HB1590

We already have an abhorrent ban on abortions after 24 weeks, there is NO reason to further reduce a woman's time to choose the right Healthcare for themselves, reducing their time to 20 weeks. Stop pushing your own religous views on the majority of the people. You are doing a grave disservice to the people by continuing to push for this. Leave it alone and savor the victory you've already won at 24 weeks.

Hey, Sorry I missed the actual time for this public testimony. I still wanted to share my thoughts. As an emergency RN and a woman, I drastically oppose limiting abortion to 20 weeks. Across the country we have seen the negative effects to women's health, safety and well being that comes from limiting access to abortion. Abortion is a medical decision which should be made between a woman and her doctor. This is not a decision that is up for public or political debate. Women have a right to reproductive healthcare and this bill will restrict women's options. Also, we don't need to be threatening healthcare workers with a felony for providing reproductive healthcare. The fear of that alone is going to prevent women from receiving life saving care. Thanks

Why are my tax dollars going to policing women's bodies more harshly instead of feeding the children you are implicitly insisting they should have?

New Hampshire already restricts abortions to 24 weeks. Stop trying to control women/score political points in a culture war and start actually solving the problems New Hampshire residents are facing - housing affordability, daycare shortages, general cost of living, etc. Enough already.

If this bill goes through it is jeopardizing the safety of every woman of child bearing age. Complications of pregnancy can require medical abortions after 20 weeks. It is a woman’s right to choose and this is wrong.

Supporting an abortion ban won't make your dick grow bigger and it won't encourage a woman to let you touch them. No uterus, no opinion.

Stop putting back door restrictions on a woman’s rights on her own body. . Most women will not know that they could be pregnant in such a short amount of time and be able to arrange the procedure.. very tired of seeing attempts like this that do nothing but make like harder on people. You never talk about meaningful support for children and just want to be cruel to people.

Under no circumstances should the government be involved in medical decisions. Abortion is healthcare. There are SO many medical reasons beyond "unwanted" that a woman may need an abortion. Restrictions create dangerous and life-threatening situations for women. Other states with strict abortion laws have already proven this to be true. There are so many cases of women dying because they could not receive the required medical care to save their life due to strict laws. It is incredibly insane that this is happening in 2026. There should be no restrictions, but they certainly shouldn't be reduced from the current 24 weeks. Women who are 20+ weeks pregnant are not getting abortions because they have suddenly decided they don't want the pregnancy. Either there is a significant fetal abnormality, which often is not discovered prior to 20 weeks, or the woman's health is in danger. Anatomy and growth ultrasounds of a fetus are often not performed until 20 weeks gestation. If a significant abnormality is found not compatible with life at that point, this bill would then force the woman to carry that fetus to term despite the fact that it would not live. That is a cruelty beyond measure to both the mother and the baby who, if born alive, would suffer until death. As it is, 24 weeks is too low for that same reason. Even providing a clause stating a so called exception for medical reasons is too restrictive. It would create unnecessary unease among the healthcare community, potentially leading them to decline lifesaving procedures for fear of legal recourse. I would strongly urge representatives to consider these very important facts and oppose this incredibly harmful bill.

For those who aren’t aware— 20 weeks is when you typically get the big important anatomy scan ultrasound. Which can be incredibly scary for parents because it’s often when you can find out stuff like organs growing outside the body, that your baby is incompatible with life, or has other conditions that can make their quality of life extremely short or painful. It’s when people have to go home and make really hard decisions that they don’t want to make. Those are the people who are having to make the heart wrenching “decision” to terminate at 20-24 weeks.

