Local News
“We’re going to make sure that women, in particular, are able to make their own health care decisions — not the government.”
Gov. Maura Healey signed legislation Monday that will make it easier for patients to receive an abortion later in their pregnancies, becoming one of few states with no gestational limits on abortion.
“We’ve heard so many stories, stories that are filled with a lot of pain and anguish and heartache … We’re signing this law so that new patients, people we won’t know or won’t meet, will be able to get the care that they need in Massachusetts,” Healey said at a Monday news conference.
The new law, H.5595, removes the state’s previous four-part framework for abortions at or after 24 weeks of pregnancy. Under the former law, an abortion at that stage was permitted only under specific circumstances, including when necessary to preserve a patient’s life or in certain cases involving severe fetal conditions.
Now, per the legislation, “an abortion may be performed by a physician based upon the professional judgment of the physician.”
The law also changes the state’s medical-review requirements, prohibiting a review process from overriding the professional judgment of the treating physician and the patient or the patient’s health care proxy.
The change makes Massachusetts one of 10 states without a statutory gestational limit on abortion, according to data from KFF, a nonprofit that does research around healthcare policy. Massachusetts recorded 99 abortions at 24 weeks or later in 2024, compared to 84 in 2023, data from the Department of Public Health shows.
Healey said she was signing the legislation as abortion access and reproductive health care “has been under fire,” pointing to the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning Roe v. Wade that ended the constitutional framework that had protected abortion rights nationwide for nearly five decades.
Healey also noted abortion-related policies pursued by the Trump administration and congressional Republicans, as well as recent comments from Attorney General Todd Blanche indicating he could use the Justice Department to further restrict abortion access.
“That’s what we’re up against in this moment. It is up to the states to lead,” Healey said. “And as governor, I promise that no matter what Donald Trump or Republicans in Congress or the Supreme Court does … we’re going to make sure that women in particular are able to make their own health care decisions — not the government.”
Supporters of the law say the previous restrictions could prevent physicians from providing care in complicated pregnancies when a patient’s circumstance did not fit within one of the statutory exceptions. They also say the law will reduce the dozens of Massachusetts patients who must travel out of state each year to obtain abortion care past 24 weeks.
“Abortion care is health care, and thanks to this new law, pregnant patients in Massachusetts will no longer have to travel far from their home state to access the care they need,” Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, said in a press release.
“At a time when reproductive freedom is under relentless attack across the nation, this new law ensures that our commonwealth remains at the forefront of the movement to protect and expand civil liberties in the United States,” Rose continued.
At Monday’s news conference, Kate Dineen and her husband, Alex Lawton, described one experience they say illustrates the limitations of the previous law.
In 2021, when Dineen was 33 weeks pregnant, she learned that her baby had suffered a stroke in utero. The couple traveled to Washington, D.C., after they were told the circumstances did not qualify for an exception under Massachusetts law.
“Our son’s diagnosis was devastating, but it did not qualify for an exception,” Dineen said. “Our doctor’s highly capable hands were tied by Massachusetts state law.”
“I felt completely helpless in my inability to protect [Dineen] and genuinely feared for her life,” Lawton said. “We felt like fugitives, fleeing our home state with the best-in-class hospital right down the road … wanting to but unable to help us given the technicalities of the law at the time.”
Opponents of the legislation argue that removing the previous restrictions weakens protections for unborn children and reduces oversight of later-pregnancy abortion procedures.
The Massachusetts Family Institute urged Healey to veto the bill in an Aug. 3 statement.
MFI, a conservative nonprofit policy organization, argued the law removes Department of Public Health oversight of policies and protocols used by medical facilities to handle later abortions, calling the change a loss of accountability.
“This is not healthcare – this is a direct attack on the dignity of life,” the organization said.
The legislation was originally filed at the beginning of the two-year legislative session by Rep. Christine Barber. The House Ways and Means Committee released a substitute version of the bill on July 22.
The House passed the legislation 119-33 on July 22. All Republicans who voted opposed the bill. The Senate moved the bill forward and laid it before the governor July 31.
Healey signed the legislation Monday as she campaigns for reelection in the Nov. 3 gubernatorial election.
Brian Shortsleeve, one of the Republican candidates for governor, identifies as “pro-choice.” Following Healey’s signing, Shortsleeve’s campaign spokesperson Pat Nestor said Shortsleeve would sign the legislation if elected governor.
“Brian Shortsleeve has been clear throughout this campaign that he is pro-choice and believes these deeply personal decisions should be made between a woman and her doctor,” Nestor said in a press release. “This legislation is largely consistent with protections already established under current Massachusetts law, and as governor, Brian would sign it.”
Michael Minogue, a former executive of a medical device company who won the Mass. GOP’s endorsement and is running against Shortsleeve in the Republican primary, has described himself as a “pro-life” Catholic.
“I’m disappointed the governor is playing extreme politics with women’s health,” Minogue said in a press release Monday. “I would much rather see the people of Massachusetts voice their opinion and decide this – not the politicians.”
H.5595 An Act prioritizing patient access to care by samantha.genzer
Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.