AB 1973
CFC OpposesAbortion: authorized procedures
CFC Says
CFC opposes AB 1973.
AB 1973 — Abortion: Authorized Procedures CFC Position: OPPOSE Under current California law, certain non-physician medical providers — including nurse practitioners, certified nurse-midwives, and physician assistants — are permitted to perform abortions, but only during the first trimester of pregnancy. AB 1973 would remove that time restriction entirely, allowing these providers to perform abortions through all nine months of pregnancy, including in the second and third trimesters. This matters deeply to California families because expanding late-term abortion access — and placing it in the hands of providers who are not fully trained physicians — raises serious concerns about both the safety of women and the lives of unborn children who are fully capable of feeling pain and surviving outside the womb. California Family Council opposes this bill because it moves California further from protecting preborn life and closer to an extreme abortion-on-demand policy with virtually no limits. Every unborn child deserves protection, not an expanded pathway to end their life. AB 1973 is currently moving through the California State Legislature.
Currently at 2nd Committee, having cleared 3 stages.
Legislative Progress
CFC's Position Letter
March 30, 2026
The Honorable Cecilia Aguiar-Curry
California State Assembly
1021 O Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry:
On behalf of tens of thousands of constituents, allied organizations, and more than 2,000 churches across California, California Family Council strongly opposes AB 1973.
AB 1973 would expand authority to perform abortions beyond the first trimester to nurse practitioners, certified nurse-midwives, and physician assistants, non-physician providers who lack the surgical training that second- and third-trimester procedures demand. It would also shield out-of-state abortion providers from professional discipline. This bill raises urgent concerns about patient safety, medical ethics, the protection of unborn life, and professional accountability.
Second- and Third-Trimester Abortions Carry Dramatically Elevated Maternal Risks
Later abortions are demonstrably more dangerous than first-trimester procedures. Research shows the risk of maternal death increases by approximately 38 percent for each additional week beyond eight weeks gestation.1 The overall death rate from abortion stands at roughly 0.7 per 100,000 procedures, but rises to 6.7 per 100,000 for late-term procedures, nearly ten times higher.1 Relative mortality risk is 14.7 times higher at 13–15 weeks and 29.5 times higher at 16–20 weeks compared to early procedures.1 Authorizing non-physicians to perform these high-risk surgeries exposes California women to avoidable harm.
The dominant second-trimester method is Dilation and Evacuation (D&E), used in approximately 95 percent of abortions once the unborn child is fully formed.1 This procedure requires the abortionist to manually dismember the child, removing limbs, sections of the torso, and finally crushing and extracting the skull.1 Scientific evidence indicates that unborn children can experience pain as early as 10–14 weeks gestation, with measurable stress hormone surges, increased heart rate, and neurological pain responses.1 Induction abortions performed later carry additional documented risks to the mother, including uterine rupture and hemorrhage.2 California should not be expanding, let alone delegating, these procedures to less-trained providers.
Second- and third-trimester abortions are complex surgical interventions requiring advanced obstetric and surgical competency. Nurse practitioners, certified nurse-midwives, and physician assistants are not trained in the full scope of complications these procedures can produce, including uterine perforation, bowel injury, and sepsis. Allowing these providers to perform procedures that even experienced OB-GYNs approach with caution represents a dangerous lowering of the standard of care.
Abortionist Left Unaccountable
AB 1973 creates an unprecedented lack of accountability for abortion providers. The bill prohibits California’s medical boards from denying licensure or disciplining physicians who have been disciplined, or even convicted, for abortion-related actions in other states. In effect, California would become a legal sanctuary for abortion providers, regardless of their prior record, so long as their conduct involved abortion.
No other area of medicine is treated this way. A physician disciplined in another state for misconduct in virtually any other procedure would face serious scrutiny. But under AB 1973, abortion is elevated above all other medical practices—insulated from oversight, shielded from consequences, and removed from the normal standards of professional accountability.
Finally, beyond the policy concerns, this bill reflects a broader moral failure. Scripture reminds us, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (Jeremiah 1:5, ESV). Every human life, born and unborn, has inherent dignity and worth. Laws like AB 1973 move us further away from recognizing that truth, and further toward a culture that treats human life as disposable.
California should be leading in compassionate, life-affirming care that supports both mothers and their children. Instead, AB 1973 expands abortion, lowers standards, and removes accountability, all at the expense of the most vulnerable among us.
For these reasons, California Family Council respectfully opposes AB 1973.
Respectfully,
Greg Burt
Vice President
California Family Council
References
1 American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), "The Harms of Abortion After 15 Weeks: The Medical Perspective," AAPLOG Fact Sheet, 2022. https://aaplog.org
2 Bixby Center / Live Action, "Late-Term Abortionist Describes Dangers of Induction Abortion," Live Action News, 2023. https://www.liveaction.org/news/late-term-abortionist-dangers-induction-abortion
Official Description
Existing law, the Medical Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of physicians and surgeons by the Medical Board of California. Existing law, the Nursing Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of registered nurses, including nurse practitioners and certified nurse-midwives, by the Board of Registered Nursing. Existing law, the Physician Assistant Practice Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of physician assistants by the Physician Assistant Board. Existing law generally makes it a public offense, punishable by a fine not exceeding $10,000 or by imprisonment, or both, for a person to perform an abortion without a valid license to practice as a physician and surgeon. As an exception to that prohibition, existing law authorizes a person to perform an abortion by medication or aspiration techniques in the first trimester of pregnancy if they have a valid, unrevoked, and unsuspended license or certificate under the Medical Practice Act, the Osteopathic Act, the Nursing Practice Act, or the Physician Assistant Practice Act that authorizes the person to perform the functions necessary for abortion by medication or aspiration techniques. This bill would instead authorize a person to perform an abortion if they are authorized under those acts to perform an abortion and would delete the restriction that the abortion be performed only in the first trimester of pregnancy. The bill would make conforming changes to specified training requirements imposed on nurse practitioners, qualified nurse practitioners, certified nurse-midwives, and physician assistants to perform those abortions. The bill would require a nurse practitioner or certified nurse-midwife performing a procedural abortion to establish and maintain procedures for consultation, collaboration, referral, and transfer of care to a physician and surgeon in complex cases and under other specified circumstances.