{"id":2144,"date":"2013-11-14T18:09:38","date_gmt":"2013-11-14T18:09:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ncjolt.org\/?p=2144"},"modified":"2020-06-04T20:53:58","modified_gmt":"2020-06-04T20:53:58","slug":"iowa-judge-stops-shut-down-of-nations-largest-telemedicine-abortion-program","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/blogs\/iowa-judge-stops-shut-down-of-nations-largest-telemedicine-abortion-program\/","title":{"rendered":"Iowa Judge Stops Shut-Down of Nation\u2019s Largest Telemedicine Abortion Program"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Thursday, November 14, 2013,\u00a0 by Amelia Serrat<br \/>\nOn November 5, 2013, Polk County District Judge Karen Romano temporarily <a href=\"http:\/\/www.desmoinesregister.com\/article\/20131106\/NEWS\/311060053\/\">suspended<\/a> a ban on Planned Parenthood of the Heartland\u2019s telemedicine abortion program in Iowa.\u00a0 The <a href=\"https:\/\/medicalboard.iowa.gov\/iowa_code\/adopted&amp;filed\/ARC%201034C%20Chapter%2013_Abortion%20Inducing%20Drugs.pdf\">ban<\/a>, which was set to go into effect on November 6<sup>th<\/sup>, was passed by the Iowa Board of Medicine on August 30<sup>th<\/sup>.\u00a0 The rule requires that a physician be physically present when a woman takes an abortion-inducing drug.\u00a0 The rule effectively bans the use of telemedicine abortion, whereby a rural woman telecommunicates with an urban doctor while in the presence of a nurse practitioner.<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/www.americantelemed.org\/learn\/what-is-telemedicine\">Telemedicine<\/a> is \u201cthe use of medical information exchanged from one site to another via electronic communications to improve a patient\u2019s clinical health status.\u201d\u00a0 Telemedicine is used to allow patients to consult with their doctors from the comfort of their homes, to send test results from rural hospitals to be examined by urban doctors, and to allow for doctors to monitor a patient\u2019s vital signs remotely.\u00a0 It is <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nbcnews.com\/id\/43830382\/ns\/health\/#.UM30Fqynk08\">notable<\/a> that while telemedicine is being used in a variety of fields, the only field in which it is currently being regulated is abortion.\u00a0 Judge Romano recognized this fact and <a href=\"http:\/\/s3.documentcloud.org\/documents\/815363\/decision-granting-stay-for-planned-parent-of-the.pdf\">wrote<\/a>, \u201cWith respect to the lack of an in-person meeting, it is peculiar, as petitioners point out, that the board would mandate this for abortion services and not any other telemedicine practices in Iowa.\u201d<br \/>\nIowa is home of the nation\u2019s first and <a href=\"http:\/\/prospect.org\/article\/iowas-high-tech-abortion-battle\">largest<\/a> telemedicine abortion program.\u00a0 Planned Parenthood of the Heartland has provided over <a href=\"http:\/\/go.nationalpartnership.org\/site\/News2?page=NewsArticle&amp;id=41604\">3,000<\/a> medication abortions to rural women in the state since the program\u2019s start in 2008.\u00a0 Supporters of the ban argue that the new standards are needed to protect the health and safety of women seeking medication abortions.\u00a0 However, Judge Romano was not persuaded by their arguments.\u00a0 She <a href=\"http:\/\/s3.documentcloud.org\/documents\/815363\/decision-granting-stay-for-planned-parent-of-the.pdf\">wrote<\/a> that the Iowa Board of Medicine has not provided \u201cany evidence whatsoever that telemedicine abortions are unsafe or negatively impact public health\u2026.There is simply no evidence the court can rely on to come to the conclusion that the telemedicine abortion procedures, which have been offered for five years without issue, do not \u2018protect the health and safety of patients.\u2019\u201d<br \/>\nJudge Romano\u2019s decision is based in part on studies cited by Planned Parenthood, which <a href=\"Effectiveness%20and%20Acceptability%20of%20Medical%20Abortion%20Provided%20Through%20Telemedicine.pdf\">show<\/a> that \u201ctelemedicine can be used to provide medica[tion] abortion in an effective and highly acceptable manner.\u201d\u00a0 A notable study surveyed nearly 600 women who obtained both face-to-face and telemedicine medication abortions through Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa.\u00a0 Follow-up data was obtained for 226 face-to-face patients and 223 telemedicine patients who visited Planned Parenthood clinics between November 2008 and October 2009.\u00a0 The rates of women who had a successful abortion were very similar: 99% of telemedicine patients and 97% of face-to-face patients. \u00a0Rates of adverse effects were similar among both groups of patients.\u00a0 Ninety-four percent of telemedicine patients were very satisfied with the process, while eighty-eight percent of face-to-face patients had the same level of satisfaction.<br \/>\nJudge Romano\u2019s stay is only temporary pending further judicial review of the Iowa Board of Medicine\u2019s ban.\u00a0 Both pro-choice and anti-choice advocates will be watching Iowa in the coming months to see how the courts decide the fate of telemedicine abortion.\u00a0 Advances in technology, including telemedicine, are influencing the country\u2019s practice of medicine in countless ways.\u00a0 Will these advances be allowed in the field of abortion?\u00a0 Looks like we\u2019ll have to wait and see.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Thursday, November 14, 2013,\u00a0 by Amelia Serrat On November 5, 2013, Polk County District Judge Karen Romano temporarily suspended a ban on Planned Parenthood of the Heartland\u2019s telemedicine abortion program in Iowa.\u00a0 The ban, which was set to go into effect on November 6th, was passed by the Iowa Board of Medicine on August 30th.\u00a0 <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/blogs\/iowa-judge-stops-shut-down-of-nations-largest-telemedicine-abortion-program\/\" class=\"more-link\">&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[51],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2144"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2144"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2144\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7540,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2144\/revisions\/7540"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2144"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2144"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2144"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}