Marvin Mandel, Governor                       2159

No law should permit the aborting of a fetus in the later stages
of pregnancy except where the abortion is necessary to preserve the
life of the mother.

I have been advised by the Medical and Chirurgical Faculty of
Maryland that it opposes—on purely medical grounds—the aborting
of a fetus in the final months of a pregnancy. Yet there is no legal
power in this State that could prevent such an act under the proposed
law.

Maryland's present law covering abortions is, I believe, ade-
quately liberal but greatly misunderstood. It's provisions are worth
reviewing. The existing law permits abortion:

1.    If the continuation of the pregnancy is likely to result in the
death of the mother;

2.    If there is a substantial risk that continuation of the preg-
nancy would gravely impair the physical or mental health of the
mother;

3.    If there is substantial risk of the birth of the child with grave
and permanent physical deformity or mental retardation;

4.    If the pregnancy results from rape.

Under the present law, an abortion must be performed by a li-
censed physician "in a hospital accredited by the joint commission
for accreditation of hospitals and licensed by the State Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene."

Moreover, an abortion cannot be performed after 26 weeks of
gestation unless the fetus is dead or continuation of the pregnancy is
likely to result in the death of the mother. Each hospital in which
abortions are performed must have an abortion review authority
which must grant written authorization for the abortion.

The most widely misconstrued aspect of the existing law is that
a psychiatrist's consent is required for the performance of an abor-
tion.

Critics have argued that psychiatric consultations are expensive
and a burden on women whose financial means are inadequate. Phy-
chiatric consultation is not required in any case under the existing
law.

However, the State has taken steps to assure financial help to
any woman who needs an abortion but who lacks the financial means.
The restrictions of hardship have been removed.

The purpose of the executive veto is not to thwart the will of the
Legislature. It is, instead, the final safeguard in our system of checks
and balances—an expression of executive responsibility for what I
feel is the protection and well-being of the citizens of Maryland.

Because of the legal uncertainties in the abortion bill, and espe-
cially because the measure fails to restrict abortions to the earlier
stages of pregnancy, I cannot, in good conscience, sign the abortion
bill into law.

I will sign into law the Medical Practices Act, Senate Bill No.
257, because I am convinced that there is a great need to empower