âMissouri Handmaidâs Billâ: Missouri bill wants to track pregnant women âat risk' of having an abortion and give their babies to more âfitâ parents
A Missouri bill wants to create a registry of pregnant women 'at risk' of having an abortion and give their babies to more "fit" parents.
Republicans have introduced quite a few Handmaidâs Tale-esque bills. Still, none get closer to that dystopian reality than Missouri House Bill 807, which proposes tracking pregnant women perceived to be âat riskâ of having an abortion and giving their babies to families deemed âfitâ to parent.
Recommended Videos
While Missouri was once considered a swing state, it has more recently staunchly aligned itself with the far-right. The state has sought to enforce a near-total ban on abortion and proposed Covenant Marriage laws to prevent women from having access to a no-fault divorce. Missouri was one of several states that had a trigger law regarding abortion. Hence, when Roe v. Wade was repealed, a law immediately went into effect banning abortion except in cases where the pregnancy posed a threat to a womanâs life. However, recently, Missouri narrowly passed an amendment to restore abortion rights. Despite voters clearly demonstrating their support of abortion rights, conservative lawmakers are already eyeing a repeal. Additionally, they are always bringing new and even more terrifying proposals to the House in their mission to control women.
Recently, Republican Missouri Rep. Phil Amato introduced House Bill 807, which TikTok influencers quickly dubbed the âMissouri Handmaidâs Bill.â At first glance, the bill seems interested in strengthening the Department of Social Servicesâ Division of Maternal and Child Services and providing additional support for adoptive families and those interested in adoption. However, things get strange when it suggests the department âmaintain a central registry of each expectant mother who is at risk for seeking an abortion of her unborn child.â
The bill leaves numerous questions unanswered about the registry, especially regarding how the state will determine which women are âat riskâ of having an abortion. Couldnât it just say that every pregnant woman is at risk or discriminate against certain groups by attributing the risk to them? Not only that, but thereâs no indication that consent will be needed to put these women on the registry so that the department can track them. Having the state trying to keep databases of pregnant women is already terrifying, but the bill gets worse. It also suggests that the departments keep registries of prospective adoptive parents who are deemed âfit and proper to adopt a childâ and essentially try to match them to women considered âat riskâ of an abortion.
The language is fairly vague, but the bill suggests making the registry of women âat riskâ of having an abortion available to potential adoptive parents and facilitating the adoption process. Notice that it doesnât suggest solely matching prospective adoptive parents to women who have agreed to and gone through the legal process of putting their baby up for adoption. They are matching them with women who the state has identified through some unknown process without their consent as âat riskâ of having an abortion and seemingly pushing for these women to have their child and give it to someone who the state has deemed more âfit and proper.â Itâs not hard to interpret the bill as trying to pressure and maybe even force women theyâve deemed âunfitâ to be mothers to give up their parental rights and reproduce to supply âfitâ parents (i.e., white, evangelical Christians) with children.
Writer Jessica Valenti described the bill as trying to empower anti-abortion and religious extremists by creating this registry to give them access to vulnerable women so they can, essentially, âfunnelâ their babies to other families.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Jessica Valenti (@jessicavalenti)
Fortunately, the bill faced opposition during its first hearing on February 18. However, Amato appeared determined to reintroduce it as he promised to amend the bill, including changing the registry from mandatory to voluntary. Of course, such an amendment makes little difference, as the biggest question is what it means when one makes it onto the registry, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. If a woman is pressured by her parents or partner to enter the registry or makes the decision herself before changing her mind, has she already lost her parental rights? Whether the bill goes through or not, itâs horrifying that someone actually had the audacity to introduce it. It serves as a reminder to Americans that if the far-right gets their way, The Handmaidâs Tale is, indeed, the ultimate goal they have in mind.
The Mary Sue is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy