Bill Overview
Title: Unborn Protection Act
Description: This bill creates new federal crimes related to the performance of an abortion on an unborn child based on the results of a laboratory developed prenatal test. The term laboratory developed prenatal test means a type of in vitro diagnostic test that is designed, developed, manufactured, validated, or performed within a single laboratory and is not cleared or approved by the Food and Drug Administration It subjects a violator to criminal penalties—a fine, a prison term of up to five years, or both. It also authorizes civil remedies, including damages and injunctive relief. A woman who undergoes such an abortion may not be prosecuted or held civilly liable.
Sponsors: Rep. Fischbach, Michelle [R-MN-7]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals considering or providing abortions related to prenatal testing
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill affects the population of pregnant individuals who might consider abortion based on prenatal test results.
- The bill impacts healthcare professionals performing abortions based on these results.
- Laboratories developing and performing prenatal tests are also affected as their operations might be scrutinized or limited.
- The bill will impact the legal system, by introducing new criminal and civil regulations related to prenatal abortion testing.
- The expectations and decisions of individuals regarding prenatal testing might change due to the legal implications.
- Since the legislation is located in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, it directly applies to the U.S. population.
Reasoning
- The target population involves a diverse set of individuals including pregnant women, healthcare providers, laboratory professionals, and legal practitioners.
- The policy affects decision-making around prenatal testing and abortions, impacting mental and emotional wellbeing.
- Budget constraints suggest the policy may affect outreach and education efforts, potentially limiting the population's understanding and compliance.
- Given the policy's implications, there could be resistance, affecting acceptance and implementation.
Simulated Interviews
Software Developer (New York, NY)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I value the information provided by prenatal tests to make informed decisions.
- This policy feels like an intrusion into my personal decision-making.
- I'm worried about how this might restrict my choices if something were to go wrong.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Obstetrician (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy adds another layer of legal scrutiny and potential liability.
- I worry about how it might affect my practice and patient trust.
- The policy might reduce the use of valuable diagnostic tools due to fear.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Lab Technician (Austin, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My job could be at risk if prenatal tests are less in demand.
- There's uncertainty surrounding the policy's impact on our procedures and employment.
- I feel anxious about the stability of my job with these new regulations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not overly affected now, but it does make me question future decisions.
- I want the ability to choose what's best for my family without legal implications.
- The policy could lead to reduced access to medical information.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Healthcare Policy Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 53 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as a potential overreach of legal authority in personal health matters.
- This policy could drive changes in healthcare policy and influence abortion debates.
- Concerns about the long-term impacts on healthcare practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Genetic Counselor (Denver, CO)
Age: 41 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could limit the options I can recommend to my clients.
- I worry about the increased complexity of navigating both medical and legal considerations.
- My main concern is how this affects the accuracy and accessibility of prenatal testing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Retired Nurse (Boston, MA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this as stepping back in terms of women's health rights.
- It's concerning how this complicates healthcare provisions.
- Our clinic might have to adjust how we approach prenatal care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
State Legislator (Seattle, WA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with my view of limited government interference.
- I believe it could safeguard against misuse of prenatal tests.
- However, legal complexities might complicate state-level healthcare policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
College Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems like a threat to reproductive rights and autonomy.
- As a future healthcare provider, I worry about how laws like this impact medical ethics.
- It's disheartening to think women might feel less control over their healthcare choices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Lawyer (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a lawyer, I see this policy creating more legal hurdles for providers.
- It could deter professionals from offering certain services due to fear of liability.
- The policy may lead to contentious legal battles over reproductive rights.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Year 5: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Year 10: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Year 100: $25000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $50000000)
Key Considerations
- The precise impact on federal costs largely depends on the rate of legal infractions and the judicial outcomes of enforcing this new law.
- Potential increases in legal and compliance costs for healthcare providers performing prenatal testing.
- Uncertainty around how many cases will be prosecuted annually under this legislation can affect cost estimates.