Sen. Joey Garcia Story Archives - West Virginia Public Broadcasting

Bill That Creates Criminal And Civil Penalties For Medical Abortions Clears Senate

A bill that imposes both a possible civil and criminal penalty for prescribing or providing abortion medications to unlawfully terminate a pregnancy has now cleared the West Virginia Senate.

Abortifacients are medications used to induce an abortion. They can be used to treat a miscarriage or end an unwanted pregnancy.

Senate Bill 85 imposes both a possible civil and criminal penalty for violating the state’s abortion ban by prescribing or providing these medications to unlawfully terminate a pregnancy.

Patricia Rucker, R-Jefferson, is the lead sponsor of the bill.

“This important legislation is designed to protect life in West Virginia and stop the practice of abortions being sent and delivered to West Virginia residents without a lawful prescription,” Rucker said.

Abortion is already illegal in the state, with just a few exemptions for medical emergencies and rape and incest. The ban also applies to abortions performed with abortifacients.

Mifepristone is a widely used abortifacient that can be used to terminate a pregnancy from home. The drug is also used to manage miscarriages and treat illnesses like endometriosis or Cushing’s syndrome. The US Supreme Court held up access to these drugs over the summer, even in states where abortion is prohibited.

Opponents of the bill worry it could make it harder for physicians to get life-saving medications to patients.

Kelly Lemons is a certified nurse midwife. She spoke against the bill at the Senate Judiciary Committee last Thursday.

“Something that a lot of people may not be aware of is when we think about using misoprostol for hemorrhage management that is a safe, low-cost, very effective method, and is probably your most-used method in your lower-acuity hospital settings,” Lemons said.

She said the bill could have a cooling effect on the administering of medications that she says are already facing barriers.

“The lack of clarity in this bill with couriers and distribution is going to put a barrier in getting those medications to those lower acuity hospitals.

The bill was amended by Sen. Ryan Weld, R-Brooke, to include a provision that would allow for the distribution of the medication for prescriptions permitted under the current law.

Rucker said the bill would enforce the state’s abortion ban as written.

“So just like we have lots and lots of laws in the books, we expect those laws to be followed,” Rucker said. “What this legislation does is give a pathway for enforcement.”

The bill would fine individuals within and outside the state who prescribe and provide abortifacients to people in West Virginia.

The bill was amended yesterday to also allow for civil suits against offenders. Anyone who has been illegally prescribed or given the drugs in the state could sue their provider under the amended bill.

Rucker, who was responsible for one of those amendments, said that that gives the bill more bite. She called it necessary because some states, like New York, have shield laws protecting state residents from out-of-state charges for prescribing and distributing abortifacients.

“Civilly, the need for evidence of the bad actor’s intent is a little less than a criminal and, so, slightly easier to prove,” Rucker said. “This allows just the ordinary victim to be able to pursue it in court.”

Sen. Eric Tarr, R-Putnam, said he was in favor of the bill that came out of the Judiciary committee. He spoke against the provision added by Rucker’s amendment that allows for civil suits. He said he is concerned about expanding the possibilities for lawsuits, saying it’s bad for business.

“I’ve been the biggest champion for this bill. I’ve been all over it, because we can still come back and do this without making this mistake,” Tarr said. “Because if you want young families having babies over here in West Virginia, we need jobs.”

Sen. Joey Garcia, D-Marion, stood up to speak against the bill from an economic stance as well.

“When I hear about job losses, well, I could see that, because people want to move out of the state when you have a state that doesn’t appreciate health care that women should be able to get, and that they do get in other states,” Garcia said.

Ultimately, the bill had five no votes, with one Democrat and four Republicans voting against the bill.

It now heads to the House for further review.

Bill Removing Autonomy For Teens To Make Own Health Care Decisions Clears Senate

Senate Bill 719 would change the ability of West Virginia teens to access things like birth control or STD testing without their parents consent or knowledge.

