Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Coats amendment’

Sen. Steve Morris

What kind of double-speak from Senate President Steve Morris (R-Hugoton) is being reported without question by the Kansas press corps?

Despite Morris’ (debatable) claim today that he will always fight for pro-life values,” he is using the University of Kansas Medical Center (KUMC) propaganda as a pretext for NOT advancing a pro-life bill.

Morris has derailed Senate action on Hsub 313 (the Pro-Life Protections Act) and claimed that it was due to his concerns that it could negatively affect KUMC accreditation. This is a phony excuse.

Moreover, the KUMC language in Hsub 313 is the EXACT LANGUAGE that already exists in all of this year’s budget proposals in both chambers– including the versions Morris voted for!

Which raises the additional question, will Morris now also attempt to remove the KUMC language from the current budget proposals?

As Kansans for Life has repeatedly explained, accreditation of KUMC is not in jeopardy. 1996 federal legislation (the Coats amendment voted for by then-U.S. Senators Dole and Kassebaum) intentionally protects state med schools from losing accreditation when banning actual abortion participation.

That federal protection was created after the independent accreditation agency for medical schools kowtowed to abortion trade groups to demand all graduate medical training include actual abortion practice. (Read more here, here, here and here)

The Coats law was intended to counteract bullying of state legislatures by the accreditation agency and it focuses on states’ right to keep the entire graduate program out of abortion training, (more…)

Read Full Post »

In 1996, every state acquired federal protection from retribution for not forcing their medical students to participate in abortion.

The applicable federal law is the Coats amendment, voted for by both Kansas’ U.S. Senators at the time, Nancy Kassebaum and Bob Dole.

Coats reads, “In determining whether to grant a legal status to a health care entity (including a license or certificate), or to provide such entity with financial assistance, services or other benefits, the Federal Government, or any State or local government that receives Federal financial assistance, shall

deem accredited any postgraduate physician training program that would be accredited but for the accrediting agency’s reliance upon an accreditation standards that requires an entity to perform an induced abortion or require, provide, or refer for training in the performance of induced abortions, or make arrangements for such training, regardless of whether such standard provides exceptions or exemptions.”

In other words, there is no possible accreditation threat to the medical center of the University of Kansas (KUMC) from section 2 of the Pro-life Protections act (HB 2598)— and now in the state budget (more…)

Read Full Post »

Kansas N.O.W. lobbyist Kari Rinker, is fanning opposition (here and here) to the Pro-Life Protections Act, HB 2598, but she is wrong that the bill will cost accreditation for the University of Kansas (KU), and she’s wrong about ob/gyn physician education.

1998 Kansas law already bans abortions at KU—but KU continued abortion training, merely moving it offsite. (read previous post)

One provision of HB 2598 would forbid abortion performance by state entities (and by state student-physicians in training) –language that mirrors what Arizona adopted in 2011 (KSA 76-3308 (i)) KU has not issued a public demand to keep abortion training, other than emails to legislators from its lobbyist,

incorrectly threatening that a lack of abortion participation would cause KU to lose accreditation by ACGME (American Council on Graduate Medical Education).

However, ACGME—by its own rules– exempts not only individuals from performing abortions for religious /moral objections to performing abortions, but also exempts education programs that are under “legal” restrictions (see article IV. A. 2 d, on pg. 13 here). That is why Arizona retains its accreditation while banning abortion training.

Authentic training required for ob/gyn physicians includes pregnancy management, evacuation of the womb and “learning about abortion procedures without doing them,” as bill-author Rep. Lance Kinzer (R-Olathe) correctly told (more…)

Read Full Post »

HB 2598, the Pro-Life Protections Act, contains several provisions reflecting the state’s right not to prop up abortion businesses with income tax advantages, and not to require abortion training for students at state-funded universities.

While the bill awaits a vote from the House Federal-State Affairs committee, a lobbyist for the University of Kansas (KU) has alerted state representatives that KU needs a specific exemption from HB 2598 to continue abortion training for their ob/gyn physician residents.  The lobbyist writes that, without the exemption, national accreditation from ACGME (the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) will be pulled — but no clear evidence of this has been produced.

KU did not testify at the bill hearing; neither is there evidence that KU contacted ACGME about the situation in light of the fact that Arizona last year passed a clear ban (see section c here) on using public monies for abortion training — without loss of accreditation for their state post-graduate ob/gyn program. (check http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/, choose “accredited programs,” choose specialty (obgyn) and choose state to see accredited programs).

Furthermore, the legislative permission for establishing the KU Hospital Authority rested on ending abortions at KU— which KU resisted in 1997, and conceded in 1998.  Now it appears they are not following lawmakers’ intent, and only moved the abortion training off of state property.

  1. Federal law protects funding for medical education that objects to abortion participation– regardless of ACGME accreditation.
  2. There is no professional reason that ob/gyn resident physicians have to learn how to destroy unborn children in order to achieve competency in pregnancy management, stillbirth evacuation or treating abortion complications.

ACGME already knows abortion training is not needed, because they “allow” individual graduate students to “opt out” of doing abortions (more…)

Read Full Post »