Are you worried about the end of reproductive rights?

[Anonymous]

This is specifically for infertility discussions - are you worried that with the end of Roe the next thing they (and by they I mean GOP) will come after is fertility/IVF treatment and other reproductive assistance?

This article sums up my concerns: https://www.law.georgetown.edu/gender-journal/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2022/04/Abortion-Trigger-Ban-Statutes-Impacts-on-Plan-B-Birth-Control-and-IVF-Treatments_N.-Patel.pdf

Thoughts? Concerns?

[Anonymous]

Oh absolutely. Once Roe is gone, I think they'll move on to access to birth control and procedures like regular IVF that produce extra embryos. That's likely a few years down the road still, but it's coming.

[Anonymous]

Presumably A LOT of republican women use IVF. I wonder how they vote in the future. I mean they probably DGAF because of course they don't and are rich enough to get IVF done wherever they want to.

[Anonymous]

I go back and forth on this. I suspect it's more likely they will turn their rage and desire to control upon people in the LGBTQ+ communities - I know many in the GOP would love to overturn the right for non-heterosexual couples to marry, for instance. But yeah, I certainly think it's possible that IVF, surrogacy (maybe especially surrogacy), and other reproductive technologies are in danger, if only as a sort of side effect of their current rampage. I also think it's possible that first we might see laws restricting unmarried people or same-sex couples from using IVF. I think they would also go for preventing the destruction of unused embryos...as a PP said, this is the top of a slippery slope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I go back and forth on this. I suspect it's more likely they will turn their rage and desire to control upon people in the LGBTQ+ communities - I know many in the GOP would love to overturn the right for non-heterosexual couples to marry, for instance. But yeah, I certainly think it's possible that IVF, surrogacy (maybe especially surrogacy), and other reproductive technologies are in danger, if only as a sort of side effect of their current rampage. I also think it's possible that first we might see laws restricting unmarried people or same-sex couples from using IVF. I think they would also go for preventing the destruction of unused embryos...as a PP said, this is the top of a slippery slope.

Also what happens if a woman does IVF and creates say 12 embryos. Are they required to implant them all? Wouldn't that follow GOP rhetoric regarding life at conception?

[Anonymous]

So many concerns. I have so many friends who went through fertility struggles including miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies and later pregnancy loses. The idea of people being forced to carry dead or unviable fetuses, especially when they so desperately want a child, is horrifying.

As a lesbian parent I’m also concerned we’ll seeing the return of restricting artificial reproductive technologies to straight married couples again. After all, I’m not the kind of person who should “deserve” to have a child according to some lawmakers.

[Anonymous]

No, I’m not concerned about that at all.

[Anonymous]

Why would they do that? I thought the whole point of this is to force people to have more babies. Why would they want to make it harder for a large number of people to get pregnant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Presumably A LOT of republican women use IVF. I wonder how they vote in the future. I mean they probably DGAF because of course they don't and are rich enough to get IVF done wherever they want to.

Which states are proposing changes to IVF?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Presumably A LOT of republican women use IVF. I wonder how they vote in the future. I mean they probably DGAF because of course they don't and are rich enough to get IVF done wherever they want to.

Which states are proposing changes to IVF?

The idea that IVf should be criminalized is relatively common in conservative circles.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/01/amy-coney-barrett-supported-group-fertilization

[Anonymous]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/alito-roe-draft-leak-abortion-congress-federal-ban.html

Congress is already weighing its post-Roe options. As of this month, 19 senators and more than 100 representatives—all Republicans—have cosponsored sweeping legislation that would grant legal personhood from the “moment of fertilization.” This law would prohibit all abortions at every stage of pregnancy, as well as many common IVF procedures, by granting due process and equal protection rights to fetuses and embryos. Other more incremental bills would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to help her terminate a pregnancy without parental consent. At a bare minimum, Republicans appear dead set on enacting a federal ban at 15 or 20 weeks, nullifying state laws that allow abortion later in pregnancy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would they do that? I thought the whole point of this is to force people to have more babies. Why would they want to make it harder for a large number of people to get pregnant?

It’s in large part about controlling reproductive choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/alito-roe-draft-leak-abortion-congress-federal-ban.html

Congress is already weighing its post-Roe options. As of this month, 19 senators and more than 100 representatives—all Republicans—have cosponsored sweeping legislation that would grant legal personhood from the “moment of fertilization.” This law would prohibit all abortions at every stage of pregnancy, as well as many common IVF procedures, by granting due process and equal protection rights to fetuses and embryos. Other more incremental bills would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to help her terminate a pregnancy without parental consent. At a bare minimum, Republicans appear dead set on enacting a federal ban at 15 or 20 weeks, nullifying state laws that allow abortion later in pregnancy.

I read the actual proposed legislation and here is what it says:

Nothing in this Act shall be construed
8 to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of
9 her unborn child, a prohibition on in vitro fertilization, or
10 a prohibition on use of birth control or another means of
11 preventing fertilization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/alito-roe-draft-leak-abortion-congress-federal-ban.html

Congress is already weighing its post-Roe options. As of this month, 19 senators and more than 100 representatives—all Republicans—have cosponsored sweeping legislation that would grant legal personhood from the “moment of fertilization.” This law would prohibit all abortions at every stage of pregnancy, as well as many common IVF procedures, by granting due process and equal protection rights to fetuses and embryos. Other more incremental bills would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to help her terminate a pregnancy without parental consent. At a bare minimum, Republicans appear dead set on enacting a federal ban at 15 or 20 weeks, nullifying state laws that allow abortion later in pregnancy.

I read the actual proposed legislation and here is what it says:

Nothing in this Act shall be construed
8 to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of
9 her unborn child, a prohibition on in vitro fertilization, or
10 a prohibition on use of birth control or another means of
11 preventing fertilization.

NP here.

If you think for one second that overturning roe v wade won’t threaten IVF treatments, you have your head in the sand. Plenty of state legislators believe that life begins at conception and will do whatever they can to push that belief on others, even if many won’t admit it at this point (although many do).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/alito-roe-draft-leak-abortion-congress-federal-ban.html

Congress is already weighing its post-Roe options. As of this month, 19 senators and more than 100 representatives—all Republicans—have cosponsored sweeping legislation that would grant legal personhood from the “moment of fertilization.” This law would prohibit all abortions at every stage of pregnancy, as well as many common IVF procedures, by granting due process and equal protection rights to fetuses and embryos. Other more incremental bills would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines to help her terminate a pregnancy without parental consent. At a bare minimum, Republicans appear dead set on enacting a federal ban at 15 or 20 weeks, nullifying state laws that allow abortion later in pregnancy.

I read the actual proposed legislation and here is what it says:

Nothing in this Act shall be construed
8 to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of
9 her unborn child, a prohibition on in vitro fertilization, or
10 a prohibition on use of birth control or another means of
11 preventing fertilization.

NP here.

If you think for one second that overturning roe v wade won’t threaten IVF treatments, you have your head in the sand. Plenty of state legislators believe that life begins at conception and will do whatever they can to push that belief on others, even if many won’t admit it at this point (although many do).

It’s hard to determine that for sure. I was just told that this legislation would disallow IVF. However, I went to go read the actual legislation and that isn’t at all what it says.