Currently, West Virginia teens can get things like birth control or STD testing without their parents consent or knowledge. Senate Bill 719 would change that.

Sen. Laura Chapman is the lead sponsor on the bill.

“The bill allows a 16-year-old to consent to general medical services for himself or herself, as long as the health care provider provides actual notice of the minor parent, except in certain circumstances,” Chapman said.

Those certain circumstances are instances of abuse or neglect, or if the minor is married or emancipated from parents.

The bill does away with the term “mature minor,” which is currently used in code. The term essentially refers to a teen who a doctor or nurse practitioner has deemed to be mature enough to make certain medical decisions on their own.

Senator Joey Garcia, D-Marion, said the bill could have a cooling effect on teens who are seeking health care for things like sexually transmitted diseases or substance abuse.

“There are situations in which a minor may not feel comfortable telling their parents about certain things that are very difficult, difficult conversations to have,” Garcia said.

He said those may be conversations about birth control, STD testing, or substance abuse treatment.

“You’re going to have a situation where an adolescent is not going to get that treatment because they understand their parents are gonna be notified about that, and they don’t want to have that conversation,” Garcia said.

He said that the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists all oppose this law.

Sen. Tom Takubo, a Republican from Kanawha County, worries about a provision in the bill that would take away some teens’ current right to have a do-not-resuscitate order without parental consent.

He said in cases where a minor is terminally ill, or otherwise has a condition that greatly reduces their quality of life, they should be able to choose.

“They say, ‘Hey, listen, if something ever catastrophically happens to me naturally, that my body fails and my heart stops and God takes me, I don’t want CPR done on me.’ We just took that ability away,” Takubo said.

The bill passed 27-6. Both Democrats, and five republicans voted no. The bill now heads to the House of Delegates for consideration.

Bill Targeting Trans People Clears Senate

The first of a flurry of bills addressing gender and biological sex has passed the upper chamber. Senate Bill 456 defines sex and prohibits transgender people from using certain facilities that align with their gender.

The bill defines the term “sex” by the reproductive tissues a person has at birth. However in this story we will also be using the term gender, which the Associated Press defines as the internal and social identity someone has. It often – but not always – corresponds with a person’s sex, but the two terms are not synonymous.

A transgender person is a person whose gender does not align with the one usually associated with the sex they were assigned at birth, as defined by AP.

The bill has a number of possible impacts on trans people in the state. For example, a trans woman – who was born male but identifies as female and may or may not have had surgery to alter their reproductive tissues – would not be able to go to a women’s domestic violence shelter if a separate space for transwomen was not available.

The language currently in the bill prohibits transgender inmates from being incarcerated in facilities that align with their gender, even if they have undergone gender confirmation surgeries.

Patricia Rucker, R-Jefferson, voted in favor of the bill.

“I very strongly believe that there are just two sexes, and I also believe that we women especially need to know that we are safe when we are entering an environment like a restroom or a locker room that we expect to be is a safe space for us,” Rucker said.

In both the house and senate committees, Julie Britton, the executive director of YWCA, which operates a domestic violence shelter in Charleston, testified against the bill.

“There are no alternative facilities, and if we are not available, the only other option would be a homeless shelter or the streets,” Britton said. “I don’t know if we’re worried about trans women’s safety, but putting trans women out on the street and not serving them would be a death sentence.”

Rucker said the facilities can still do their best to accommodate trans people in the state.

“I think it was very clear these women’s shelters and correctional facilities, any of these types of areas, do their very best to try to accommodate what is safe for the individual that they’re trying to help, and they will help any individual who needs safe spaces,” Rucker said. “It may cost them more because they may have to go to a hotel instead of staying in their shelter, but they still will accommodate the needs of the people who are needing a safe space.”

However without a fiscal note, it’s not clear where the extra money for hotel rooms and separate spaces would come from.

