Green Light for Omni:

Abortion Rights Preserved in Cleveland Heights

An open meeting of the Cleveland Heights City Council Committee on Public Health and Safety was held on April 29, 1978, as a forum for residents to express their opinions about the City's ordinance which regulates the administration of abortion services. Close to 100 attended to hear the short remarks of about 30 individuals, who were evenly divided between pro-choice and anti-abortion groups.

The movement to initiate restrictive changes in the Cleveland Heights ordinance regulating abortion services began several months ago, when anti-abor. tion groups began to attend meetings of the Heights Council to speak against the opening of the Omn! Health Center at Severance Center. The Omni Health Center, which is now open, provides reproductive health care to both men and women. Preg. nancy termination services will be added when the permit is received from the City.

A large attendance by anti-abortion forces at Council on February 22, as a demonstration of criticism of Omni's existence, was countered by a large turn-out of pro-choice activists at the subsequent March 6 Council meeting. Mayor Majorie Wright responded to the uproar by ruling that the issue of licensing Omni Health Center was administrative rather than legislative, in that the City had an ordinance by which Omni's application would be evaluated. (Even if the Heights ordinance is amended in the future, Omni's application would be evaluated on the basis of the present ordinance.) Ms. Wright ruled out further public discussion of the issue, but acceded somewhat to the anti-abortion groups by referring the Heights ordinance to the legal depart. ment for review. The legal department's report was offered at this open meeting.

Councilperson Robert H. Arnold, who chairs the public health and safety committee which called the open meeting, began the session by reviewing the history of Ordinance 66, 1973, passed in response to the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Cleveland Heights regulates the operation of abortion services through this ordinance, which largely codified the recommended procedures developed by the Cuyahoga County Board of Health. Mr. Arnold clarified that there was no pending law, that Council was interested in "fact-finding" toward considera. tion of possible amendments to Ordinance 66, 1973. Jules Koach, Acting Law Director, reviewed the Legal Department's assessment of the current ordinance. "Technical" amendments were suggested, which included increasing the size of stretchers used and increasing insurance requirements.

Mr. Koach then reviewed three substantive areas in which amendments to the City ordinance might be considered: (1) What are the parameters of informed consent in legal abortion? To what extent must there be an exchange of information, and an examination of alternatives and attitudes of the patient by the physician? (2) While courts have excluded unreasonable delay, there is "no absolute constitutional right to instant abortion." A required physical or required counseling may be appropriate under the law. (3) What are the rights of minors, and when may they give consent for abortion? Counterposed are statements that while "no parent has the right to absolute veto,' "not every minor is capable of informed consent,'

What the Cleveland Heights Law Department reviewed in these statements is much of the political program of the anti-abortion groups. Amending the ordinance, however, would require that a member of Council first propose such legislation.

While speakers from each side alternated during the meeting, the anti-abortion philosophy and program will be considered first.

An explanatory statement about terminology may be in order. Often we read or hear in the straight media about "right-to-life" and "pro-life" groups. We give power to those who oppose abortion rights when they are called "pro-life," as it appears to give them moral stature. In practice, they are "pro"

nothing they are anti-abortion and anti-woman, As the process of naming empowers its source, it is a political choice to call such groups "antiabortion."

Many of those who spoke for the anti-abortion position seemed to avoid an understanding of the number and diversity of women who seek abortion, or the complexity of their reasons for doing so. One speaker asserted about those who seek abortions, "If they knew what they were doing, they wouldn't do it.' Some standard tactics were employed to sway the Council the playing of a tape of a fetal heart beat and a roll call of disputable statistics on adverse effects of abortion.

Some speakers expressed racist and prejudicial reactions to the presence of Omni Health Center in the city. Orie man thought that women should be able to go to Cleveland for their abortions. A woman participant feared the potential clients of Omni .. that the Center would attract poor and black people Into her neighborhood.

The Concerned Catholic Parents seriously proposed that before a woman could obtain an abortion, she must attend a series of abortion Information classes. At graduation, she would receive a license from City Hall for the abortion!

These comments Indicate the insensible climate and conservatism of the anti-abortion groups. Em. phasis must be given to the planned program of the anti-abortion forces, as it reflects the work of skilled legal and political minds.

