Alabama deserves a revote on ‘Life’
From left to right: Cody Carnley of Crenshaw County, Alabama; Carrie McNair of Mobile; Veronica Wehby-Upchurch of Birmingham and Lindsey Shaw of Birmingham hold signs at a rally in support of legislation to protect in vitro fertilization on Feb. 28, 2024 in Montgomery, Alabama. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)
In today’s divisive political landscape, it is extremely unlikely to find an issue where the vast majority of people – much less Alabama legislators – are in agreement. Yet in the period of time since the Alabama Supreme Court ruled frozen embryos are also “children” in the eyes of the law and effectively halted all IVF services in the state, we have seen near universal public and legislative support in finding a way to help those who need reproductive assistance to build their families regain their ability to do so.
Alabamians overwhelmingly believe that creating families is pro-life, regardless of whether or not technology is required to do it.
It is a rare occurrence to have the legislature almost universally pass legislation that represents the direct beliefs of most of the voters in the state, much less in such a quick and effective manner. The Supreme Court ruling created a problem; the Legislature addressed it; most voters (and all who participate in IVF procedures) are reasonably satisfied by the results for the moment, and clinics should soon reopen. Unfortunately, this is not a permanent fix as long as our court interprets the state constitution as promoting fetal and embryonic personhood.
When voters were told to vote on the “Sanctity of Life” amendment in 2018, proponents of the measure called it a “statement of values,” rather than something that would have real and direct impact on their ability to make medical decisions for themselves and their families. Opponents of the amendment were scoffed at when they argued that it could make contraception illegal, force people who were pregnant due to sexual assault to give birth against their will, or make IVF inaccessible in the state.
“Amendment 2 merely declares a policy as the will of the people, leaving the specific prohibitions or liberties to the Legislature,” the director of Alliance for a Pro-life Alabama said back during the campaign. Yet here we are today, watching our state government craft a response bill that represents the will of the people while battling concerns that no legislative act can supersede the language now found in our state constitution.
Many Alabama voters consider themselves “pro-life,” but their definition is much more nuanced than the narrow, extreme version coming from the Supreme Court. It is not “pro-life” to deny families the ability to create a pregnancy any more than it is “pro-life” to force anyone to risk their permanent health and ability to conceive again by continuing a doomed pregnancy. It is not “pro-life” to deny access to any contraceptive options in a state with one of the worst maternal mortality and morbidity rates in the nation, nor is it “pro-life” to have a medical system in which doctors can be subject to more punishment criminally and civilly if they do something that might harm an embryo or fetus than they would if they kill the person carrying it due to their medical neglect.
These were not the results the people of Alabama wanted when they voted for the “Sanctity of Life” amendment. It is the obligation of the Legislature to provide us with a second chance to define what our values truly are. If every lawmaker who voted for the short-term IVF bill agrees to pass legislation that would allow another vote on the “Sanctity of Life” amendment, then we can see if this is truly the will of the people and not just the fanatical beliefs of a far-right court.
Now that we have full awareness of what its language does, this is the only way to return the power to the voters and their elected officials, right where it belongs.
The post Alabama deserves a revote on ‘Life’ appeared first on Alabama Reflector.
