This story was originally published by the Indiana Capital Chronicle.
By Leslie Bonilla Muñiz
Indiana Capital Chronicle
January 22, 2026
Indiana doctors, patients and others lined up Wednesday to testify on a contentious proposal allowing anyone to file potentially lucrative lawsuits related to the illegal use of abortion-inducing drugs.
Senate Bill 236 also lets Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita’s office sue in some cases, changes reporting requirements for abortion-related filings and redefines what abortion is.
“It really aims to close what’s a perceived loophole” around such drugs, said author Sen. Tyler Johnson, R-Leo. He is an emergency room physician.
The legislation would prohibit manufacturing, distributing, mailing, prescribing or possessing abortion-inducing drugs in Indiana — with carveouts for the drugs’ other uses, federal law, the U.S. Constitution and a pregnant woman’s own actions.
Anyone could enforce the ban through two types of civil lawsuits, which would only require intent rather than a successful or even attempted abortion. And they’d be able to sue for up to 20 years.
The first is a wrongful death action. If a claimant can’t identify the manufacturer of the drug that caused the death or injury, liability would be split between all manufacturers in proportion with their share of the national market for abortion-inducing drugs at the time.
The second is a qui tam action, in which private individuals sue on behalf of the government.
Texas recently adopted a similar law.
“A qui tam case is where a person identifies fraud and waste of government funds and goes out to recoup those funds on behalf of the government and retains a small portion of those funds as their reward for shining light on government fraud,” civil litigator Kathleen DeLaney said. “There’s nothing about government waste or fraud in this bill whatsoever, but what there is is the state of Indiana weaponizing individual citizens to go out and sue their co-citizens.”
In a qui tam action, a court would be required to award a successful plaintiff at least $100,000 and attorney’s fees — but largely wouldn’t be able to award legal costs to victorious defendants.
DeLaney, of law firm DeLaney & DeLaney, asserted the legislation creates “an army of private litigants, standing in the name of the government, claiming $100,000 bounties from others.”
State law would apply to the use of the drugs by Indiana residents regardless of where they’re used.
Senate Bill 236 would also authorize Rokita to sue on behalf of fetuses of Indiana residents against anyone who violates federal abortion drug mail laws.
Indiana has a near-total abortion ban, approved in 2022, that only allows the procedures in narrow circumstances: up to 20 weeks post-fertilization to save the mother’s life or if the fetus has been diagnosed with a fatal anomaly, and up to 10 weeks post-fertilization in cases of rape or incest.
Doctors already must file a terminated pregnancy report with the Indiana Department of Health for each abortion performed in the state. The bill originally would have made those public, but it was amended out in committee.
An ongoing lawsuit has thus far resulted in a judicial ruling that they are medical records.
Senate Bill 236 adds to the lengthy list of details on the reports — including the name of each person assisting with the report.
The attending physician would also have to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they reviewed the TPR, the information is correct and the abortion was performed in accordance with Indiana law. Incomplete forms would be subject to investigation by IDOH and the Office of Inspector General.
In Wednesday’s amendment, Johnson said, “We essentially are simplifying it to say those reports are private, so that they’re not publicly disclosable.” The reports would no longer be forwarded to Rokita.
“If we’re making them private, I want a second set of eyes (on them),” he added, so they’d be reported to the inspector general instead.
Numerous witnesses, however, argued that what’s collected is invasive and identifiable.
Hamilton County resident Amber Dowd said she was forced to fill out a TPR for a son who “had no brain, no spinal cord, no way of having life.” She shared the loss on social media.
“The TPR report that I filled out had a lot of identifying information, so it’s really easy to find out where I am,” Dowd told the Capital Chronicle.
Fake Facebook profiles were created about Dowd, her business and her husband, Michael — who she said lost his job as a result. The news even made it to her three living sons’ classmates.
“You know what that Facebook profile said? ‘Mike Braun didn’t kill your baby. You did,’” Dowd said, during her emotional testimony. “He didn’t have a brain!”
Another mother, Hendricks County resident Danielle Spry, said she terminated a wanted pregnancy after the fetus was diagnosed with likely life-threatening health complications.
“This wasn’t just an abortion. … This was the day that my daughter died,” Spry said. “… All of this is so violating, to think that these private medical records, that are between me and my doctor for a personal decision that I made for my family and my daughter, would be looked at by any of you!”
“How dare any of you look at me and say that you would have done anything different?” she added.
Senate Bill 236 also redefines “abortion” in state code to any means intended to “cause the death of an unborn child,” specifying that birth control and contraceptives don’t count. It also exempts acts intended to save the child’s life or health, remove a miscarried or stillborn child, or remove an ectopic pregnancy — a dangerous condition in which a fertilized egg grows outside the uterus.
But medical professionals repeatedly warned lawmakers the new definition doesn’t account for other serious conditions.
Dr. Erin Lips, an Indianapolis-based obstetrician-gynecologist, told the committee about a young patient in her 20s suffering from a suspected molar pregnancy: “an abnormal pregnancy that can consist of fetal parts and cardiac activity, but will never develop into a baby.”
She warned lawmakers that the tissue can cause severe illness — including cancer — and death.
“Because of the changes in the abortion legislation, her doctor did not feel comfortable providing the (dilation and curettage) to her, so he referred her to IU,” Lips said. “Given transportation issues for the patient, her appointment was scheduled for weeks later.”
That delay in care “threatened her life and potential future fertility,” she continued, with the patient admitted to IU with liver and kidney failure. She recovered but was later diagnosed with post-molar cancer, according to Lips.
Senate Bill 236 advanced from committee Wednesday on a 9-4 vote.
LaGrange Republican Sen. Sue Glick, who authored the near-total abortion ban, joined Democrats in opposition. She feared women would be identified by details in the reports.
“In small towns, I guarantee you they can piece this together. … I guarantee you there are people who will decide that they are on the moral high ground, and they will bring these actions,” she said. “But they’re second-guessing medical professionals in an area that they do not have the expertise in.”
Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, pushed back against claims the bill would have a “chilling effect” on doctors.
“The chilling effect will be on people who are providing abortions illegally and illegally prescribing and or mailing these abortion pills into this state,” she said. “… Follow your oath, follow the law, make sure these women are taken care of and file the report.”
Indiana Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: info@indianacapitalchronicle.com.
