HB1402 would create a new Hawaii “Abortion Survivors Protection Act” requiring that any infant born alive, including after an attempted abortion, be treated as a legal person entitled to medically appropriate and reasonable life-saving and life-sustaining care. The bill defines key terms such as “born alive,” “infant,” “abortion,” and “healthcare provider,” and directs physicians or other providers present at a live birth to take immediate steps to preserve the infant’s life and health. It also bars denying nourishment or medical care to a born-alive infant, prohibits using such an infant for research or experimentation except to protect the infant’s life and health, and requires reporting of noncompliance to law enforcement.
The measure adds criminal, civil, and professional consequences for violations. Intentional killing of a born-alive infant would be treated as second-degree murder, reckless failure to provide appropriate care resulting in death would be manslaughter, and concealing the corpse of an infant in these circumstances would be a misdemeanor offense under existing law as amended. The bill also authorizes civil suits by the woman upon whom the abortion was performed or attempted, including damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees, while barring damages against the mother herself. In addition, it amends physician and nursing licensing statutes to make noncompliance grounds for discipline, including suspension or revocation of licenses.
The bill’s stated legal effect is narrow in one sense and broad in another: it says it does not change existing abortion law, does not restrict a woman’s right to obtain a lawful abortion, and does not alter generally accepted medical standards, but it does impose new duties and penalties once a live birth occurs. It would therefore affect abortion providers, hospitals, nurses, physicians, and the Department of Human Services, while also creating a new statutory framework for born-alive infants and related enforcement. The bill would take effect July 1, 2025.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided material, there is no documented legislative debate or vote history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears strongly protective of infants born alive and framed as a child-protection and medical-care requirement. The main likely point of contention is abortion policy: supporters would view it as a born-alive infant safeguard, while opponents may see it as an abortion-related enforcement measure that could chill medical practice, expand criminal liability, and invite disputes over medical judgment and the circumstances of live birth after an abortion attempt.
HB1402 would add a new chapter to the Hawaii Revised Statutes establishing duties for healthcare providers when an infant is born alive after an attempted abortion, and it would amend physician and nursing licensing laws and the infant corpse-concealment statute to align with that new chapter. It would create new criminal offenses and penalties, authorize civil remedies, and make violations grounds for professional discipline, thereby expanding state regulation of post-abortion care, provider conduct, and reporting obligations.
No committee discussion or voting record was provided, so there is no observable legislative sentiment from hearings or floor action. The bill itself is written in strongly protective terms, emphasizing preservation of life, medical care for born-alive infants, and penalties for noncompliance, which suggests a pro-enforcement and pro-child-protection posture. At the same time, its abortion-related subject matter indicates it would likely draw polarized reactions along abortion-rights and abortion-restriction lines.
The central contention is whether the bill is a necessary born-alive infant protection measure or an abortion-related restriction that could affect lawful medical care. Supporters are likely to focus on the duty to provide life-saving treatment, mandatory reporting, and penalties for intentional or reckless noncare. Opponents are likely to object to the criminal penalties, civil liability, mandatory reporting to law enforcement, and the potential for professional discipline, especially where medical judgment is involved in determining viability, appropriate treatment, and whether an infant was truly born alive after an abortion attempt.