductive lives. {1} An examination of these issues and events shows the power of the states to shape reproductive health policy and to control the availability of services.

Abortion

A majority of legislatures were confronted with the abortion issue--chiefly with attempts to limit access to services-in 1996. State lawmakers who oppose abortion were able to generate a substantial amount of debate on this subject, but they navigated an uphill road in their efforts to gain approval for restrictive measures. By the end of the year, most of the proposed antiabortion initiatives had not been voted on at the committee level. Even so, several states enacted antiabortion laws.

Mainstay antiabortion concerns--such as parental involvement in a minor's abortion decision, counseling and waiting period requirements, and funding prohibitions--continued to be emphasized; however, a new restriction, banning a specific late-term abortion procedure, was the focal point in numerous states. And for the first time in seven years, no measures were enacted to safeguard abortion clinics and providers from harassment and acts of violence. The drop in state-level activity in this area is likely attributable to a decease in the number of reported incidents against abortion providers and to the effect of the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, signed by President Clinton in 1994, in deterring violent protests outside clinics.

Late-Term Abortions

At the beginning of the year, antiabortion activists believed they had a winning strategy on the abortion issue, inundating legislative chambers with measures to ban dilatation and extraction (D&X) or place severe limits on abortion after 20 weeks' gestation. (D&X, one of the methods used to terminate late-term pregnancies, maybe safer for the woman and more likely to preserve her future fertility than other abortion methods, according to some doctors who perform the procedure. (2)) Supporters of such restrictions considered them the centerpiece of the 1996 antiabortion agenda; however, by midyear, only two states had approved such bans (and no other states followed). Nevertheless, supporters were able to generate considerable debate about the procedure, which they dubbed "partial birth" abortion, and about late-term abortions in general.