Latest news with #AbortionActionMissouri
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Push for Missouri abortion ban isn't about protecting women. It's about punishing them
Protestors with Abortion Action Missouri interrupt Missouri House debate of an anti-abortion constitutional amendment on April 15, chanting: "When abortion rights are under attack, what do we do? Stand up, fight back" (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent). Debate about abortion is often divorced from reality. But I was still stunned by the stream of elaborate and hurtful lies from Missouri lawmakers at the recent hearing on the bill to overturn Amendment 3. House Joint Resolution 73 is an attempt to reinstate the abortion ban that Missouri voters rejected when we passed Amendment 3. The bill itself, which would put the legality of abortion back on the ballot, is written to be as misleading as possible. For example, it contains a ballot summary that doesn't tell voters that it would put the ban back in effect. It instead asks voters if they want to protect treatment for miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. But the hearing was amazing for the way Republican legislators openly infantilized and lied about Missouri voters, women and doctors. The bill sponsor, Republican state Rep. Brian Seitz of Branson, opened with testimony tightly packed with falsehoods and paternalism: 'The preeminent facet of this legislation is that it protects women. What Amendment 3 took away from them, this legislation seeks to restore.' The implication is that I, like all women, need to be protected from my choices about my family, life and health care. I also need to be protected from the vote that I cast in November to take away the state's authority to make those decisions for me. This is because I, like the majority of Missouri voters, lack the intelligence to have understood what I was voting for on a widely and fiercely debated issue. This theme of 'protecting' women is also about justifying medically inappropriate abortion regulations. These regulations are sold as health protections but are actually intended to be impossible to comply with, so that abortion clinics can't operate. These are 'targeted regulation of abortion providers,' or 'TRAP' laws. Amendment 3 forecloses that backdoor ban strategy by putting the burden on the state to prove that a regulation actually has a health benefit. Amendment 3 also bars discrimination against abortion care. It's easy to tell when a law discriminates against abortion care by looking at whether the same regulations apply to miscarriage care, because abortion involves the same procedures and medications. Seitz went on to make the particularly fanciful claim that 'this legislation seeks to align itself with the will of the voter' because 'the people expressed that they wanted exceptions.' We did not express that we wanted exceptions. Amendment 3 had nothing to do with and no mention of exceptions. What voters said is that we don't want abortion to be banned in Missouri anymore. The claim that what voters really wanted was for abortion to continue to be banned but with exceptions for those victims of rape and incest who can jump through all the hoops our anti-exceptions legislature has in store for them is a fantastical lie. 'Incest' refers to a child raped and impregnanted by a family member. Even House Speaker Jon Patterson of Lee's Summit (who is a doctor and was the lone Republican to vote against the bill) acknowledged that a child who is being sexually abused is not likely to realize she is pregnant by the 12 week cut off for the victim exception in HJR 73. And if this child does realize what is happening to her before 12 weeks, how is she supposed to end her pregnancy if there are no functioning abortion clinics in this state? The hearing devolved into legislators interrogating testifying pastors about when life begins and berating doctors who testified that their patients were harmed under the ban. State Sen. Rick Brattin, a Republican from Harrisonville, responded vehemently to a doctor recounting how the ban had caused harm to her miscarrying patients, including one who bled for four weeks after being denied a procedure to evacuate her uterus. Brattin, like lawmakers across the country, blamed doctors for not understanding the law. 