KNOXVILLE, Tenn. — More than three years after its door was shot out, and it was set on fire, Knoxville's Planned Parenthood opened its new facility this week.
Ashley Coffield, the Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi CEO, said since then providers have seen 108 patients.
"We're really excited, we are on day seven of services at this point," she said. "We were packed every day last week. We had 23 patients the first day."
She said the center is not performing abortion care. It offers other services like STI testing, gender-affirming care, pregnancy testing and planning, as well as other healthcare.
"Our building was burned down on Dec. 31, 2021," she said. "So in less than three years we have a building open, operating, staff trained and we're seeing patients — so we're very proud of that."
Coffield spoke to reporters Tuesday morning, where she also addressed a decision a panel of Tennessee judges made last week that allows doctors to perform some emergency abortions in the state without losing their licenses.
The conditions that allow the doctor to perform abortions are specific, she said, adding they don't cover all the health risks pregnant women can face.
"The issues that people face are so complicated that they can not be legislated, or named by a judge," she said. "Your imagination cannot think of everything that could happen to a person where they would want to receive abortion care."
According to Planned Parenthood, the ruling said abortions can be performed if a pregnant woman is experiencing pre-viable, pre-term premature rupture of membranes, dilation of the cervix prior to the viability of a pregnancy or fatal fetal diagnoses like severe preeclampsia. Abortion care can also be provided for fatal fetal diagnoses that could lead to uterine rupture or the possible loss of fertility.
Anti-abortion group Tennessee Right to Life put out a statement Friday, that said it disagreed with the the decision.
"Tennessee lawmakers have worked diligently to ensure that unborn children are protected under the law while making sure that mothers can receive the care they need in emergency situations," the statement said, in part. "The law already allows doctors to use their reasonable medical judgement to treat the mother to the best of their ability in emergency situations, therefore, it is unnecessary for the Court to intervene in this case."
Coffield said that she thinks that there is some "relief" in hospitals and amongst doctors since the decision.