PLATFORM : What Next?
Those opposed to abortion should find little comfort in the court’s ruling. If the court can rule the way it did on abortion, it can issue a similar ruling on Caesarean sections, heart transplants, blood transfusions or anything else the government chooses to remove from conversation between doctor and patient.
The state has fought for years to outlaw use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions under the Medi-Cal program. Now the court has nailed the lid down tighter on the ability of poor women to obtain abortions if the government is involved, even if abortions are legal. Advocates of a government-run health plan won’t like to talk about it, but it seems clear--doctors in a Canadian-style national-health program designed to serve everyone are not going to be able to serve everyone. If the patient is pregnant and wants to know about abortions, she’s out of luck.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