This bill would be terrible for people with wanted pregnancies, such as those achieved through in virto fertilization (IVF) and other fertility treatments. By framing this bill as “harmonizing” two completely unrelated statutes, the bill obfuscates its true intentions, which is to severely restrict abortions taking place after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Additionally, the bill assigns personhood rights to fetuses at only 20 weeks of gestation, a time when a fetus cannot even survive outside the uterine environment even with the best medical care. Anytime fetal personhood rights are legislated, we have to be concerned as to the impact on IVF. As we have seen in Alabama, fertility clinics simply cannot operate when embryos in the laboratory have personhood rights. This bill moves us one step closer to that result. The carveouts for “medical emergency” and “fetal abnormalities incompatible with life” are confusing and do not align with accepted medical standards. This kind of terminology in other states, such as Texas, has led to health care provider confusion and refusal or delay of medically necessitated abortions resulting in patient deaths, increased health care costs for intensive care admissions, and, for many patients who did manage to survive, the loss of their future fertility. A woman should not be forced to wait until she’s on the brink of death prior to receiving an abortion to save her own life or health. Furthermore, the carve out for the actions of the pregnant person herself would be eliminated by this bill. Under the proposed language, a pregnant patient will only be protected if her health care provider strictly followed the law. This places a tremendous, and unfair, burden on the patient to ensure that her doctor’s diagnostic and treatment actions are medically and legally correct or she could face the repercussions of criminal charges and incarceration. If a doctor tells a patient that she has pre-eclampsia and must terminate the pregnancy to save her own life, the patient should be able to rely on her doctor’s medical assessment without fear of facing criminal charges. In at least one state with similar language, the Attorney General has conducted aggressive fishing expeditions to determine whether doctors’ reasons for performing abortions were sufficiently justified under state law. The law would not protect women from having their private medical information exposed in this manner, and the law would not sufficiently protect either doctors or patients from criminal charges. In addition to harming the pregnant patient, her spouse or partner would also suffer the repercussions of this bill. He would be forced to watch as his own pregnant spouse or partner cannot receive medically necessary care. He may be forced to parent a child who will only suffer, because a medically necessary abortion was not available during the pregnancy. In summary, this bill would have terrible repercussions for people with wanted pregnancies, including those achieved through IVF and other fertility treatments. This bill would also threaten continued access to IVF. Please vote this bill as inexpedient to legislate.

Granite Staters have been clear, time and time again, that we support a woman's right to choose. It may not be the opinion of the elected members in the House who continue to push bills like this to the floor, but it's not your opinion you're meant to be representing, now is it? We are the "Live Free or Die" state, and the New Hampshire GOP does not get to decide when and to whom that gets applied. This deeply personal decision should continue to be left up to women and their doctors, not to a bunch of loser men who can't get pregnant. Y'all should start mind your own business; you'd probably be happier people.

Absolutely opposed to this as a constituent, woman, mother, and nurse. Just another way of taking decisions away from patients and their doctors.

Stop trying to interfere in medical decisions between a pregnant person and their doctor. People at this stage of the pregnancy very much want their fetus to be a success. Stop trying to drag out their agony by taking away this option when you find out life changing news at the 20 week anatomy scan.

I oppose this abortion ban and all abortion bans.

A bad bill for women’s health.

Abortions after 20 weeks continues to be an extremely rare occurrence (less than 1% of all abortions), and is a decision that should only be addressed with the woman and her healthcare provider. 24 weeks continues to be the age of fetal viability, prior to this time the fetus has a less than 50% chance of survival during a miscarriage. The State of NH still does not currently issue birth certificates to women who deliver full term, still born infants, and this bill is a slap in their face.

This further restricts a woman's right to have a safe abortion, particularly when she, along with her doctors, have identified a serious, catastrophic problem with the pregnancy. Abortions this late occur when something horrible has gone wrong. The government should not be in the business of deciding what citizens have to do in this painful circumstance. These decisions should be left between the woman, her family and her providers.

To Members of the House Judiciary Committee, I am writing today in opposition to HB1590. As a practicing OBGYN who has trained and now practice in New Hampshire, I can say with confidence that this not only puts my patients at risk, but it will also drive providers out of the state. Prior to coming to New Hampshire, I trained briefly as an OBGYN in Texas. Over the course of the last 6 years since training there, I have seen how abortion restrictions have driven friends and colleagues out of the state. In committing to a life in medicine, we also commit to doing no harm towards our patients, and abortion restrictions contradict those moral principles. Providers who feel that they are not practicing medicine with morality WILL leave the state. The decision to terminate a pregnancy after 20 weeks, whether it be for lethal or non-lethal anomalies, does not come easy, but needs to remain a right for patients. Asking a provider to sort through whether an abortion is warranted in the middle of a medical emergency puts the patient at risk and it compromises medical decision making. Please think about patients, medical morality, and provider shortages in the state and oppose this bill. With thanks and sincerity, Charlotte Hastings, MD

This is an abortion ban bill with criminal penalties. Stop with the personhood language. Unless medical terminology changes fetus is the correct term not personhood. Using personhood language is just another way to prevent a woman in consultation with her doctor from exercising her right to choose. Penalizing women is another cruel attempt by the bill's sponsors to ban abortion in NH. VOTE NO on this bill.

I oppose this bill that will change the abortion ban to 20 weeks. Abortions are health care for women and should not be restricted by the state. This is a subject that is between a woman, family and the doctor.

The decision on when and whether to end a pregnancy should be between a woman and her health care provider. The state should not be involved.

I oppose this 20 week abortion ban.

Let women choose what to do with their bodies!!

Abortion is healthcare and decisions about one’s health should be between that person and their doctor. A ban on abortion, regardless of the stipulations, is not what the citizens of New Hampshire want. We, as a whole, oppose this type of bill every single time you bring it forth. Listen to your constituents. Live free or die.