Better Days: Alabama Passes Law to Protect IVF Treatments
Better days have arrived.
Last night Alabama legislature passed SB159[1] to protect IVF. First words of the bill: “Relating to in vitro fertilization; to provide civil and criminal immunity for death or damage to an embryo to any individual or entity when providing or receiving services related to in vitro fertilization.”
The voting went in favor of the bill, big time: 81 to 12 with nine abstentions in the House, and in the Senate it went 29 to 1. Big claps all around, confetti, fist pump, so much relief it feels like my emotions have gone through a carwash.
Minutes later Gov. Ivey signed the bill — capping an end to nearly 20 days of uncertainty for patients and providers. Megan, my wife, and I are lucky were weren’t in the middle of a transfer. I feel for all those individuals who were doing a transfer, and had to abruptly hit the pause button on their care.
In the coming days, we hope our clinic will return to regular operation.
It’s been a strange. Ever since the ruling, it has felt like a second job, waking up and trying to understand this, making phone calls, sending emails, tracking the news. Regular work has been an insulation against thinking about this — being so angry and confused at the laws, the politics.
That said, it’s rare to see political action happen so quickly. I am at once heartened by this: why can’t we do stuff like this all the time and quickly change circumstances? On the day before the State of Union, and an election year, I want to believe capability is there. Possiblity for better days exists.
And I am hurt and mystified by this ordeal, too: what does it mean when eight judges map a religious — theology-first — belief into law?
For those who sit in Alabama power seats, there are lots of questions still in the air: What is life? When does a soul enter a body — or enter a the potential for a body, being among the top questions for Republican lawmakers. And when do those lawmakers want to start protection? This set of laws have caught many Republicans in contradictory spot.
More talks will be held in the ruby red state of Alabama, as New York Times reported:
The State Supreme Court ruling also drew upon a constitutional amendment approved by Alabama voters in 2018 to “recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children,” reflecting language championed by groups opposed to abortion rights. Because that language is now enmeshed in the 1901 Alabama Constitution, some experts said the new shield law would likely face further legal challenges.
Furthermore, even with this bill passed, how will patients be protected with this legislation? The law may shield providers from wrongdoing. As the New York Times wrote:
Some lawmakers opposed the bill, expressing reservations over whether patients would be able to pursue negligence lawsuits against doctors and clinics.[2]
IVF has its regulation challenges across the country, and is in the nexus of reproductive care, abortion, family planning, and religious belief. But it is largely a procedure that provides an opportunity for people who face infertility, and want children.
This experience has left lots of feelings, created new rivers within me. It has made me want to be more accepting of situations. It’s shifted how and what I want to write, or how I want to use my skills and abilities.
I’m not finished having these conversations.
Lastly, before the ruling, Cosmopolitan interviewed Megan on why this ruling has brought real conversations about leaving this state. We will of course resume our care here, and there’s a lot to happen, but I can’t say this experience — any of it — made me want to stay. See the article HERE.
A new post will be out tomorrow or tonight that won’t be about IVF. Thanks for reading.
ENDIT.