Goddammit, Indiana. Goddamn you, Patricia Miller.
For those of you who haven’t been following every detail, this is my home state — not born here but pretty damned well raised. I’ve suffered through and been witness to a lot of stupid law in the last few years, but this one takes the cake.
Even though this bill will not pass (and I have to cross my fingers here because my fellow Hoosiers keep surprising me with their utter bigotry) it does reveal disturbing truths about our attitudes on faith, parenthood, sexuality, and entitlement. How curious that electable Republicans will do everything in their power to strongarm and legislate that pregnancies never end in abortion… while trying to ensure that certain people may never parent natural or adopted children. Unless they have a state license.
Further adding to what Jill wrote below, I found this article that puts the law and the fallout in greater detail.
An interim legislative committee is considering a bill that would prohibit gays, lesbians and single people in Indiana from using medical science to assist them in having a child. Sen. Patricia Miller (R-Indianapolis) said state law does not have regulations on assisted reproduction and should have similar requirements to adoption in Indiana.
Miller acknowledged that the legislation would be “enormously controversial.”
Um, understatement.
Bueller? Bueller?
“If were going to try to put Indiana on the map, I wouldn’t go this route,” said Betty Cockrum, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Indiana. “It feels pretty chilling. It is governmental intrusion into a very private part of our lives.”
I’ve worked with Betty on several occasions and know that despite her position at Planned Parenthood, she has plenty of friends on either side of the aisle in Indy. Even without Cockrum’s political clout, this legislation absolutely will not pass. It is clearly unconstitutional and so freaking wingnutty that nobody but Patricia Miller — and anyone else who doesn’t mind being lampooned and berated from coast to coast — will put their name on it.
The bill defines assisted reproduction as causing pregnancy by means other than sexual intercourse, including intrauterine insemination, donation of an egg, donation of an embryo, in vitro fertilization and transfer of an embryo, and sperm injection.
It then requires “intended parents” to be married to each other and says an unmarried person may not be an intended parent.
A doctor cannot begin an assisted reproduction technology procedure that may result in a child being born until the intended parents have received a certificate of satisfactory completion of an assessment required under the bill. The assessment is similar to what is required for infant adoption and would be conducted by a licensed child placing agency in Indiana.
The required information includes the fertility history of the parents, education and employment information, personality descriptions, verification of marital status, child care plans and criminal history checks. Description of the family lifestyle of the intended parents also is required, including participation in faith-based or church activities.
The legislation appears to affect some married couples, although the rough draft is unclear at times. Miller said the draft will be clarified before a vote.
The bill does not apply to assisted reproduction in which the child is the genetic child of both of the intended parents, for example, the sperm is from the father and the egg is from the mother. But married couples that need one or the other would still have to go through an assessment process and establish parentage in a court.
I can think of at least one long-term, committed, and more than financially stable couple that would be affected by this bill. And livid, I might add.
Ken Falk, legal director for the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, said his office began hearing about the bill Friday, a day after the rough draft was discussed by the Health Finance Commission. He said it sets up a clear discrimination that would be difficult to uphold in court, and considers the bill to be unique nationally.
“My question is ‘What is the danger that we are legislating against?’ Are we saying that only married persons should be able to be parents, which is certainly a slap in the face to many same-sex couples but also to many who do not have a partner but have undertaken being a parent,” Falk said.
Well, I can think of one offended Hoosier. I’d raise my hand and look around expectantly for everyone to point at me, but I figure my offense is obvious.
Miller said the state often reacted to problems and that she wanted to be proactive on this issue. “We’re not trying to stop people from having kids; we’re just trying to find some guidelines,” she said.
But that is exactly what this bill is designed to do. It is designed to prevent certain kinds of people from having children, or adopting children, or becoming parents in any way, shape, or form– namely anyone who isn’t married.
Which makes that anti-same sex marriage ban passed earlier this year mighty convenient.
She acknowledged such a law would bar single people from using methods other than sexual intercourse but said “all the studies indicate the best environment for a child is to have a two-parent family — a mother and a father.”
And what the hell are the consequences of not being a nice, rich, church-going, married couple who gets pregnant? Jail time? Child Protective Services knocking down your door? What?
Let her know what you think:
Sen. Patricia Miller
(317) 232-9400
(800) 382-9467
“Misrepresented” indeed. If you haven’t gotten enough of this train wreck, read more here.
I’m fucking moving.