Frances Akridge said when it comes to reproductive healthcare, she wants to avoid any “witch hunts” in Huntsville.

Akridge, the city council member representing east Huntsville, has presented a resolution that would instruct the police department to make investigating abortions and pregnancy outcomes their “lowest priority.”

Related: U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; rules abortion not a constitutional right

The city council will consider the resolution at Thursday’s meeting.

• Read the full resolution below

Akridge said she wants to protect patient privacy and provide “assurance” to healthcare providers that they will not face additional scrutiny in the aftermath of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade to allow states to ban abortion.

“It’s just to offer some assurance to both doctors and pregnant women who we are trying to keep here that we’re not going to set up a new entity (for investigations),” Akridge said Wednesday in an interview with AL.com.

“I don’t want people going on a witch hunt. That’s all.”

After the Supreme Court handed down its decision this summer, a law went into effect in Alabama, making it a felony for a doctor to perform an abortion, except when the patient’s life is in danger. If convicted, a doctor could face up to life in prison.

The one-page resolution states that it would be the policy of the city that city resources would not be used to create a record of any information about an individual’s pregnancy or related health care. The city’s policy would also be not to provide information about pregnancy outcomes unless the information is provided to defend a patient’s right to reproductive care or the healthcare provider’s right to provide the care.

It also would prohibit the use of city resources to conduct surveillance for the purpose of determining the purpose of a woman’s appointment with her physician.

The resolution does not prevent police from complying with state or federal law but says that any investigation or prosecution of pregnancy outcomes should be the “lowest priority for law enforcement personnel” except in certain outlined cases.

“Healthcare providers must be free to carry out the medical procedures most appropriately indicated for any given patient scenario without fear of prosecution and so that women and girls do not experience unnecessary pain, suffering and risk of serious illness or death,” the resolution states.

Akridge said she is unsure if there is enough support for it to pass. At least three of the five council members must vote for the resolution for it to pass.

“I’m against abortion,” Akridge said. “I’m also against the government telling us what we should do with a very particular instance. This is not a pandemic. A pandemic required government intervention because it affects absolutely everybody.”

Ultimately, Akridge said she is seeking to safeguard the medical privacy of women and their relationship with their doctors that existed prior to the Supreme Court decision.

“It’s simply an assurance that we’re not going to set up a commission outside of the medical world or any other entity to double check on what doctors are doing,” Akridge said. “Patient and doctor privacy is what I’m trying to protect.”

Akridge said doctors are also “nervous” about the implications of new laws relating to abortion.

“The least I can do is to offer a piece of paper that says you’ll be able to do your job without fear of a proactive investigation,” Akridge said. “Will the police do their job if there’s probable cause like they would for any other crime? Of course. That’s what’s said in the in the resolution also.”