Will Fresno see a surge in out-of-state abortion seekers, after Roe v. Wade overturned?
A U.S. Supreme Court decision that allows states to engineer their own laws restricting abortions may have the effect of boosting demand in California and the Valley for a slew of reproductive care services, and not just pregnancy terminations, a Fresno doctor said Friday.
The ruling does not outlaw abortion, but clears the way for individual states to establish their own limitations on the procedure.
Even before the court’s 6-3 opinion Friday overturning the landmark 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, which effectively made abortion a constitutional right, California has moved to position itself as a state in which abortions will remain legal and available not only for women already living here, but for patients traveling from more restrictive states to seek care.
The issues, however, go well beyond abortion “to all areas of reproductive care,” said Dr. Carolina Sueldo, a board certified obstetrician/gynecologist and reproductive/fertility specialist with the UCSF-Fresno medical education program.
In some states, “personhood laws” defining life as beginning at fertilization “would dramatically impact the way that infertility treatment is provided to patients in those states,” Sueldo said. “We do assistive reproduction treatments not only for infertility, but for genetic diseases (and) recurrent miscarriages.” She added that in some states, colleagues have been restricted in managing medical emergencies such as ectopic pregnancies or life-threatening miscarriages.”
It’s those other services, rather than abortions themselves, that are more likely to have ripple effects on the health care system in California, Sueldo told The Fresno Bee on Friday. “What we see in California is that Gov. Newsom has been very black-and-white on his position that California will support reproductive rights,” she said. “We do not believe the women of California will be directly impacted” by overturning Roe.”
“Even though in California we ‘don’t have anything to worry about,’ I think we will see ourselves impacted by patients coming from out of state,” Sueldo said. “Because CA will be considered a ‘haven state,’ we do anticipate an influx of patients from other states seeking care, not only for abortion but for all of these reproductive aspects, safe contraception and assisted reproduction technologies.”
“I believe it’s going to be a volume issue. ... If there is an influx of out-of-state patients, that may put a strain on the system, and that may ultimately impact patients’ ability to access care.”
Two people on opposite sides of the abortion debate said they, too, believe California may see an upswing in the number of women coming from out of state for services.
John Gerardi, CEO of Right to Life Central California, said the San Joaquin Valley already suffers from a shortage of prenatal care, especially for low-income women. He added that he believes legislation working its way through the state Capitol “is basically going to turn California into the nation’s abortion magnet” by offering services at taxpayer expense to women coming in from other states with more restrictive laws. That number, he added, could increase from “tens of thousands (per year) to hundreds of thousands.”
Gerardi’s organization operates a pregnancy center in Fresno that offers its clients prenatal care as well as information on alternatives to abortion.
Genoveva Islas, a former member of the board of Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, which operates health centers across northern California including two facilities in Fresno, agreed that the state and Valley may experience more patients seeking services. “I can see that happening,” she told The Bee on Friday. But rather than something to dread, “I would feel glad that we are providing services to people who need them.”
“I hate the idea that people have to leave where they live to have access to these services,” Islas added.
Islas said the focus on abortion ignores other reproductive health services that Planned Parenthood provides, from prenatal care to screening for early cancer detection. “Abortion is just one component of the many services,” she said.
Sueldo, the UCSF-Fresno doctor, said that because her practice includes fertility treatments for would-be families, the terms “pro-life” and “pro-choice” detract from the root issues. “As a reproductive specialist, my patients want more than anything to be parents, and my job is to help them bring life into this world.”
“I believe that all medical professionals are ‘pro-life,’” she added. “Where I think the distinction is for me is that this is a medical decision that really needs to be made in the confines of a medical office between the provider and the patient.”
“When you have legislation that is going to impact that relationship,” Sueldo said, “there is a potential to ultimately end up in life-threatening situations.”
This story was originally published June 25, 2022 at 8:00 AM.
