WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 1563

Requires each violator of "Buster's Law" to register with the division of criminal justice services

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Joe Addabbo and 5 co-sponsors

The bill allows an abortion based on the physician’s professional judgment, expanding clinician discretion and reducing specific statutory conditions for abortion access.

REFERRED TO AGRICULTURE
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 1563

Summary — S.1563 (Senate No. 1563) — "An Act prioritizing patient access to care"

Purpose / intent

The bill amends portions of Chapter 112 of the Massachusetts General Laws to prioritize patient access to abortion care by shifting decision-making authority toward the treating physician’s professional judgment. It replaces several statutory, descriptive criteria that limited when abortions could be performed with a standard based on a physician’s professional judgment.

Note: The bill text and metadata provided contain inconsistencies (see “Notes” below). This summary is based on the bill text amending Chapter 112 as provided.

Key provisions (by statutory section)

  • Section 1 — Amends G.L. c.112, §12N:
    • Strikes existing language that specified that “no abortion may be performed except by a physician, and only if in the best medical judgment of the physician it is: (i) necessary to preserve the life... (ii) necessary to preserve the patient's physical or mental health; (iii) warranted because of a lethal fetal anomaly...; or (iv) warranted because of a grave fetal diagnosis...”
    • Inserts a simpler standard: “an abortion may be performed when based upon the professional judgment of the physician.”
  • Section 2 — Amends G.L. c.112, §12N½:
    • Removes language that required each circumstance permitting an abortion for a pregnancy of 24 weeks or more to be “considered independently by a treating physician and a patient or the patient’s health care proxy.”
  • Section 3 — Further amends §12N½:
    • Replaces the phrase “a determination by” with “the professional judgment of.”
  • Section 4 — Further amends §12N½:
    • Strikes subsection (b) in its entirety.
  • Section 5 — Amends G.L. c.112, §12P:
    • Strikes the second paragraph of that section (text of the struck paragraph not included in the summary document).

Who would be affected

  • Patients seeking abortion care in Massachusetts, including those with later-stage pregnancies (the bill alters language that previously applied to pregnancies of 24 weeks or more).
  • Physicians and other treating clinicians, whose clinical judgment becomes the statutory standard for permitting abortions.
  • Health care institutions and regulators, which may see changes in procedural or documentation requirements depending on implementing regulations or guidance.

Procedure / timeline / status

  • Bill filed as Senate No. 1563 (dated 1/16/2025 in the docket).
  • Referred to relevant committees (Public Health and Judiciary appear in actions); hearing scheduled for 07/10/2025 (09:00 AM–1:00 PM, room A‑1).
  • Placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 83) on 2025-05-20.
  • Reported by the Committee on the Judiciary with an amendment in the nature of a substitute (dates in May 2025).

Potential impacts and considerations

  • The bill simplifies statutory criteria and expands clinician discretion; this could increase access to abortion services where physicians judge care to be appropriate.
  • By removing statutory specifications (including certain procedural checks for later-stage pregnancies), the bill could reduce mandated procedural steps or separate determinations—affecting oversight, documentation practices, and possible legal standards in contested cases.
  • Implementation effects will depend on how administrative agencies, professional boards, and health systems interpret and operationalize the “professional judgment” standard.

Notes and inconsistencies in the provided materials

  • The document header and text reflect a Massachusetts Senate bill presented by State Senator Robyn K. Kennedy; however, an earlier title and metadata included references to “Buster’s Law” and a registration requirement that do not appear in the bill text.
  • Sponsor lists and some legislative-action entries supplied with the request (e.g., names of U.S. Senators and duplicate “REFERRED TO AGRICULTURE” entries) appear inconsistent with a Massachusetts state bill and were not reflected in the bill text itself.
  • This summary relies on the statutory text excerpts provided; any additional sections or substituted language in committee amendments could change the bill’s effect.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.