PHOENIX β Gov. Katie Hobbs says she intends to veto legislation approved Thursday that would require doctors to provide βmedically appropriate and reasonable care and treatmentβ to any infant born alive, regardless of whether it is likely to survive.
βIt overrides patient and clinician decision-making in complex and highly personal circumstances,β Murphy Hebert, the governorβs chief of communications told Capitol Media Services.
The move is not a surprise. Only one House Democrat, Rep. Lydia Hernandez of Phoenix, voted for the measure.
Thursdayβs 32-28 House vote for SB 1600, which followed party-line approval in the Senate last month, was highlighted by lawmakers detailing not only their beliefs about when life begins but also, in some cases, personal stories about their experiences with extremely premature infants or those with medical problems, like being born with only half a brain.
And there were several mentions of God.
But much of it came down to what some people say happens now in these cases and what the law would β and would not β have required doctors to do.
βThis bill comes down to a simple question: If a baby is born alive, even if it is sick or troubled, do we make efforts to try to save that person and treat them with the same dignity we would any other human being in our hospitals, or do we leave them on a table to die?ββ asked Rep. Justin Heap, R-Mesa. βIt is repellent. It is evil.β
House Majority Leader Leo Biasiucci, R-Lake Havasu City, said all this does is conform the treatment of newborns with what is expected elsewhere.
βIn what world do we live in if you ever went to the emergency room for any reason, heart attack, stroke, car accident β¦ would we be OK with the doctor saying, βYou know what? This doesnβt look good. Weβre going to let you die,ββ he said. βThis is exactly the same thing.β
But Rep. Athena Salman, D-Tempe, said thereβs a crucial difference.
She said it can often be clear that a baby is so premature or so medically handicapped that survival beyond perhaps a few hours is not medically possible.
βIn those instances where medical intervention will be futile, health care providers can help families by providing comfort care for the baby and providing the family an opportunity to hold their baby, spending those precious few moments of life with their loved ones and spiritual services as requested,β Salman said.
The legislation did have an exception.
It would have allowed a parent or guardian to refuse to consent to medical treatment or surgical care that is not necessary to save the life of the infant, where the risk outweighs the potential benefit, or βwill do not more than temporarily prolong the act of dying when death is imminent.β
βIt doesnβt require the draconian efforts that some in this chamber have claimed, nor does it put ethical doctors at risk,β said Rep. Steve Montenegro, R-Goodyear. βIt requires medically appropriate and reasonable care to all newborns.β
And that, he said, depends on the circumstances.
βItβs not medically appropriate or reasonable to whisk a baby away from that babyβs motherβs arms at 15 weeksβ gestation,β he said. βBecause we know that that baby is probably not going to survive at 15 weeks.β
But Salman said none of that means anything if parents are unaware of those rights.
Rep. Amish Shah, D-Phoenix, who is an emergency room physician, said the situations doctors face is not as simple as proponents of the legislation claim. And thatβs because SB 1600 would have imposed potential prison terms for those who are found to have not complied with the law.
βWhen the threat of criminal penalties applies in a very subjective, harrowing situation like this, people are going to say, βIβm going to have to do something that I wouldnβt otherwise do with regard to medical judgment,ββ he said.
For example, Shah said, at 18 weeks of pregnancy the chances are βalmost zeroβ the baby will survive. And he reads the law to require doctors to do all they can to preserve the life.
βBut when would a medical code ever end?β Shah said.
βIt would never end because it ends when I subjectively decide that the medical code ends and we stop the CPR process,β he said. βSo anybody can disagree with that and say, βDr. Shaw, youβre guilty of a criminal violation.ββ
That area of possible dispute over when a newborn could be saved was underlined by Hernandez who told colleagues about the experiences of her sister-in-law who she said pleaded with a doctor to save her baby after the doctor explained the βslight chanceβ of the newborn surviving.
βI held her in the palm of my hand,β Hernandez said. βShe survived and is now 18 years old and is a student at Phoenix Union High School,β said the representative as she joined with Republicans in support.
At least some of the debate about the issue became religious.
βWith God, all things are possible,β said Rep. Rachel Jones, R-Tucson. βAnd if God wants that human being to live and have life, that human being will survive.β
Rep. Lupe Diaz, R-Benson, pastor at Grace Chapel in his home town, had his own take.
βLife is sacred,β he said. βAnd we are told that life is sacred because we are created in the image of God.β
Diaz said the issue goes beyond his belief that life begins at conception.
βHow we treat life in the beginning, and how we view life, will also determine how we view life at the end,β he said.
But Rep. Stacey Travers, D-Phoenix, said this isnβt an academic issue for some.
βI have been through something like this,β she said tearfully. βAnd while I respect the comments of my learned colleagues from the other side, I think part of the biggest problem is we are not being heard.β
Travers said proponents also are making the assumption that parents would be able to deal with a severely handicapped child, like the one cited by Rep. Mae Peshlakai who the Cameron Democrat said was born with just half a brain, even if it was able to survive more than a few hours outside the womb.
βWho do we think we are?β Travers said.
βWe are legislators,β she said. βAnd as my fellow colleagues talk about God, we are not God.β
And Rep. Stephanie Stahl-Hamilton, D-Tucson, said this is not a legislative issue.
βAt the end of the day, the people who are in the room, when it comes to pregnancy outcomes, are the people who need to be able to make their decisions as a team,β she said.