The Iowa House passed a bill that raises penalties for causing death or injury of a fetus. The bill would also change language in Iowa law from "human pregnancy" to "unborn person," which is causing concern about how that may affect fertility treatments in the state.
- Council bluffs Republican Brent Seigrist is confident the bill won't impact IVF and he says that's not the point of the bill.
- "All's the bill does is change the definition of an unborn baby and increases the penalties ... If a woman was punched by a boyfriend, husband whatever and loses the baby it increases those penalties ... it has nothing to do with IVF," said Siegrist.
- Omaha-based fertility specialist, Dr. Elizabeth Constance, treats patients from Iowa. She’s worried and, she says, so are her Iowa colleagues.
- “We have been inundated with phone calls and messages from our patients since the Alabama decision and again today ... We have lots of patients that are very scared, they’re very worried. People concerned with, do they need to move their embryos out of the state, with concern that Nebraska could be next,” said Constance.
BROADCAST TRANSCRIPT:
Thursday, the Iowa House passed a bill that would increase penalties for fetal deaths and replaces the term "human pregnancy" with "unborn person" in the law.
I'm your Southwest Iowa reporter Katrina Markel
There are concerns about whether these changes would affect fertility treatments, specifically, in-vitro fertilization. All of this comes after a court ruling in Alabama that briefly suspended IVF treatments in the state.
Council bluffs Republican Brent Seigrist is confident the bill won't impact IVF and he says that's not the point of the bill.
"All's the bill does is change the definition of an unborn baby and increases the penalties...If a woman was punched by a boyfriend, husband whatever and loses the baby it increases those penalties ... it has nothing to do with IVF," said Siegrist.
Omaha-based fertility specialist, Dr. Elizabeth Constance, treats patients from Iowa. She’s worried and, she says, so are her Iowa colleagues.
“The concern is the way the bill is written it defines an unborn child as beginning at fertilization and there’s no language in the bill that specifies inside our outside of the uterus and there’s also no language in the bill specifically eliminating IVF,” said Constance.
I asked Siegrist why change the language from “human pregnancy” to “unborn person,” given widespread concerns about IVF. He said some of it was about having consistent language in Iowa code.
“As I understand it there are several other places in the Iowa code that references the unborn ... Plus, they did want to increase the penalties as a way to really try to deter anyone from harming a pregnant woman,” said Siegrist.
“We have been inundated with phone calls and messages from our patients since the Alabama decision and again today ... We have lots of patients that are very scared, they’re very worried. People concerned with, do they need to move their embryos out of the state, with concern that Nebraska could be next,” said Constance.
The bill will still need to be passed by the Senate and signed by the governor before becoming law.
Katrina markel, your Southwest Iowa neighborhood reporter.
