Alabama Strikes Down New Bill That Would Provide Support for Women Denied an Abortion

If you had any doubts, throw them out: Alabama is not trying to support women, mothers or children.

Per Newsweek, Alabama’s Senate struck down a new bill that would provide free prenatal and medical care for mothers who had been denied an abortion on Tuesday; the vote failed 23-6. This bill, a response to Tuesday’s near-universal abortion ban, was proposed by State Senator Linda Coleman-Madison, and intended to support expecting mothers with at-risk pregnancies.

On the nature of her bill, Coleman-Madison asserts that Alabama doesn’t provide substantive education. “And then,” Coleman-Madison says, “the child is born and we know that mother is indigent and she cannot take care of that child, we don’t provide any support systems for that mother.”

The bill received support from fellow State Senator Vivian Davis Figures, who proposed several amendments to it. The amendments would require Medicaid to provide funding for new mothers and their children, require the lawmakers that voted for the bill to pay the legal costs to defend it and outlaw men’s access to vasectomies. Unsurprisingly, all three amendments failed to pass.

Of note here is that this bill and its amendments are not trying to overturn Alabama’s abortion ban; rather, they are just trying to support mothers and their children. Or, you know, do the absolute bare minimum that a government could do.

Let’s break down the three amendments.

The first amendment—to require Medicaid to provide support for low-income mothers and their children—seems poised to appeal to those with a pro-life mentality. It would, in other words, support the lives of women and children that otherwise might be in danger. To reiterate, this amendment failed to pass.

The second amendment, which would require the lawmakers who voted for Alabama’s abortion ban to pay for legal costs in the inevitable court battle that will unfold in the coming months, is likewise straightforward. Yet the burden of legal costs—which, it is worth noting, rack up quickly and easily—will fall on those who choose to take up the torch. This amendment failed to pass.

The third, and arguably most radical, amendment would prevent men from getting vasectomies. A vasectomy, you may recall, prevents the creation of sperm. Sperm, you may also recall, has DNA in it. Ergo, it stands to reason that sperm has the same quantifiable amount of “life” in it as a fetus prior to six weeks. This amendment failed to pass.

Coleman-Madison’s bill and Figures’ amendments were meant to provide support as a means of allaying the harms inflicted by the abortion ban. The bill behind the abortion ban was proposed by State Representative Terri Collins. Here’s what she has to say about the bill:

My goal with this bill, and I think all of our goal, is to have Roe v. Wade turned over, and that decision be sent back to the states so that we can come up with our laws that address and include amendments and things that address those issues.

For those misguided enough to believe that Alabama’s abortion ban was meant to foster and support lives, here’s your answer: It’s not. It’s about overturning Roe v. Wade. If it were anything but, maybe this bill and its amendments would have passed.

To find out more about the recent abortion bans, go here and to see how you can support those affected, go here.