'Negligence of the law is no excuse' he said repeatedly. I'm pretty sure what he meant to say is 'ignorance of the law is no excuse,' which he illustrated with the classic example that not knowing the speed limit is not an excuse for speeding. But I think Brattin hit on an accidental insight with 'negligence of the law is no excuse.' Lawmakers need to own the outcomes of the laws they pass. Doctors provide care based on what their lawyers say they can or cannot do. As ProPublica has documented in Texas, many hospital lawyers are telling doctors they can't provide miscarriage care until the patient shows signs of infection or other life threatening complications when fetal heart tones can still be detected. Others are providing no guidance or legal support at all, leaving doctors to navigate the risk of criminal prosecution unaided. ProPublica has reported on the deaths of five women denied abortion care. Another 20 women who survived have sued Texas. Missouri's medical emergency 'exception' language in both the now enjoined ban and HJR 73 is nearly identical to Texas' — but worse. It required not just that a patient be at 'a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function,' but that the impairment be 'substantial and irreversible.' And the exception wasn't actually an exception. It was a defense to the crime of providing any abortion that the doctor would have the burden of proving at trial. Missouri has fewer reported stories than Texas of women injured because we are a small state that borders states where abortion is legal. But we know it happened here, too. When Mylissa Farmer was miscarrying she was sent to a Kansas hospital three hours away for treatment. She was turned away in Kansas where abortion is legal but heavily restricted. When she was finally able to get an abortion in Illinois, she was in excruciating pain and had an infection. The rate of sepsis among pregnant women, which can be fatal, has increased by 50% since Texas banned abortion. There's no reason to think women here weren't similarly endangered when Missouri's ban was in effect. And yet, Brattin yelled that the ban's emergency exception had been perfectly clear. It wasn't the law but doctors' ignorance of it that caused women who had lost their babies to bleed for weeks. Let's accept, for the sake of argument, that lawmakers didn't intend to imperil pregnant women. Intent doesn't matter. As Brattin put it: 'negligence of the law is no excuse.' And at this point, it's not negligence but deliberate indifference, given that injuries have been widely reported and a doctor told Brattin to his face that she had treated patients who were denied miscarriage care. The harm is known, but he and his fellow Republicans do not care. Miscarrying women are justifiable collateral damage in their attack on the main target: women and girls who do not want to continue their pregnancies. They want the opposite of safer abortion. They want to reinstate the ban so that we have to have later, more complicated or invasive procedures after traveling out of state, or to self manage with abortion medication from the internet without local medical supervision. They want anyone who needs an abortion to suffer as much as possible. It's not protection, it's punishment.
Yahoo
05-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Missouri representatives aim to end divorce complications for pregnant women
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – In late February, Missouri lawmakers passed House Bills 243 and 280, which look to prohibit courts from using pregnancy status as a reason to not dissolve a marriage or legal separation. Both bills reverse two sections, 452.305 and 452.310, and instead replace them with 452.305 and 452.3. HB 280 stood on its own originally until it was replaced with a substitute bill, making HB 243 the primary bill. Despite that, both bills are identical. St. Louis Mayoral primary results The Children & Families Committee heard the bills, which Rep. Cecelie Williams (R-111) and Rep. Raychel Proudie (D-73) bipartisanly supported. Those in agreement with the bill believe it can provide safety and reassurance for victims. Williams testified for the bill's purpose, sharing her past relationship with her ex-husband with the committee. She recounted a graphic incident with her ex-partner that left her with a broken left jaw and orbital bone. Despite that traumatic event, Williams attempted to leave the relationship. However, Missouri's law created difficulties for her as she was pregnant at the time, preventing her from dissolving the marriage. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now 'The emotional, psychological and physical pain I endured didn't stop just because I was carrying our fourth child. It would seem, from my perspective, that the law didn't care that I was safe,' Williams said to the committee. Others alongside Williams, including Matthew Huffman, Chief Public Affairs Officer at the Missouri Coalition Against Domestic & Sexual Violence, as well as groups Abortion Action Missouri and Planned Parenthood, testified in support of the bill. In a unanimous vote, the bill was passed, perfecting it with no opposing opinions voiced to the committee. HB 243 and 280 head to Missouri's Senate for further discussion. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Missouri Republican proposes ‘e-Harmony for babies' database to track pregnant women ‘at risk' of seeking abortion
