Background
A South Carolina woman has filed a lawsuit challenging the state’s abortion ban, which prohibits the procedure when a “fetal heartbeat” can be detected. The woman, Taylor Shelton, argues that the ban should not take effect until later in a pregnancy. Shelton’s case is supported by Planned Parenthood South Atlantic’s chief medical officer, Dr. Katherine Farris, who claims that the state legislature provided conflicting definitions of “fetal heartbeat” in its law.
Previous Legal Battles
This is not the first time that abortion providers in South Carolina have tried to challenge the state’s fetal heartbeat law. Last summer, the South Carolina Supreme Court initially struck down a similar version of the ban but later reversed its decision. Planned Parenthood also previously requested the court to broaden the narrow window in which a pregnancy can be terminated, but the justices declined to take up the case.
The Legal Argument
According to the South Carolina General Assembly’s definition, “fetal heartbeat” refers to “cardiac activity, or the steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart, within the gestational sac.” While ultrasounds can detect cardiac activity as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, Planned Parenthood argues that the major components of the heart usually form around nine weeks. Therefore, the group believes the ban should begin at nine weeks, not six weeks.
Plaintiff’s Experience
Taylor Shelton, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, shared her personal experience. She approached her gynecologist about options to end her unplanned pregnancy last September but was met with dismissiveness due to the potential legal consequences for healthcare providers. Shelton discovered she was pregnant two days after missing her period and underwent a difficult process to find an abortion provider in North Carolina. Ultimately, she received an abortion at approximately six weeks and four days pregnant. Shelton expressed frustration with the limited time frame and the hardships involved.
Legal Uncertainty
The South Carolina Supreme Court has acknowledged the ambiguity of the law’s language. During oral arguments, one justice questioned the definitions provided in the law. However, the court did not provide a definitive ruling on the matter. Republicans argue that abortion providers are changing their interpretation of the law, as they previously claimed it banned abortions after six weeks, not nine weeks.
Planned Parenthood’s Response
Planned Parenthood contends that healthcare providers have adopted a more conservative interpretation due to the severe penalties for noncompliance. The organization has stopped offering abortions when “early embryonic electrical activity” is visible on ultrasounds. Planned Parenthood’s lawyer, Susanna Birdsong, stated that they are fighting for every inch of ground in South Carolina.
This article was written by [Author Name] for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative.
