I went to the source to review it I found there were two bills originally considered, state bill S2796 and S240. Only S240 was signed by the governor. But I am listing them both here just for reference…they are pretty much the same.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2017/S2796

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s240

I read this bill and find nothing that says you can have an abortion up to 40 weeks. In fact it says that unless it is in an effort to preserve the life of the mother or the child is no longer viable, an abortion performed past 24 weeks is considered murder.

Now something I did see that has me bothered is that you don’t have to be a doctor to perform an abortion, nor to determine how far along a woman’s pregnancy has progressed. It specifically states:

§ 2599-BB. ABORTION. 1. A HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER LICENSED, CERTI-
FIED, OR AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE EIGHT OF THE EDUCATION LAW, ACTING WITH-IN HIS OR HER LAWFUL SCOPE OF PRACTICE, MAY PERFORM AN ABORTION WHEN,ACCORDING TO THE PRACTITIONER’S REASONABLE AND GOOD FAITH PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE PATIENT’S CASE: THE PATIENT IS WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR WEEKS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF PREGNANCY, OR THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF FETAL VIABILITY, OR THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT’S LIFE OR HEALTH.

If you go to title 8 of the education law you find it covers everything from soup to nuts, but does have a section for medicine which specifically addresses licensed physicians. But the actual health care reform act only says it needs to be a health care practitioner. Health care practitioners range from PAs to acupuncturists to podiatrist to chiropractics and everything in between. I couldn’t find a specific license for abortionist, though I didn’t read each and every entry…just the ones I thought applied. My feeling is that if they specifically wanted a doctor, they would have stated licensed physician instead of health care practitioner. It does say Within his or her lawful scope of practice but when you are vague about the actual needed training, you are opening up a can of worms. To further explain this point, I went to a federal definition for Licensed Health Care Practitioner:

https://definitions.uslegal.com/l/licensed-health-care-practitioner/

This definition specifically excludes physicians. It also seems to state that all that is required is for a person to say they are a licensed health care practitioner and all is good.

From what I understand, abortion is taken out of the New York criminal statutes so if it is outlawed nationwide, it will not be a crime in New York state.

As a doctor I have no problem with having non-physicians provide procedurs. In fact it’s VERY common for nurses and PAs do do procedures in and around the hospital. They are often better at it than the physicians because that’s all they do.

I do not consider acupuncturist and chiropracters licensed health care providers. They are quacks. But that’s another discussion. If they are, in fact, allowed to perform abortions, then I would have a major problem with it.

@Caravanfan I posted a link on Dutchess’ question about this the other day, that specifically mentioned midwives could also perform them. If all these people are qualified and able to handle emergencies, that’s reassuring in the physical aspect.

@KNOWITALL Oh, I didn’t realize Dutchess had asked a similar question. My bad. I’ll self-mod the question off.

@Caravanfan No worries on my part, I love to see such a radically different viewpoint than my own or the people that I live around.

@KNOWITALL But honestly, I teach PAs and FNPs all the time in my various courses (not abortions but other stuff) and frankly they are often better at what I am teaching than the physicians are.

@Caravanfan I don’t doubt that at all, as long as whomever is performing them is equipped to deal with complications quickly. The midwife being allowed threw me for a bit of a loop, but hey, it’s not my body and I don’t know the qualification in NY for midwifery.

This video shows the exchange which makes many people in my area pause in disbelief. Virginia. The end of 40 weeks it could still be performed already dilated, which means the fetus is viable outside the womb.
https://youtu.be/OMFzZ5I30dg

(I’m trusting this thread and you to stay factual and unemotional, which is the only reason I’m being really honest in this discussion.)

@KNOWITALL ask and ye shall receive

http://www.op.nysed.gov/prof/midwife/article140.htm

Certified nurse midwifes are awesome at what they do.

The bill I saw in the news was the Virginia bill which allows abortion up to 40 weeks if continuing the pregnancy impairs the physical or mental health of the mother.

Mental health? Now I think we are in dangerous territory.

@Demosthenes that’s the bill Gov Northam commented on and is trying to tap dance his way out of it. He made the statement during a radio interview that he felt abortion was between a woman and her doctor(s) and that if a baby was delivered, then the mother and doctors would have to have a discussion about what to do with it. There were no qualifiers with the statement at the time so it sounded like he was supporting post-birth abortions which in many areas of the country is called murder. But this question seems to be about the NY law that was recently passed.

@seawulf575: There’s no such thing as post-birth abortion.

@jca2 Actually what @seawulf575 is referring to something that Northam said, which is actually a correct statement.

If a fetus is delivered and it’s deformed and incompatable with life, then Northam was saying that a discussion should be made as to whether to let the infant die than to recussitate it. This is actually correct practice, but he said it in a very inelegant way. If a fetus is delivered, and it is nonviable, then it shouldn’t necessarily be recussitated.

But the right wing press went insane with the comment.

@Caravanfan I think the right went crazy over this because the whole conversation when he made the comment was about abortion and how late in a pregnancy should be too late. He was specifically talking about abortion. He never once mentioned resuscitation. In fact resuscitation and abortion are sort of opposite ends of the spectrum. Nor did he mention if the baby dies after being born…just if it had defects or if the mother’s physical or mental health were in jeopardy. Given the context it was very disturbing, especially given the offhand way he presented it.

“When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way,” Northam said. “And it’s done in cases where there amy be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion.”

Okay, he didn’t say “recussitation”. He said “recussitated.”
Read this article.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-abortion-bill-proposed-by-kathy-tran-third-trimester-today-2019-01-30/

So if the infant is kept comfortable, what is the discussion between the physician and the mother about in relation to abortion? Resuscitation would only be done if the baby died and abortion would not be an issue at that point. In fact, if the baby died during birth, abortion would not be an issue. So the discussion was abortion during delivery. What part of that statement the governor made would apply to that topic? “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable.” And ”...a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” Bringing up a delivered child in an abortion discussion and talking about what to do with it after it is born can really only be taken one way.

If a baby is born, there’s no abortion. What happens to it after its born is not abortion.