Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey issued a statement Wednesday that pharmacies statewide will still be required to stock essential family planning medications, despite national efforts to ban them.
“At a time when states are rushing to ban medication abortion and some pharmacies are irresponsibly restricting access to it, we are reminding Massachusetts pharmacies that they have an obligation to provide critical reproductive health medications,” Healey said in a statement.
The reminder comes just two weeks after Texas District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk heard a lawsuit case that aimed to overturn the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the mifepristone drug, after decades of it being in circulation.
“One thing to really remember about misoprostol is that it is a very routinely used medication for a whole host of reproductive health care, including abortion care,” said Caroline Kimball-Katz, director of communications and marketing at Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts. “It also includes miscarriage management and other pregnancy-related care.”
The lawsuit was represented by Christian legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom on behalf of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a coalition of anti-abortion groups and four anti-abortion doctors.
A 2022 study conducted by Suffolk University and the Boston Globe found that 78% of survey respondents, made up of Massachusetts residents, said abortion should be “legal in all or most cases.”
When it comes to the governor’s statements and state legislation requiring pharmacies to provide abortion medication, Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, said it goes “against the purpose of what a pharmacy is for and that is to sustain and benefit health.”
“Now we’ve got all of our elected officials, including our governor, essentially forcing pharmacies to carry drugs,” Mahoney Flynn said. “These drugs on their own are dangerous … if the judge in Texas rules in our favor, that is if he were to say that the FDA is no longer allowed to approve sale of this drug, then that would be a win.”
Other members of prominent public organizations involved with this issue have reacted differently, expressing their support for the Massachusetts state government and criticizing the situation in Texas.
“It can be hard to hold watching human rights like bodily autonomy be taken away from people across the country while knowing that our state is actually making huge strides towards liberation,” said Kate Glynn, co-chair of the board of directors for the Abortion Rights Fund of Western Massachusetts.
Glynn also gave her thoughts on what the mifepristone case could mean outside of national laws, commenting that they are paying attention to the “chilling effect” that the lawsuit could cause.
“I’ve read so much in the media in the last couple of weeks like ‘medication abortion is going to be outlawed,” she said. “They’re going to make it harder and more painful, but it’s not technically outlawed.”
Carol Rose, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, relayed her fears about bans in more states.
“This lawsuit is baseless, unprecedented and the next step in anti-abortion extremists’ plan to ban abortion in all 50 states. This case could cut off access to a very safe and effective abortion and miscarriage medication — even in states like Massachusetts where abortion is protected. The ACLU won’t let this happen without a fight,” Rose wrote in an email.
Meanwhile, the nation will continue to watch and wait for a decision on the Texas lawsuit case.
As the situation stands now, regularly prescribed and emergency contraceptives, and FDA-approved family planning medication continues to be readily available for all Massachusetts residents.
“I have full confidence that our state is going to continue to do what they can at various levels,” Glynn said. “I know that both in the legislative bodies and in the governor … there are a range of supports.”
