OLYMPIA, WA – Expecting but on the brink of death? State law says you don’t get a say in what happens, but not for long. Senate Democrats passed a bill Monday that removes any reference to pregnancy in Washington’s advance healthcare directive form. Critics call it an attack on unborn children.
Established under the 1979 Natural Death Act, the Washington state Legislature created the form so people could opt out of life support. State lawmakers amended it in 1992, clarifying language around feeding tubes and end-of-life decisions for pregnant women.
“If I have been diagnosed as pregnant and that diagnosis is known to my physician,” according to the provision, “this directive shall have no force or effect during the course of my pregnancy.”
House Bill 1215 eliminates that provision. The majority party passed the proposal on the House floor last month, with the Senate following on Monday. Both chambers did so with a party-line vote after every elected Republican refused to support the bill, highlighting an ideological split.
“The argument for why this bill needs to pass is that people don’t understand that they can actually change a model form,” Sen. Phil Fortunato, R-Auburn, said Monday.
He and other Republicans believe HB 1215 codifies one option while obscuring alternatives.
Democrats say the bill makes it clear that pregnant women can still choose to void their directive, but Republicans argue that option already exists. Fortunato said the provision protects unborn children, and others have called the bill a tilt away from life and toward death.
The majority rejected an amendment Monday that would’ve kept the pregnancy clause in place and provided boxes so women could decide whether they want their pregnancy to void the form.
“Women are competent, educated beings who understand how to execute their own medical directive,” Sen. Manka Dhingra, D-Redmond, argued against the amendment. “They don’t need the state or this body telling them what options they have given a temporary health condition.”
Since state law created the form, Democrats say they must amend it to avoid misleading women into thinking it will void their directive. While some Republicans call this unnecessary, Democrats say it clears up any confusion despite rejecting Fortunato’s amendment.
Dhingra said HB 1215 ensures everyone is treated the same, regardless of whether they can get pregnant. She likened it to a stand for bodily autonomy, as states pull back reproductive rights in a post-Dobbs world, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade.
Sen. Jeff Holy, R-Cheney, said the amendment would have provided a clear binary choice, yes or no, removing ambiguities that HB 1215 attempts to correct. He said an attorney would know their client could decide to void the form if they’re pregnant, but not the average citizen.
“It’s not a matter of whether this [form] should have this or shouldn’t,” Holy said. “People don’t know they have a choice to go either way. I would have voted yes for the bill if we adopted the amendment … [now] it creates as many problems equally as it solves.”
The bill now awaits the signature of Gov. Bob Ferguson.
This article was written by Tim Clouser and originally published by The Center Square. It is republished here with permission.
