An Indiana doctor who performed an abortion on a 10-year-old rape victim last year violated his young patient’s privacy by discussing the case with a reporter, the state’s medical board ruled Thursday. night
Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indianapolis, became nationally popular last year after she provided an abortion to a girl in Ohio shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which leaves states free to severely restrict or ban abortion. .
The state medical board voted to issue Dr. Bernard a letter of reprimand and a fine of $3,000. But it decided against heavier penalties, which could include suspension or probation, instead deciding that Dr. Bernard deserves to return to his practice.
The board also cleared him of other allegations that he failed to properly report the rape of the woman to the authorities.
The decision is the culmination of a year-long legal pursuit by Dr. Bernard of the state’s attorney general, Todd Rokita, is a Republican who opposes abortion.
The Ohio girl traveled to Indiana for the procedure after her home state enacted a ban on most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Dr. told Bernard a reporter for The Indianapolis Star about the case during an abortion rights rally. He did not name the patient, but the case quickly became a flash point in the early, heated days of debate after the Supreme Court’s decision, caught the attention of President Biden and focused conservative attention and anger on Dr. Bernard.
“I don’t think he intended for it to go viral,” said Dr. John Strobel, the president of the board, who called Dr. Bernard who is a “good doctor.”
“But I think we doctors have to be careful in this situation,” he said.
Mr. Rokita, who filed the complaints against Dr. Bernard of the medical board, praised the result.
“This case is about patient privacy and the trust between doctor and patient being broken,” Mr. Rokita said in a statement Thursday. “What if your child or your patient or your brother is suffering from a sensitive medical crisis, and the doctor, who you think is on your side, runs to the press for political reasons?”
Criticized by Dr. Mr. Bernard Rokita to make the case a “political stunt.”
During the hearing, which lasted more than 15 hours, which ended before midnight, Dr. Bernard said his own comments did not reveal protected patient health information. Rather, Dr. Bernard said, it was a fierce political battle that ensued. Some conservatives doubted his story and pushed for a request to confirm it. After a while, the man accused of raping the woman appeared in court and was involved in her case.
Dr. Bernard, who advocates publicly for abortion rights, said he has an ethical obligation to educate the public about pressing public health matters, especially questions about reproductive health – the his area of expertise.
Last July, after Indiana scheduled a special legislative session on abortion, Dr. Bernard said lawmakers in his home state would pass strict restrictions on abortion access similar to the Ohio law that forced his 10-year-old patient to cross state lines.
Indiana has passed legislation banning most abortions, with narrow exceptions for rape and incest. That law is on hold pending a legal challenge. Abortion is currently legal in Indiana up to 22 weeks.
Dr. Bernard said he wanted to highlight the potential consequences of laws restricting access to abortion, and “didn’t expect” how much public attention the Ohio woman’s case would bring.
“I think it’s very important for people to understand the real word effects of the laws in this country,” he said.
Dr. Peter Schwartz, a Pennsylvania OB-GYN and chair of the American Medical Association’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, supported the decision of Dr. Bernard to talk about the patient in Ohio.
Dr. Schwartz said Dr. Bernard has an “affirmative obligation to speak out” about reproductive health issues, saying he is one of only two doctors in Indiana with expertise in complex obstetric cases such as second-trimester abortions.
Attorneys for both sides of the hearing called on medical confidentiality experts to understand whether Dr. Bernard violated the guidelines of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, known as HIPAA, which governs the protection of patient privacy.
The boss of Dr. Bernard, Indiana University Health, found that he did not violate HIPAA rules because the patient could not be identified based on the information shared by Dr. Bernard in public.
“The cause and effect happening here is not: ‘Dr. Bernard’s story led to the patient sharing his protected information,'” said Alice Morical, the doctor’s attorney.
But the members of the medical board, consisting of six doctors and a lawyer – all appointed by the governor – decided that, together, the details provided by Dr. Bernard about the patient – including his age, his rape, his home state and his condition. abortion — qualifies as identifying information.
“Dr. explained Bernard is a skilled and competent doctor, and I would submit that he is exactly the doctor that people want their children to see under these circumstances,” said Ms. Moral.