HB2619 creates the Illinois “Ultrasound Opportunity Act,” a new law focused on abortion-related informed consent and ultrasound disclosure. For abortions sought after 8 weeks of gestation, the bill requires the physician performing the abortion, the referring physician, or another qualified person working with them to offer the patient an opportunity to receive and view an active ultrasound of the unborn child before any part of the abortion is performed and before any anesthesia or medication is given in preparation for the procedure.
The bill also requires a 72-hour waiting period after an ultrasound before anesthesia or medication may be administered in preparation for the abortion. The ultrasound must be performed by a qualified person, the image must meet standard medical practice, and the patient’s acceptance or refusal of the offer must be documented. The bill includes an exception for medical emergencies, as determined in the physician’s good-faith clinical judgment, and contains a severability clause.
Impact
HB2619 would add a new standalone statute governing abortion facilities and providers in Illinois. It would impose new pre-procedure counseling and documentation duties, require facilities to offer access to ultrasound services or local ultrasound providers, and create a mandatory delay after an ultrasound for abortions after 8 weeks of gestation. The measure would affect abortion providers, referring physicians, ultrasound technicians or other qualified personnel, and patients seeking abortions, while leaving an emergency exception for urgent medical situations.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or support/opposition in the available record. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a strongly pro-ultrasound, informed-consent approach to abortion regulation, with findings emphasizing fetal development, ectopic pregnancy diagnosis, and the importance of informed decision-making. The bill’s framing suggests support from abortion-restriction advocates and likely opposition from abortion-rights supporters, but that cannot be confirmed from the provided materials.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s effect on abortion access and timing. Supporters would likely argue that the ultrasound offer and waiting period improve informed consent and protect patient health, while opponents would likely view the requirements as an additional barrier to abortion care, especially the 72-hour delay after an ultrasound. Another likely dispute is whether the mandated offer is truly voluntary in practice and whether the law intrudes on medical judgment outside the emergency exception. No specific stakeholder comments were provided in the record.