Bill Overview
Title: Prohibiting Abortion Industry’s Lucrative Loopholes Act
Description: This bill expands the prohibition on the sale or purchase of human fetal tissue in interstate commerce to include any payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of such tissue.
Sponsors: Rep. Franklin, C. Scott [R-FL-15]
Target Audience
Population: People accessing or involved in abortion and fetal tissue medical research globally
Estimated Size: 110000000
- The bill focuses on prohibiting transactions involving human fetal tissue, which is generally related to abortion services and research.
- Approximately half of the U.S. population are women, and among them, a significant portion may consider abortion services during their reproductive years.
- There are organizations and research facilities that use fetal tissue for medical research, which could be impacted by this bill.
- Clinics and medical facilities that provide abortion services and might engage in legal transactions involving fetal tissue would be impacted.
- Patients seeking abortions and the medical professionals providing those services could experience changes in access to medical procedures and research.
- Countries with similar abortion services could experience similar impacts if they engage in global collaborations or research sharing involving fetal tissue.
Reasoning
- The policy is primarily aimed at regulating the financial aspects of fetal tissue transactions related to abortion and medical research.
- The target population includes both women who might seek abortion services and medical professionals engaged in fetal tissue research.
- Budget constraints suggest only part of the associated medical and research community may be directly impacted.
- Considering 110 million individuals in the U.S. related to this policy area, the immediate impact will focus on professionals and organizations involved in fetal tissue handling.
- Not all trips or costs associated with fetal tissue will be prohibited, so some projects may continue if self-funded or restructured.
- Certain regions or states with stricter abortion laws may see more pronounced impacts on local research projects.
- Wellness metrics can change due to policy's effect on healthcare access, legal pressures, and potential restriction in medical research innovations.
Simulated Interviews
Researcher at a University (California)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could limit advancements in important medical research areas.
- We rely on fetal tissue for critical studies in regenerative medicine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Healthcare worker (Texas)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy creates more hurdles for women seeking abortions.
- Overall healthcare quality at my clinic might decrease.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Medical ethics consultant (New York)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy represents ethical nuances needing careful navigation.
- Could lead to a reduction in ethically complex cases for advising.
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 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Scientist working in biotech (Illinois)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Restricting fetal tissue usage can hinder scientific breakthroughs.
- Alternative funding sources may be necessary but challenging.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Politician (Florida)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm pleased with efforts to limit fetal tissue trading.
- There are ethical concerns that justify this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Pro-life activist (Arizona)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step forward for the pro-life movement.
- It aligns with the values of those against fetal tissue commerce.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Graduate student in medical research (Ohio)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Lack of access to fetal tissue could limit my research scope.
- I'd likely need to pivot to different medical research.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Healthcare policy analyst (New Mexico)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy can restrict access to important medical resources.
- Research backlash could affect healthcare delivery in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Retired OB-GYN (Iowa)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see both the medical benefits and moral concerns of fetal tissue use.
- Former patients' care access might be affected by this policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
College student (Washington)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Limiting fetal tissue availability could stall medical advancements.
- Advocacy work must focus on maintaining comprehensive healthcare access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $510000000 (Low: $410000000, High: $610000000)
Year 3: $520000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $620000000)
Year 5: $540000000 (Low: $440000000, High: $640000000)
Year 10: $580000000 (Low: $480000000, High: $680000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Key Considerations
- Compliance with the bill could be complex, requiring substantial resources to implement.
- Long-term effects on medical research could stifle innovation in biomedical fields.
- The impact on international collaborations and the scientific community needs to be evaluated.
- Consideration of ethical concerns and public opinion regarding the use of fetal tissue in research is crucial.