The Bush administration is going forward in its final months with a new abortion regulation. The regulation, which was announced yesterday, is designed to allow health care workers to opt out of participating in or providing information about abortions if doing so violates their personal beliefs.

According to a report in the Washington Post, the regulation would allow federal officials to pull federal funds from more than 584,000 institutions if the regulation is violated.



“People should not be forced to say or do things they believe are morally wrong,” Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said. “Health-care workers should not be forced to provide services that violate their own conscience.”



The most controversial language of the proposed regulation, which ignited enormous controversy and opposition, has been eliminated however. According to the New York Times, that language read like this:

…any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.



Since birth control prevents a fertilized egg from being implanted, under this wording birth control pills are classified as abortion. Leavitt addressed the issue of birth control with reporters on a conference call, reported in the Washington Post:

 

“Words in that draft led some to misconstrue the department’s intent,” Leavitt told reporters during a telephone news conference. “This regulation . . . is consistent with my intent to focus squarely on the issue of conscience rights. This specifically goes to the issue of abortion and conscience.”



But when pressed about whether the regulation would protect health-care workers who consider birth control pills, Plan B and other forms of contraception to be equivalent to abortion, Leavitt said: “This regulation does not seek to resolve any ambiguity in that area. It focuses on abortion and focuses on physicians’ conscience in relation to that.”



But the language is broad enough to be applied beyond abortion, and according to the Post even supporters of the regulation agree about that:



“I think this provides broad application not just to abortion and sterilization but any other type of morally objectionable procedure and research activity,” said David Stevens of the Christian Medical and Dental Association. “We think it’s badly needed. Our members are facing discrimination every day, and as we get into human cloning and all sorts of possibilities, it’s going to become even more important.”



A 30-day public comment period commenced yesterday, at the end of which the Bush administration may implement the regulation. For further context and reaction in New Mexico, refer to Gwyneth Doland’s NMI report here.