Thoughts on Utah Bill that would Penalize Women for Miscarriage

by Jillian Hewitt

About two weeks ago, the Utah legislature passed a bill that will allow the state to “charge a woman with criminal homicide for inducing a miscarriage or obtaining an illegal abortion.” So far, though, the media has given it little attention. Given this lack of publicity⎯in addition to the fact that Utah’s governor still has to sign the bill⎯I thought I’d discuss it here.

The bill would make women legally responsible for miscarriages caused by “reckless” behavior, regardless of whether or not the woman was actively trying to end her pregnancy. At first glance I understand why the legislature would think of creating such a law; the bill itself has roots in a recent case, where a 17-year-old pregnant girl paid a man $150 to beat her, hoping the damage would cause her pregnancy to end. Certainly we don’t want pregnant women running around hiring people to purposefully—but without proper medical procedure—terminate their pregnancies. That being said, this bill is problematic in so many ways; it will be a tragic step in the wrong direction for pregnant women if it gets implemented.

First off, the bill says nothing about any third party that might help with inducing a miscarriage; that is, the man who actually beat the 17-year-old would be unaffected by the law. Second, the bill lacks the language necessary to prevent the prosecution of pregnant women who accidentally miscarry. For instance, if a pregnant woman drove without a seatbelt and crashed, ending the pregnancy, she could be charged with homicide due to her recklessness. Same goes for a woman whose husband abused her, if she chose not to leave the man. In this sense, the bill is so sweeping as to be reckless itself, allowing for the possibility that women whose miscarriages already devastated them could end up serving long-term prison sentences.

I had a couple problems, however, with the arguments used against the bill by Missy Bird, the executive director of Planned Parenthood Action Fund of Utah. She makes the case that one of the problems with the bill is that it may drive women with substance abuse problems to not seek help, fearing that they might miscarry and be charged with homicide. With this statement, I agree wholeheartedly. However, she goes on to defend pregnant women with substance abuse problems by saying that “science makes clear that drug use by pregnant women does not create unique risks” and that “the commonly thought belief that pregnant women who use drugs are engaging in behavior that is likely to cause a stillbirth or miscarriage is wrong.” While I haven’t researched the effects of drug use on pregnancies, I think we can all agree that it is best for pregnant women to abstain from drugs—Bird’s explanation seems to let pregnant women “off the hook” for their destructive behavior. I would maintain that those with substance abuse problems should ideally feel comfortable getting help (not going “underground” with their problems) but should by no means be enabled by insistence that their addiction will not harm their child.

While this bill is shocking in its extremity, I think one of the things we should be discussing (that was never mentioned in this article) is why women feel pressured to induce miscarriages in the first place. Is it that they could get an abortion, but somehow the thought of having the fetus terminated less directly is easier for them to handle than actually walking into a clinic? Do they feel so much shame in their decision that they feel they must hide it under the guise of a violent accident? Or are legal abortions so difficult to obtain by some women that they feel they have no other choice?

image from davhor‘s flickr