A Republican state lawmaker in Missouri has introduced legislation that would create a 'central registry' of pregnant people who are 'at risk for seeking an abortion,' what the bill's author called the makings of an 'e-Harmony for babies' to match with adoptive families. The legislation would also allow the state to share information from that database with law enforcement agencies, 'including those outside of this state,' the bill states. Republican state Rep. Phil Amato largely deferred questions about his 'Save MO Babies Act' during a Children and Families Committee hearing to Gerard Harms, an adoption attorney who wrote the bill. 'We're looking at something like e-Harmony for babies — mothers who want to put up their children need to match with prospective parents,' Harms told the committee Tuesday. 'That's exactly what the intent of this is. Against, inartfully drafted.' Harms said participation is voluntary and would comply with all federal health privacy laws. But skeptical state lawmakers and abortion rights advocates have raised alarms about data privacy protections and what amounts to 'government surveillance' tracking people who could seek an abortion. Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, said the legislation is a reminder of prior attempts from state officials to 'track and surveil' pregnant people in the state, including a former state health department director's admission that he tracked the menstrual cycles of Planned Parenthood patients. 'The flippant and disturbing remarks heard today about establishing 'e-Harmony for babies' encouraging prospective families to shop for children should ring alarm bells for everyone,' Schwarz said in a statement to The Independent. 'No pregnant person, no child is off the table for anti-abortion politicians to exploit in order to further their own power and control over our bodies, families, and futures,' she added. Missouri House Democrats raged against the legislation on social media Monday night. 'ARE YOU SERIOUS!?' a Facebook post from the Missouri House Democratic Caucus said. 'We have to imagine even conservative Missourians would be horrified by this idea,' the post added. The Independent has requested comment from Amato. His legislation would require the Division of Maternal and Child Resources within the state's state's Department of Social Services 'to make and maintain a central registry of each expecting mother who is at risk for seeking an abortion and a central registry of each prospective adoptive parent who has successfully completed certain screenings, background checks, home studies, and other investigations to ensure the fit of the prospective parent to adopt a child.' The division 'can share records, information, and findings with federal, state, or local child welfare agency personnel and law enforcement agencies, including those outside of this state,' according to the bill. The legislation follows a state court ruling that blocks restrictions on abortion access in the state, marking a major victory for abortion rights in the GOP-controlled state. Missouri was among several states last year where voters approved ballot measures proposing state constitutional amendments to enshrine the right to abortion access in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling that overturned a constitutional right to abortion and punted abortion rights to individual states. In December, a judge ruled the state's near-total abortion ban was unenforceable under the new amendment Last week, a judge blocked 'unnecessary' and 'discriminatory' requirements for certain exams and tests that other healthcare providers do not have to perform. There were more than 3,000 abortions in Missouri in 2022, according to the Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services, the last year for which data was available — marking a 62 percent decrease from 1999, which saw more than 8,000 abortions. Abortion rights advocates are bracing for Donald Trump's administration's potential maneuvers around abortion care as he fills his presidential cabinet with anti-abortion figures and a Republican-dominated Congress revives efforts to target abortion access even in states where it is legally protected. Last month, the president signed pardons for 23 anti-abortion activists who were convicted for violating a federal law that makes it a crime to block entrances to reproductive health clinics, while U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has visited with anti-abortion officials who want to target prescription abortion drugs. Trump's administration also removed reproductive healthcare information from government websites. The administration's reinstatement of the so-called 'global gag rule' and threats to foreign aid have also significantly disrupted reproductive healthcare globally. Nearly three years after the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade, nearly half of U.S. states ban or severely restrict access to abortion.
