House Republicans’ proposed 15-week abortion ban includes no exceptions for rape or incest

The State House dome as seen on March 5, 2016. (ELIZABETH FRANTZ / Monitor staff)

The State House dome as seen on March 5, 2016. (ELIZABETH FRANTZ / Monitor staff) ELIZABETH FRANTZ

By CHARLOTTE MATHERLY

Monitor staff

Published: 01-16-2025 1:48 PM

Nine Republican state representatives filed a bill this week that would make abortion illegal after 15 weeks. It includes exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities that are “incompatible with life.”

However, it makes no exception for cases of rape or incest. Cyril Aures, who represents Chichester and Pittsfield and signed on as a cosponsor to the bill, said he’d like to see those exceptions added. However, he’d want to require that the rape be reported within a short period of time so that it’s not used as a “convenient excuse,” he said. Most rapes are not reported to law enforcement, often due to stigma or fear of retaliation, according to national statistics.

Gov. Kelly Ayotte promised repeatedly on the campaign trail – and in her inaugural address – to veto any bill that restricts abortion further than New Hampshire’s current six-month law.

Under House Bill 476, which is led by Katy Peternel of Wolfeboro, any medical provider who performs an abortion, no matter the fetus’s age, would have to report it to their facility, which in turn would have to report it to the state Department of Health and Human Services. A healthcare provider convicted of violating the law would be held guilty of a class B felony and subject to a fine of at least $10,000.

Aures said he doesn’t think about it as making the procedure illegal – he sees it as protecting an unborn child from murder.

“I've learned to respect life, and I don’t like the thought of killing anyone, much less an innocent child in the womb,” Aures said.

He said he believes the majority of his constituents support his view, noting that several people in his community thanked him for voting for a bill in 2023 that would’ve banned abortion on any fetus where a heartbeat could be detected.

Last year, the House voted down bills that would’ve restricted or expanded abortion access in the state.

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

In an ideal world, Aures said, he’d want to prohibit abortions after six to eight weeks but still supports 15 weeks since that was how the bill was written. He believes abortion is killing human life, but he also said he’s known women who’ve experienced drastic physical and emotional consequences after having an abortion.

In his mind, adoption and state support are the answers. He argued that the state should protect both the woman and the child.

Aures said he’d like to see New Hampshire help pregnant women and parents financially if needed, both before and after they give birth, until the child turns 18. He said that’d alleviate financial pressures that can factor into a woman’s decision to have an abortion.

“We send billions to Ukraine,” Aures said. “Why not take care of our own? I don’t get it.”

Democrats haven’t introduced any bills that would protect abortion access in New Hampshire but have proposed a resolution that, if the Legislature approves it, would recognize “abortion as a critical component of comprehensive healthcare.”

“New Hampshire lawmakers should be spending their time working on bills that break down barriers for people to get the health care they need, not by proposing abortion bans,” Kayla Montgomery, the vice president of public affairs for the Planned Parenthood NH Action Fund, said in a statement. “A patient’s health should drive important medical decisions, not a politician’s political belief. An overwhelming majority of Granite Staters support abortion rights, and will not tolerate this abortion ban."

Ayotte has vowed not to sign a more restrictive abortion law, but legislators could have other options. If it were to pass and get vetoed, Republicans hold a veto-proof two-thirds majority in the Senate. The House of Representatives, which has about 40 more Republicans than Democrats, may not be able to meet that threshold. Two-thirds of both chambers would have to vote to override a veto from Ayotte.

Aures said he has no idea how the bill will fare in the Legislature. If it passes, he’ll leave it up to the governor but said he hopes it would garner enough support to overrule a veto if it came to that.

"Whatever she decides, I respect her decision,” Aures said.

Charlotte Matherly is the statehouse reporter for the Concord Monitor and Monadnock Ledger-Transcript in partnership with Report for America. Follow her on X at @charmatherly, subscribe to her Capital Beat newsletter and send her an email at cmatherly@cmonitor.com.