Physicians urge rejection of Virginia abortion amendment for weakening medical oversight

Physicians urged Virginia voters Friday to reject a proposed reproductive freedom amendment, arguing it could weaken medical oversight and parental consent requirements.

Virginia Medical Professionals for Women’s Safety held the Richmond press conference to oppose Question 1 on the Nov. 3 ballot.

Dr. Christina Francis, an OB-GYN and CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the amendment could allow abortions by unlicensed providers in unlicensed facilities. She urged voters to consider the proposal as a patient safety issue.

Dr. Timothy Boley, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, questioned who would set and enforce medical standards under the amendment.

The proposal would add a right to reproductive freedom to the Virginia Constitution, which does not currently explicitly provide that right.

The ballot question asks:

“Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to (i) protect the freedom to make personal decisions about prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion, miscarriage management, and fertility care; (ii) protect doctors, nurses, and patients from being punished for these decisions; and (iii) allow for restrictions on access to abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy except when the patient’s health is at risk or the pregnancy cannot survive?”

Abortion is already legal in the commonwealth during the first and second trimesters, with additional restrictions afterward. Rejecting the amendment would not itself ban abortion.

Current law already includes an exception for mental or physical health after the second trimester. It generally requires hospital care and agreement from three physicians that continuing the pregnancy would likely cause death or substantially and irremediably impair the patient’s mental or physical health. A separate exception applies when an abortion is necessary to save the patient’s life.

The amendment would allow third-trimester restrictions but prohibit a ban when a physician judges an abortion medically indicated to protect the patient’s life or physical or mental health, or when the fetus is not viable.

Boley also argued that the amendment’s protection for patients’ decision-making could take precedence over restrictions on third-trimester abortions.

More broadly, restrictions on reproductive care would have to maintain or improve the patient’s health and follow accepted medical standards and evidence. They would also have to use the least restrictive approach and respect the patient’s right to make their own decisions.

Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation of Virginia, argued the amendment would invalidate parental consent requirements.

Current law generally requires consent from a parent or another authorized adult for an unemancipated minor’s abortion. A minor can seek a judge’s permission instead. The law also includes exceptions involving suspected abuse or neglect and medical emergencies.

Virginians for Reproductive Freedom, the coalition campaigning for passage, launched a six-figure digital ad campaign.

“From the Shenandoah Valley to the Eastern Shore, we know Virginians don’t agree on everything,” the ad says.

“But when it comes to our healthcare decisions, we can all agree: a politician is never more qualified to make medical decisions than you, your family, and your doctor,” it continues.

“This November, it’ll be up to us, not extreme politicians in Richmond.”

Early in-person voting began Sept. 18 and continues through Oct. 31. Election Day is Nov. 3.