No official summary available for this bill.
[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 611 Introduced in House (IH)]
<DOC>
119th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 611
Expressing the importance of accurate information for medical
professionals treating pregnant women and their unborn children in the
emergency department, and for informing the general public, and for
other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 25, 2025
Mrs. Cammack (for herself, Mr. Onder, Mr. Harris of Maryland, Mrs.
Biggs of South Carolina, Mrs. Fischbach, and Mr. Smith of New Jersey)
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce
_______________________________________________________________________
RESOLUTION
Expressing the importance of accurate information for medical
professionals treating pregnant women and their unborn children in the
emergency department, and for informing the general public, and for
other purposes.
Whereas, in June 2022, the United States Supreme Court returned authority to
regulate, and even limit, elective-induced abortion to the people,
through their elected representatives, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's
Health Organization;
Whereas 22 States now protect unborn children from elective-induced abortion at
or before 12 weeks gestation, and most States limit abortion at some
point in pregnancy;
Whereas, under Federal guidance and Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) policy, ``abortion'' is defined as the intentional termination of
a pregnancy with an outcome other than live birth or the removal of a
dead fetus, and this definition excludes medical treatment for
miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy;
Whereas every State's law permits abortion in the rare and heartbreaking
circumstances where it is required to save the life of the mother, and
every State's law permits medical professionals to intervene in a life-
threatening situation, even if such intervention may end the life of the
unborn child;
Whereas an ectopic pregnancy occurs when the embryo implants somewhere other
than the uterine lining and therefore cannot mature and will eventually
rupture, and the Mayo Clinic describes the seriousness of an ectopic
pregnancy diagnosis thusly: ``ectopic pregnancy can't proceed normally.
The fertilized egg can't survive, and the growing tissue may cause life-
threatening bleeding, if left untreated'';
Whereas the vast majority of obstetricians and gynecologists do not perform
elective-induced abortions, and there is no such disagreement within the
profession regarding treatment of life-threatening conditions such as
ectopic pregnancy;
Whereas the indicated treatments for ectopic pregnancy and the types of abortion
both fall into 2 categories (drug-induced and surgical), and the
medications used and types of surgery used for abortion are different
than those used to treat ectopic pregnancy;
Whereas the clinical treatment of an ectopic pregnancy pharmaceutically uses the
medication methotrexate, and induced abortion as approved by the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) uses 2 different drugs, mifepristone and
misoprostol;
Whereas the mifepristone and misoprostol abortion drug regimen is
contraindicated for ectopic pregnancy because they will not remove an
ectopic embryo or resolve the life-threatening risk of ectopic rupture;
Whereas, similarly, the surgical procedures performed to treat an ectopic
pregnancy (salpingectomy or salpingostomy) differ clinically from any of
the methods of surgical abortion which include aspiration, dilation and
curettage, dilation and evacuation, and partial-birth abortion;
Whereas, despite longstanding recognition that treating a medical emergency and
performing an elective-induced abortion are different, medically,
ethically, and legally, some medical groups have blurred the lines post-
Dobbs for political reasons, leading to confusion on the part of well-
meaning medical professionals who were not performing abortions prior to
the abortion laws changing;
Whereas, for example, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
(ACOG) describes an ectopic pregnancy on its FAQ page as ``a life-
threatening emergency that needs immediate surgery'';
Whereas medical professionals affiliated with the American Association of Pro-
Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) affirm that ``treatment of
an ectopic pregnancy is not the same thing as performing an abortion'',
that ectopic pregnancy is a life-threatening condition requiring prompt
medical intervention, and that failure to treat it would constitute
malpractice;
Whereas States apply the same standards to abortion law exceptions, reasonable
medical judgment or, less commonly, good faith judgment, that are used
in many other areas of law governing medical professionals, including
mental competence, end-of-life decisions, medical malpractice, informed
consent, and Federal laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act and
the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), and in most
States, the evaluating standard of whether the exception applies did not
change from the pre-Dobbs laws;
Whereas, due to consensus on the ethical difference between abortion and
treatment for ectopic pregnancy, some States have explicitly excluded
this condition from the State's definition of ``abortion'', including
Alabama (``does not include a procedure or act to treat an ectopic
pregnancy''), Georgia (``shall not be considered an abortion if the act
is performed with the purpose of removing an ectopic pregnancy''),
Nebraska (``shall under no circumstances be interpreted to include
removal of an ectopic pregnancy''), Wyoming (``shall not include any
use, prescription or means done with the intent to treat a woman for an
ectopic pregnancy''), and Florida, which defines ``abortion'' as ``the
termination of human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a
live birth or to remove a dead fetus'' (Fla. Stat. Sec. 390.011(1)),
thereby excluding treatment for ectopic pregnancies; and
Whereas the laws governing abortion do not affect treatment for ectopic
pregnancy, and conflating emergency medical treatment with elective-
induced abortion causes delays in care, confusion among medical
professionals and their patients, and even inappropriate treatment that
is not clinically indicated: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) recognizes the need to help guide future policy so
medical professionals know that they can act to treat an
ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage;
(2) calls for medical providers to ensure that the public
knows that treatment for ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage is
legal in every State;
(3) calls for medical organizations to accurately advise
their members on the differences between elective-induced
abortion and medical intervention for ectopic pregnancy or
miscarriage; and
(4) calls for institutions of higher education training
doctors, nurses, and other emergency department personnel to
accurately instruct their students about the differences
between elective-induced abortion and treatment for ectopic
pregnancy or miscarriage, and the critical-thinking processes
they need to make these decisions with their future patients.
<all>
Submitted in House
Submitted in House
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Llama 3.2 · runs locally in your browser
Ask anything about this bill. The AI reads the full text to answer.
Enter to send · Shift+Enter for new line