The basis for the anti-abortion group's program is a significant re-interpretation of both the original Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion and subsequent case law (e.g., decisions made in any high court that modify or add to the original decision). Key suppositions for the anti-abortion presentation assert that it is not the woman herself who holds the right to personal choice of abortion. Rather, it is a woman's attending physician whose professional judgment of what is medically indicated determines if she may exercise her rights.

This view posits two bases for the State's legal control of the abortion process. First, the physicianpatient relationship may be examined to determine if the physician is in fact "attending" In other words, that the physician has seen the patient on several visits. Secondly, if the physician is to exercise his/her medical judgment in a professional manner, he/she must develop an understanding of many aspects of the woman's current status, This The implies mandatory pre-abortion counseling. anti-abortion groups use these interpretations in their attempts to force legislation to deny women their rights.

Several legal cases were cited to encourage the belief that the state "has a valid and important interest in protecting childbirth," that the state in fact has "an interest throughout pregnancy to encourage childbirth." In the terms of the anti-abor. tion group, the multiple needs of the woman are not considered. In their view, she is seen as an unprepared, indecisive creature, whose best interests require constant protection by the law. Anti-abortion proposals to Cleveland Heights

Council to amend the existing law regulating "abortion service facilities" include the following: (1)

Implementation of a mandatory waiting period. A "cooling off period" to assist the woman who is making "ethical decisions with long-term effects." In this way, an abortion "will not be a quick solution to a long-range problem.

(2) Involvement of the "whole family." For a woman between 15 and 18, her parents would receive notification. If under 15, a woman would require written parental permission. If a women were married, her husband could refuse to give her per. mission to have the abortion. And even if the woman seeking an abortion were of age and unmarried, the anti-abortion group proposed to give the "expectant father" the legal power to deny the woman her rights!

(3) Requirement of the woman's informed con. sent. Anti-abortion forces believe that informed consent requires detailed, mandatory "counseling" in the possible complications and sequelae of the abortion procedure, instruction of the exact development of the fetus, and alternatives to termination of the pregnancy.

Pro-choice speakers responded to both the proposed program and its supporting ideology. Abortion was held to be the "personal choice of a free person," and is an "issue of human rights." A minister spoke to the choice of abortion as a moral and ethical decision. He saw at issue not only abortion, but also standards and values, that is, the individual choice of religion, which is unversal and inalienable. The only sensible course is to protect Individual choice in matters of religion and morals. The alternative is a shift from democracy to theo. cracy. On the basis of First Amendment rights, civil authority is required to stay out of religious decisions --of which the choice of abortion is one.

A woman's ability to make decisions for herself was repeatedly emphasized. City Council was urged to understand that decisions for abortion are made with serious consideration. Women must be given credit for thinking things through. A woman agonizes before she reaches her decision, long before she comes to an abortion facility. Mandatory waiting periods, requiring two trips to the clinic, only add red tape. As an early abortion is the safest safer also than carrying the pregnancy to term .. waiting increases the medical hazards of the woman's experience.

Council was reminded that they are legally limited to protecting the health of the pregnant woman suggestions of a waiting period, or availability of an abortion elsewhere, are not reasonable, and so have no bearing. Despite anyone's personal opinions, the community as a whole is responsible to those who desire abortions. The Supreme Court parameters are the only reference point.

A speaker from Preterm affirmed that teen-age women are sophisticated, already aware of the meaning of pregnancy, and able to make responsible decisions for themselves. Experience has shown that placing age limits on free choice of abortion only means that young women lie about their ages.

Required notification and/or permission of parents places young women in difficult positions. Parents do not always make good decisions for their daughters. One woman was aware that if she shared the fact of her pregnancy with her parents matter what her decision -she would be forced out of the home, as her older sister had been. A state's requiring parental consent in all cases was declared unconstitutional, as there must be a way for a minor to have legal recourse. A minor must have the ability to give consent herself.

Several physicians spoke to the anti-abortion proposals which were seen to place severe restrictions on the ability of patients to obtain optimal health care. Singling out one office procedure when no others were regulated intervenes in a medically and ethically unjustified fashion between the patient and the physician. This restraint of medical practice (continued on page 14)

What She Wants/June. 1978/naqe 1