The Independent
18-02-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Missouri Republican proposes ‘e-Harmony for babies' database to track pregnant women ‘at risk' of seeking abortion
A Republican state lawmaker in Missouri has introduced legislation that would create a 'central registry' of pregnant people who are 'at risk for seeking an abortion,' what the bill's author called the makings of an 'e-Harmony for babies' to match with adoptive families. The legislation would also allow the state to share information from that database with law enforcement agencies, 'including those outside of this state,' the bill states. Republican state Rep. Phil Amato largely deferred questions about his 'Save MO Babies Act' during a Children and Families Committee hearing to Gerard Harms, an adoption attorney who wrote the bill. 'We're looking at something like e-Harmony for babies — mothers who want to put up their children need to match with prospective parents,' Harms told the committee Tuesday. 'That's exactly what the intent of this is. Against, inartfully drafted.' Harms said participation is voluntary and would comply with all federal health privacy laws. But skeptical state lawmakers and abortion rights advocates have raised alarms about data privacy protections and what amounts to 'government surveillance' tracking people who could seek an abortion. Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, said the legislation is a reminder of prior attempts from state officials to 'track and surveil' pregnant people in the state, including a former state health department director's admission that he tracked the menstrual cycles of Planned Parenthood patients. 'The flippant and disturbing remarks heard today about establishing 'e-Harmony for babies' encouraging prospective families to shop for children should ring alarm bells for everyone,' Schwarz said in a statement to The Independent. 'No pregnant person, no child is off the table for anti-abortion politicians to exploit in order to further their own power and control over our bodies, families, and futures,' she added. Missouri House Democrats raged against the legislation on social media Monday night. 'ARE YOU SERIOUS!?' a Facebook post from the Missouri House Democratic Caucus said. 'We have to imagine even conservative Missourians would be horrified by this idea,' the post added. The Independent has requested comment from Amato. His legislation would require the Division of Maternal and Child Resources within the state's state's Department of Social Services 'to make and maintain a central registry of each expecting mother who is at risk for seeking an abortion and a central registry of each prospective adoptive parent who has successfully completed certain screenings, background checks, home studies, and other investigations to ensure the fit of the prospective parent to adopt a child.' The division 'can share records, information, and findings with federal, state, or local child welfare agency personnel and law enforcement agencies, including those outside of this state,' according to the bill. The legislation follows a state court ruling that blocks restrictions on abortion access in the state, marking a major victory for abortion rights in the GOP-controlled state. Missouri was among several states last year where voters approved ballot measures proposing state constitutional amendments to enshrine the right to abortion access in the wake of the Supreme Court 's 2022 ruling that overturned a constitutional right to abortion and punted abortion rights to individual states. In December, a judge ruled the state's near-total abortion ban was unenforceable under the new amendment Last week, a judge blocked 'unnecessary' and 'discriminatory' requirements for certain exams and tests that other healthcare providers do not have to perform. There were more than 3,000 abortions in Missouri in 2022, according to the Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services, the last year for which data was available — marking a 62 percent decrease from 1999, which saw more than 8,000 abortions. Abortion rights advocates are bracing for Donald Trump 's administration's potential maneuvers around abortion care as he fills his presidential cabinet with anti-abortion figures and a Republican-dominated Congress revives efforts to target abortion access even in states where it is legally protected. Last month, the president signed pardons for 23 anti-abortion activists who were convicted for violating a federal law that makes it a crime to block entrances to reproductive health clinics, while U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has visited with anti-abortion officials who want to target prescription abortion drugs. Trump's administration also removed reproductive healthcare information from government websites. The administration's reinstatement of the so-called 'global gag rule' and threats to foreign aid have also significantly disrupted reproductive healthcare globally. Nearly three years after the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade, nearly half of U.S. states ban or severely restrict access to abortion.
