A controversial birth control bill that some medical professionals and Democrats fear could be Indiana’s first step toward limiting access to certain types of contraception is heading to the governor’s desk.

On Tuesday, March 5, the Indiana Senate passed House Bill 1426, which would require hospitals to offer Medicaid-covered women a long-acting reversible contraceptive — specifically a subdermal implant in the arm — after they give birth.

Proponents of the bill, including author Rep. Rita Fleming, D-Jeffersonville, said it will reduce unintended pregnancies and protect women from the risks of multiple pregnancies in a short time period. But opposition grew after legislators stripped language from the bill that also would have required hospitals to offer IUDs.

Mirror Indy first reported that IUDs were excluded from the bill after an anti-abortion group falsely claimed the devices are a form of abortion.

[Learn the details and understand what to expect in the future]

Indiana Right to Life, a group behind the state’s near-total abortion ban, met with lawmakers last year about an identical birth control bill, lobbyist Jodi Smith said. Fleming has denied meeting with the group.

“The fact that this legislature has once again chosen an extremist organization’s suggestion over medical expertise is a warning of what’s to come,” Haley Bougher, Indiana’s director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, said in a statement. “Birth control is under attack.” 

Medical groups withdrew their support from the bill after the IUD language was removed. Elizabeth Ferries-Rowe, an Indianapolis OB-GYN and member of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, testified that exclusion of IUDs was “medically unsound.” 

The bill’s author, a retired OB-GYN, chastised the group in an op-ed sent to news organizations Tuesday.

“The opposition from representatives from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the ‘neutral’ stance from the Indiana State Medical Association baffles me,” Fleming wrote. “It’s on your watch, for the past decades, that maternal and infant mortality has climbed, that more children are born addicted, that sexually transmitted diseases are affecting newborns in record numbers. Whatever you might be doing about those, it’s obviously not working.”

The bill sailed through the House and passed the Senate on Tuesday in a 30-18 vote, with some Republicans and Democrats opposing it — but for different reasons.

Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, raised concerns about the cost of the legislation.

“I am only voting no because of the Medicaid budget issue,” she said. “To be clear, women in Indiana already have the options.”

Sen. Shelli Yoder, D-Bloomington, called the bill a “pawn” for an anti-abortion group pushing false claims about IUDs. She tried unsuccessfully to add IUDs back into the bill. After her amendments failed, Yoder joined all but one Senate Democrat in voting against the bill — a rare moment of dissonance with their House counterparts.

“It is legislators saying one form of birth control will be preferred by the state based on ideology and not medical science,” Yoder said Tuesday.

Earlier, Fleming said that arm implants are the best option for Medicaid patients who may not be able to get IUDs because of sexually transmitted diseases and other infections. She also cited a higher risk of IUDs falling out postpartum.

“Those patients are not good candidates for IUDs,” Fleming said Jan. 30 during a House Committee on Public Health meeting. “I’m not trying to weigh the benefits of one or the other, but I guess if we can’t have the ideal situation, let’s have something that is suitable for pretty much all women without contraindications.”

Fleming has since clarified her stance on IUDs. She said conversations about long-acting reversible contraceptives don’t happen enough at hospitals, and her bill could be the catalyst for change.

[Read Fleming’s response after receiving criticism from fellow Democrats]

“I am supportive of IUDs and want women to use the birth control that is right for them,” Fleming said in an email to Mirror Indy on Tuesday. “House Bill 1426 is about starting a conversation with a postpartum patient and stipulating that the subdermal implant is the jumping-off point for that conversation, but it doesn’t restrict providers from discussing other forms of birth control.”

IU Health, Community Health Network and Eskenazi Health, told Mirror Indy they will continue to offer both IUDs and subdermal implants to their postpartum patients even if the bill is signed into law. The state’s Catholic hospital systems, including Franciscan Health and Ascension St. Vincent, do not provide birth control and would have a religious exemption from the bill’s mandate.

“The most fundamental thing is (legislators) are going to encourage restricting your choice about when or how often to have a baby if you are poor, and … force everybody else to give birth,” said Jacque Lyons, 72, an Indianapolis resident who attended a hearing on the bill in February. “That, to me, is the epitome of discrimination.” 

The bill sunsets in June 2025, giving legislators the option to reintroduce it in a later session.

Mirror Indy reporter Mary Claire Molloy covers health. Reach her at maryclaire.molloy@mirrorindy.org.  Follow her on X @mcmolloy7