Sen. Joey Garcia, D-Marion, was the single no vote on this bill. He said restricting women’s access to shelters is one of the problems with this bill.

“This is going to create a problem and potentially an interruption of services,” Garcia said. “One of the things we heard from the domestic violence shelter executive director was that you may have people that they can’t serve because of the restrictions this puts on them, and therefore they’re gonna be on the street”

Despite the bill’s stated purpose, it cannot be applied to public bathrooms. That’s because of the U.S. fourth circuit court decision, Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board. That court decision upholds that the state cannot prohibit transgender individuals from using restrooms that align with their gender.

Senate Health Committee Advances Bill To Ban Gender Affirming Care

Gender dysphoria is a feeling of distress that can happen when a person’s gender identity differs from the sex assigned at birth. Some, but not all, transgender people have gender dysphoria at some point in their lives.

In 2023 the Legislature banned gender-affirming care for minors with narrow exceptions for specific hormone therapies.

Under that law, minors who are experiencing suicidal ideations in relation to gender dysphoria can go through multiple hoops to get hormone therapies as treatment.

Now, a more conservative Senate is moving to do away with those exemptions. A bill sponsored by Sen. Chris Rose, R-Monongalia, would ban hormone therapy for new and existing patients under the age of 18.

The Senate Health Committee heard testimony from medical professionals, and from advocates of the bill who video-called in from out of state.

Chantel Weisenmuller warned legislators that Senate Bill 299 could be dangerous for trans minors in the state.

*Photo by Will Price/WV Legislative Photography*

Chantel Weisenmuller, president of the West Virginia Psychological Association, told lawmakers that stopping gender affirming care for teenagers is risky and detrimental to their health.

“As a psychologist, that is a very frightening prospect for me,” Weisenmuller said. “Because from clinical lived experience, whenever folks suddenly lose access to this necessary, evidence-based, best practice medical treatment, we see a marked, significant, intense escalation in depression, anxiety and suicide, suicidality.”

An amendment was offered by Sen. Joey Garcia, D-Marion, that would allow existing patients to continue receiving hormone therapy.

“We’ve heard from West Virginia Practitioners and the West Virginia Association For Psychology representative about the potential harms, including increased harms for someone that’s currently undergoing medical treatment under the exception, that’s in law, especially if it’s done immediately,” Garcia said.

The amendment was rejected. Rose, the lead sponsor of the bill, said no minors in the state should be receiving hormone therapy.

“The reason this bill is necessary in the first place is there’s never a medically necessary reason to transition a child,” Rose said. “There’s never a medically necessary reason to chemically castrate or sterilize a child. For a mental illness, you get mental health. There is therapy for that, but never is it justifiable to permanently alter their body with something that’s irreversible.”

Rose asked Weisenmuller if conversion therapy could be used to treat gender dysphoria instead.

Conversion therapy is a widely discredited practice of attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. A number of states and municipalities have banned it.

Weisenmuller said conversion therapy is not recommended by the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association.

“We have over 100 years worth of data showing that suicide rates actually increase precipitously after exposure to what folks may think about as conversion therapy,” Weisenmuller said. “Conversion therapy kills people. So no, that is not something that any licensed provider in the state would offer to a child or to their family.”

Simon Maya Price from Boston Massachusetts appeared before the committee virtually. He says for a brief time during his adolescence, he believed he was female. Now, a freelance speaker he advocates for bills like West Virginia Senate Bill 299.

“The more desisters and de-transitioners I talk to, the more I realize just how close I was to being permanently disfigured, disabled and becoming a lifelong medical patient,” Price said.

Price said his doctors recommended he undergo gender affirming medical treatments. However, he said his father refused the treatment, something for which he said he is now grateful.

“The law in West Virginia says that if you get the sign-off from two doctors, you can receive puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones,” Price said. “In my case, I had four who would have done that.”

The bill passed the Senate Health Committee, without any amendments. The bill now heads to the Judiciary Committee.