Yahoo
17-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Missouri clinics will ‘immediately' offer abortion across the state after judge's ruling
The Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis on June 24, 2022. (Photo by Tessa Weinberg/Missouri Independent) A Missouri judge on Friday blocked a licensing requirement for abortion clinics that providers argued was a key obstacle to renewing access to the procedure across the state. Hours later, Planned Parenthood clinics announced they would begin offering abortion services in Missouri. 'Abortion care will be restored immediately,' said Emily Wales, President and CEO of Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains. 'The people voted, the court responded and we will do our part: serving Missourians in their home state.' In a three-page ruling issued late Friday afternoon, Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Jerri Zhang said the regulations mandate physicians to perform certain exams and testing that are 'unnecessary.' The licensing requirement is 'discriminatory,' Zhang wrote, ' because it does not treat services provided in abortion facilities the same as other types of similarly situated health care, including miscarriage care.' Planned Parenthood clinics had previously said it could begin taking walk-in medication abortion appointments in Kansas City, Columbia and St. Louis if the judge ruled in their favor. 'Our health center staff are quickly readying to restart this critical care in the coming days,' said Margot Riphagen, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers. Abortion Action Missouri announced Friday evening the expansion of its clinic escorts program to include the Planned Parenthood in St. Louis. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'Barely a year after launching the campaign to end Missouri's abortion ban, the court upheld the will of the people,' Mallory Schwarz, executive director of Abortion Action Missouri, said. 'With this change the landscape for Missourians and the entire Midwest region will be transformed,' she said, 'as patients will have greater access to abortion care than they have had in years.' Coalition Life also announced it would again gather outside the clinic in St. Louis and re-establish its sidewalk counseling efforts. 'This ruling reinforces the need for pro-life agencies and advocates to offer life-affirming alternatives to women,' said Brian Westbrook, the group's executive director. 'Coalition Life remains steadfast in our mission to provide resources, education, and support to women facing unexpected pregnancies.' Stephanie Bell, a spokeswoman with Missouri Stands with Women — one of several political action committees formed last year to defend the state's abortion ban — said the fight is not over. 'We will not stop fighting to protect both women and unborn children from reckless, profit-driven practices,' Bell said. 'No woman should suffer, and no innocent life should be taken, in the name of an industry that refuses to be held accountable.' The day after voters narrowly decided to overturn the state's near-total abortion ban and protect the right to an abortion in the state constitution, the ACLU of Missouri, Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers sued the state to strike down those statutes. Zhang previously blocked a number of 'targeted regulation of abortion provider' statutes, better known as TRAP laws, such as a 72-hour waiting period for an abortion and a requirement that physicians performing the procedure have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals were put on hold. But the licensing requirements have left clinics unable to offer abortion in Missouri. Friday's ruling will certainly be appealed by the state. A spokeswoman for Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey did not respond to a request for comment. A decade ago, more than 5,000 abortions were performed in Missouri, according to the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services. By 2020, when abortions were still legal, that number fell to 167, a drop that abortion providers attributed to the state's growing list of regulations. Missouri's trigger law banning all abortions with limited exceptions for medical emergencies went into effect the same day the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Last November, Missourians narrowly approved Amendment 3, which states, in part, that 'the right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, interfered with, delayed, or otherwise restricted unless the government demonstrates that such action is justifiable by a compelling governmental interest achieved by the least restrictive means.' The lawsuit seeking to strike down Missouri's remaining abortion restrictions was filed soon after. Efforts by the Republican legislative majority to repeal or modify the terms of the Amendment 3 have led to 17 bills and proposed constitutional amendments filed in the Missouri House, and another 19 in the state Senate. Organizers with 'What's Next,' a group of Missouri activists who have pressed for a constitutional amendment beyond what voters approved last year with no restrictions on abortion, said attempts to unravel Amendment 3 should make abortion rights advocates think twice before celebrating Friday's ruling. 'Today's temporary court ruling on abortion is progress, but a far cry from any sort of win,' the organization said in a statement to the media. 'What remains in our state is a constitutional right for government interference, and we expect no less from our hostile legislature.' The only House measure to receive a hearing so far is a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban abortions except in cases of medical emergency, rape or incest. Filed by state Rep. Melanie Stinnett, a Republican from Springfield, it would only allow abortions for rape or incest in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy and only if a report has been filed with law enforcement. None of the Senate proposals have been scheduled for a hearing. The Independent's Rudi Keller and Anna Spoerre contributed to this story. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
