Article Summary –
Wisconsin’s upcoming Supreme Court election on April 1st will determine whether conservative candidate Brad Schimel or liberal candidate Susan Crawford fills the seat left by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, which could shift the court’s majority and influence the ruling on Wisconsin’s 1849 abortion law. The law’s vague wording, interpreted differently by courts, has raised concerns among legal experts and physicians about its impact on medical practice, patient safety, and potential maternal deaths, emphasizing the need for clear medical documentation when abortions are necessary to save a mother’s life. Dr. Shefaali Sharma highlights the potential negative consequences of the law on Wisconsin’s healthcare system, predicting increased maternal risks, a decline in medical training quality, and an exodus of physicians from the state.
On April 1, Wisconsin voters choose their next Supreme Court justice, filling a seat left by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, who announced her decision not to run for reelection. The contenders are conservative Waukesha County Circuit Court Judge Brad Schimel and liberal Dane County Circuit Court Judge Susan Crawford. The new justice begins in August.
Electing Schimel could shift the Supreme Court’s 4-3 liberal majority and influence the fate of an 1849 statute potentially banning abortion.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2022, Wisconsin’s 1849 law took effect, banning abortion.
In December 2023, Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled the law concerned infanticide, not abortion. Challenges persist, with the state Supreme Court hearing arguments in November 2024 and a decision expected soon.
The 174-year-old statute mentions exceptions for “therapeutic abortion” to save a mother’s life.
Schimel stated in debates that “life begins at conception” and defended the 1849 statute as a “valid law” passed through legislative processes.
A health care law expert expressed concerns that the law’s vague wording could endanger patients’ lives.
Richard Davis, a Milwaukee attorney, advised thorough documentation of any abortion required to save a patient’s life while the law was enforced as a ban.
“The key is meticulous medical documentation, justifying why the procedure is essential to save the mother’s life,” Davis explained.
Davis warned that if the 1849 law is enforced as an abortion statute again, it could leave physicians without clear guidance.
“Ultimately, it depends on the physician’s medical judgment,” Davis remarked.
Dr. Shefaali Sharma, an OB-GYN in Madison, worries that the statute’s ambiguity could increase maternal deaths.
“Vague wording creates fear, moving away from evidence-based practices and shared decision-making,” Sharma explained. “This could lead to more maternal deaths.”
Sharma warned the law could devastate Wisconsin’s medical system, prompting patients to seek care elsewhere and potentially causing physicians to leave the state.
“More women will face complications,” Sharma said. “The state’s health care quality will decline, losing skilled physicians and affecting women’s health in Wisconsin.”
—
Read More Wisconsin News
