HB1085 would require a pregnant person’s health-care provider to offer the person the option to complete a “Do Not Abort” form. The form is intended to document the person’s wish not to receive an abortion if they later become incapacitated or otherwise unable to communicate. If completed, the provider must place the form in the patient’s medical record.
As introduced, the bill creates a new statutory section in Colorado law governing this disclosure and recordkeeping requirement. It does not itself mandate that any abortion be performed or withheld in a specific case; rather, it requires providers to offer the form and preserve it in the medical chart if the patient chooses to sign it. The bill would take effect after the standard referendum period unless referred to voters.
Impact
The bill would add section 25-3-135 to the Colorado Revised Statutes, creating a new provider obligation in the health-care setting. It would affect pregnant patients, obstetric and prenatal care providers, and medical record systems by requiring an offer of the form and documentation in the patient’s record when completed. The measure could also intersect with existing informed-consent, advance directive, and reproductive-health practices, although the bill text does not amend those laws directly.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests the bill was controversial and did not advance smoothly. In House Health & Human Services, an amendment was adopted unanimously, but the subsequent motion to refer the bill to the Committee of the Whole failed by a narrow margin, and a later motion to postpone the bill indefinitely passed 7-6. That pattern indicates divided views, with some members willing to modify the bill but a majority ultimately opposing further progress.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s subject matter: whether health-care providers should be required to offer a form specifically designed to document a preference against abortion in the event of incapacity. Supporters likely view it as a way to preserve patient autonomy and advance planning, while opponents may see it as unnecessary, ideologically driven, or potentially intrusive in reproductive-health care. The close committee votes show disagreement both over the policy itself and over whether it should move forward at all.