It is rare for me to disagree with a Democrat on the hill, especially one so liberal as Representative Jackie Biskupski (D – Salt Lake, District 30). But, frankly, I find the language in HB 340 – Sexual Assault Victim Protocols, a little concerning.
Currently, if a victim of sexual assault walks into an Instacare center, they can immediately receive emergency contraception. This bill would change the code and allow Instacares the right to deny EC so long as a hospital is less than 30 miles away from the center.
Now, I do not honestly think that any health center would actually deny care to a victim of such a horrendous crime, but I have to wonder why Biskupski (of all people) would propose this – after all, this is the kind of bill I would expect from a Carl Wimmer or a Chris Buttars – not one of the most liberal legislators on the hill.
But, I have to read the bill on its face, and the implications therein. I encourage Representative Biskupski to explain this bill in greater detail, and I am very willing to change my position. As it stands right now, it looks as though the bill would allow the denial of services to victims of crime.
Click here to contact Representative Biskupski.
After an email exchange with Representative Biskupski, I can understand the current amendment. As she writes,
“It is critical to refer these women to a properly trained facility to obtain the critical investigative information in these cases. The current status for women is that they are already going to and being referred to the medical facilities that can handle these. The reason for the bill was to not require instacares on the wasatch front to handle them. They are not equipped or trained to handle these cases. Also, the 30 mile range was for rural utah. A standard for critical that is the Rural Healthcare Act.”
I still have concerns that a poor victim from rural Utah is forced to travel up to 30 miles to get care.