Colorado Abortion Opponents Will Reintroduce Fetal Personhood Bill

Wednesday, 1 July 2009, 9:40 | Category : Legislative Watch

By freewomyn

Abortion opponents in Colorado lost a major ballot initiative in November when the state’s voters rejected a proposed amendment to Colorado’s constitution that would have granted personhood to a fertilized embryo. Not content to rest on their laurels, abortion opponents will start collecting signatures tomorrow in order to put the same bill on the 2010 ballot.

Colorado Right to Life and Personhood USA say they will submit a new initiative Thursday to the Colorado Legislative Council in hopes of getting the measure on 2010 ballots. Last year, Colorado voted 3-to-1 against a similar measure to define fertilized human embryos as people in the state constitution. . . Abortion opponents say they think they’ll fare better next year in Colorado with better funding and a new campaign strategy. (source)

Voters in Georgia and Oregon have rejected this type of legislation, and the North Dakota legislature rejected a similar bill in February. The intent of these bills is clear – anti-choicers hope that the bills will make an end run around abortion by defining a fetus as a person and endowing the fetus with civil rights. However, Gender Equality Law explains that the effects go far beyond abortion and will have negative consequences for a broad range of reproductive health services.

While its intent to effectively ban abortion are obvious, there are also consequences to reproductive health services, contraception, in vitro fertilization, and stem cell research.

Reproductive Health Services: The legislation of reproductive and sexual health is dangerous because it effectively makes decisions in the government rather than in the doctor’s office. Planned Parenthood has pointed out this bill takes decisions about abortion, contraception, in vitro fertilization, etc. away from women but also away from their doctors. In November, doctors opposed a California consent law because they said it would turn them into police officers rather than caregivers. This bill creates a similar situation where a new legal restriction can determine how a doctor cares for his or her patient based on political rhetoric rather than medical rationale.

Contraception: If a person is a fertilized egg, what does this mean for contraception that prevents an egg from being fertilized? The birth control pill and emergency contraception are used to prevent the release of eggs – or ovulation – so there is no egg for the sperm to fertilize. Does this mean the egg that has not been released has legal rights because it has the potential for life? Through contraception, is the woman then violating the legal rights of eggs to achieve personhood? Although it is currently a philosophical debate, by giving rights to fertilized eggs it then becomes a legal debate. Do eggs and sperm also have legal rights as potentials for personhood?

In Vitro Fertilization: Personhood North Dakota claims this bill would not stop in vitro fertilization, but it would prevent the killing of frozen embryos. There have been previous bills in other states that would require women who use in vitro fertilization to carry every fertilized egg to term or to find someone else who would by putting the embryos up for adoption. The problem is that up to 15 eggs can be fertilized in the in vitro process. This could mean choosing between having no children or having a soccer team. Again, this bill places limits on what a doctor and a family can decide.

Stem Cell Research:
Personhood North Dakota claims this bill will not stop stem cell research because scientists can use umbilical cords to obtain embryonic cells. In some sense, this is a moot point. North Dakota prohibits research on a living/non-living embryo or fetus. So while claiming the bill will only prevent the use of aborted fetuses in stem cell research, Personhood North Dakota is only stating the status quo. North Dakota also bans research on cloned embryos.

To stay up to date on any developments in the fight against the Colorado legislation, check out Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains’ action page, or click over to NARAL Pro-choice Colorado.

Tags : , , , , , , , ,

3 Comments for “Colorado Abortion Opponents Will Reintroduce Fetal Personhood Bill”

Trackbacks

  1. 1. Feminists For Choice » Montana is on the Anti-Choice Bandwagon
  2. 2. Feminists For Choice » What Does Personhood Really Mean?
  3. 3. Feminists For Choice » Book Shelf: The War on Choice

Leave a comment