E-Mail This Article to a Friend REPRO RIGHTS An easier morning after BY DEIRDRE FULTON

For a bill that stresses the importance of timely access, passage has been a long time coming. But now, after several years of debate, the state measure that would make it easier for women in Massachusetts to access the so-called morning-after pill is finally coming down the home stretch.

The bill’s aim is twofold. First, it would require hospitals to provide rape victims with emergency contraception (EC) — a dose of highly concentrated hormones that, when taken within five days of intercourse, prevents ovulation, fertilization, or implantation of a fertilized egg in the womb. Secondly, it would allow pharmacists to dispense EC without a prescription — a great boon for every woman who knows that mistakes can happen on weekends, after hours, and when your doctor is on vacation.

Proponents say the EC bill would prevent unintended pregnancies, and therefore reduce the number of abortions in the state. "This is an area where we can reach common ground in the reproductive-rights debate," says Angus McQuilken, public-affairs director for Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts (PPLM).

The Senate unanimously approved its version of the bill in June, while the House passed the measure by a large margin early this month. Now, six senators and representatives are hammering out a compromise. The sticking point? Whether to include language that would make it possible for the state’s nine Catholic hospitals to opt out of providing EC to rape victims.

Anti-choice conservatives, led by the Massachusetts Catholic Conference (MCC) and Massachusetts Citizens for Life, oppose the bill. By requiring Catholic hospitals (such as St. Elizabeth’s, in Brighton) to provide EC, the legislature would be forcing them to "violate Catholic teachings," says MCC associate director for policy and research Dan Avila. But this argument rests on the assumption that EC can actually induce abortion, a claim refuted by activists and doctors alike. Regardless, McQuilken adds, "Catholic hospitals are not places of worship.... They serve patients of all faiths."

Both sides expect the compromise to be ironed out soon. That would leave the governor’s desk as the bill’s biggest obstacle — though the measure still has enough support (two-thirds of the legislature) to override his veto.

During his gubernatorial campaign, Governor Mitt Romney told Planned Parenthood (on a candidate questionnaire) that he supported expanded access to EC. Now, he’s staying exasperatingly mum. Romney’s national political aspirations recently led him to flip-flop on his abortion stance, and Massachusetts pro-choicers are worried that his conservative courtship will lead him to reject the EC bill as well.

"He won’t say what he’s going to do, which is just so frustrating," says Melissa Kogut, director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, whose organization, along with PPLM, sent the governor a letter in June asking him to come clean on his current EC stance. (He hasn’t responded.)

Maybe Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, who made waves last week when she told the Boston Globe that she supports "expanding access to emergency contraception generally," might be able to persuade him.