Cleveland Reporter

Mehek Cooke, a Columbus attorney, represented the opposition to Issue 1 in a debate on October 14. She claimed that the language of the amendment is misleading and could have significant consequences. Cooke argued that the amendment could allow for late-term abortions, block parental consent laws, and allow abusers to roam freely in the state without consequences.

During the live forum, Cooke debated Desiree Tims, president and CEO of Innovation Ohio, and they answered questions from Ohio voters. Cooke expressed concern about the broad scope of the amendment, stating, "We shouldn't have an amendment that allows for decisions outside parental notification, outside parental control." She also criticized the ACLU for writing a very broad amendment.

According to Protect Women Ohio, those in favor of Issue 1 are trying to mislead Ohio voters with vague language inserted into the amendment. Issue 1, also known as The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety amendment, is currently on the ballot, with early voting and absentee voting underway. Cooke questioned why the word "woman" is not mentioned once in the amendment, seeking clarification from Tims during the debate.

Cooke further argued that supporters of Issue 1 do not want Ohio voters to know that if the amendment is passed, it would allow for painful, late-term abortions throughout all nine months of pregnancy. The ballot language references a decision to be made between a patient and physician based on the "health" of the mother, which Cooke believes is not clear and leaves room for interpretation. She raised concerns that this phrasing could include "financial, social, or mental health" reasons for a late-term abortion, calling it a "major loophole."

Regarding parental consent, Tims stated that the amendment would still allow for parental consent for children. She explained that the amendment primarily addresses the extreme abortion ban currently in place. Protect Women Ohio claims that the ACLU, one of the main backers and writers of the amendment, deliberately used the word "individuals" to avoid excluding minors. They cited the ACLU's website and coalition partners who advocate for the elimination of parental rights.