(Photo: Tetra Images/Getty Images)
Opponents of Ohio’s legislation that seeks to restore a 24-hour waiting period for abortions say the bill is not only unconstitutional but discriminates against reproductive health care.
The Ohio House of Representatives Health Committee met to hear testimony against Ohio House Bill 347a bill to allow abortion only if a doctor meets with the pregnant person at least 24 hours before the abortion “to provide specified information and document the woman’s informed consent,” except in medical emergencies.
The bill provides civil liability penalties against a doctor who fails to comply with HB 347 and also allows the State Medical Board – which includes the head of an anti-abortion lobby group – to adopt regulations “setting forth the adverse physical or mental conditions resulting from an abortion that a doctor must disclose as possible complications when meeting with a pregnant person(s) as part of the informed consent process,” according to an analysis of the bill by the Legislative Service Committee.
But abortion rights advocates who spoke at the committee hearing said a state-mandated delay in health care would only create more health problems, and not just for pregnant women.
The 24-hour waiting period also already existed in state law before the lawsuit was filed, and a Franklin County common pleas judge blocked its enforcement as the lawsuit continued. The final decision in the case will be made at least this summer, as the deadlines in this case already reach April.
Anastasia Martinez of the Ohio Women’s Alliance Action Fund said waiting for the procedure under the previous law only added to her stress, not changed her mind.
“The 24-hour waiting period… did not influence my decision in any way,” Martinez said. “This only increased my anxiety and forced me to take not only sick leave but also days off from work for mental health reasons.”
Republicans on the committee questioned the amount of burden placed on pregnant women by waiting 24 hours and argued that no other medical service was provided the same day it was requested. Abortion rights supporters say it is misleading to say abortion is on demand.
“You don’t make an appointment the same day or on demand,” said Laura Sullivan of Just Choice Family Planning Center in Ohio. “You make an appointment like you would for any other medical procedure, wait until the day of your appointment, and then receive the medical procedure on the day of your scheduled appointment.”
Other opponents of the bill pointed out that HB 347 details abortion procedures, even though some of the care is the same as non-abortion services.
Abortion Forward deputy director Jaime Miracle told the committee she underwent a procedure called D and C, compact for dilation and curettage. Although this procedure is used for surgical abortions, it is also used to remove tissue to diagnose other medical problems.
Miracle stated that its D and C are not pro-abortion, but under this bill, a person who undergoes the exact abortion procedure will have to wait at least one day. She said the only difference between her experience and that of a pregnant woman “is a positive or negative pregnancy test.”
“So if you say that informed consent for abortion must occur in one way, but can occur in a completely different way if someone undergoes the same procedure or uses the same drugs, that is discrimination under the constitution, not the way medicine is practiced,” Miracle said.
State Rep. Jennifer Gross, R-West Chester, was one committee member who appeared to dismiss her opponent’s concerns about a delay in health care, asking opponents “What’s wrong with that?”
“It’s not a use of force, it’s an opportunity to look at all the data, the consent that’s in front of you, and make an informed decision about consent, not a forced or rushed one,” Gross said.
But Miracle and others disputed the notion that the waiting period is an “opportunity” and said 24 hours is rarely that long, especially for people who have child care or transportation issues.
“Because we have access to abortion care in Ohio, people have a lot of time to sit down and think,” Sullivan said. “I don’t know where the idea comes from that people don’t have enough time to process their choice because it takes a long time between making the decision, making the appointment (and) actually getting the appointment; usually weeks.”
According to Mya Rucker, membership director of the Ohio Women’s Alliance, those who will be most affected by the imposition of further abortion laws are those who are already “historically oppressed in this country.” This includes Black and brown communities, LGBTQ+ people, low-income families, rural Ohioans, youth, survivors of violence, and residents without paid leave benefits.
“For someone who works an hourly job without paid time off, lives in a rural area, arranges child care, or is in an unsafe relationship, this ’24-hour waiting period’ can mean many days or weeks of hardship, additional costs, and unnecessary mental and emotional strain,” Rucker said.
State Rep. Angela King, R-Celina, asked Rucker whether, as a minority woman, she was “concerned” that new data from the Ohio Department of Health showed that 48.9% of abortions performed in 2025 involved Black pregnancies.
“I think what upsets me more as a black woman is that the mortality rates for black and brown women and the maternal death rates are higher,” Rucker said. “I think that irritates me more.”
Overall infant and maternal mortality is a constant battle for the well-being of the country. In the budget review in the same committee last week Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Bruce Vanderhoff he expressed hope that federal funding through the Rural Health Transformation Fund could be used to expand efforts, and added that “it’s probably not best to do more of what we’ve done in the past without success.”
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
