Procedures for disposal of fetal remains amended, advanced after cloture vote

Lawmakers gave first-round approval April 15 to a bill that would establish procedures for the disposition of fetal remains following an abortion.

Under current Nebraska law, hospitals must have a policy in place regarding the disposition of fetal remains following a miscarriage or stillbirth.

LB632, sponsored by Blair Sen. Ben Hansen, would require a health care facility that performs an “elective abortion” to dispose of the remains by burial or cremation, or as directed by the state Board of Health if neither option is feasible. The bill does not include penalties for noncompliance.

Hansen said burial or cremation of fetal remains helps protect the public and the environment from potential contamination of the air, soil and water. Fifteen other states, including Minnesota, currently require burial or cremation of fetal remains, he said, which provides for their safe and dignified care.

“These are human bodies and as such, they deserve to be treated with some measure of human respect,” Hansen said.

A Health and Human Services Committee amendment, adopted 46-0, would clarify that the disposal procedures outlined in the bill apply to health care facilities where an elective abortion is “completed.”

Hansen said the amendment was meant to address concerns that the disposition requirements in LB632 would apply to medical abortions, which require one pill to be taken at a health care facility and a second taken 24 to 36 hours later to complete the procedure.

Hastings Sen. Dan Lonowski supported the bill, saying it would help address the “undignified” treatment of aborted fetuses.

“The absence of regulation in many states means aborted babies can be treated as medical waste,” Lonowski said. “Fetal dignity laws have helped shape a culture that honors and respects the unborn by acknowledging their humanity and affirming the dignity of each life lost through abortion.”

Ralston Sen. Merv Riepe supported advancing the proposal to select file, but suggested the need for an amendment to give pregnant individuals the right to decide what to do with fetal remains following an abortion.

Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh of Omaha, speaking in opposition to the bill, said the decision about what to do with the fetal remains should be left to a patient and their family. The government should not tell anyone how to grieve, she said.

Omaha Sen. Ashlei Spivey filed a series of unsuccessful procedural motions to extend debate on the bill, calling the measure a “backdoor” attempt to ban abortion in the state. She said the high cost of cremation services — which range from $800 to $1,300 — could make it impossible for some health care facilities to operate and provide care.

Spivey also emphasized that while current state law requires hospitals to have policies regarding the disposition of fetal remains following a miscarriage or stillbirth, it does not mandate that the policy include burial or cremation.

“LB632 treats providers that offer abortion care differently and subjects them to higher costs, more administrative hurdles and unnecessary restrictions,” she said. “If the true concern behind this bill was human dignity, the burial or cremation requirement would apply to every medical provider who deals with pregnancy tissue, not just abortion providers.”

Also opposing the bill, Omaha Sen. Megan Hunt said the state Department of Environment and Energy already has regulations in place for the disposition of medical waste, which all health care facilities, including abortion care providers, must follow.

“There are rules in place to protect public health, to ensure sanitary conditions [and] ensure that health care providers are maintaining the standard of professional care,” Hunt said. “This bill is creating a new punitive framework on an already regulated process.”

Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln also opposed LB632 and expressed concern that the bill is unconstitutionally vague. The proposal states that it is “unlawful” for a health care facility to violate its provisions, he said, but does not outline what those provisions are or specify what the penalty for violations would be.

After four hours of general file debate over two days, Hansen offered a motion to invoke cloture, which ends debate and forces a vote on the bill. The motion was adopted on a vote of 33-13. Thirty-three votes were needed.

Following the successful cloture motion, lawmakers advanced LB632 to select file on a 34-11 vote.