4 October 2005 - 9:05am
Want to have a baby? Ask the government, first!
People have come to this site, and elsewhere, and expressed skepticism that Republicans are trying to ban birth control and control reproduction -- namely women's bodies. The evidence is all around us. You have but look at the news.
But here's something that really takes the cake -- or womb:
Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make
marriage a requirement for motherhood in the state of Indiana,
including specific criminal penalties for unmarried women who do
become pregnant "by means other than sexual intercourse."

This has to be a sick joke, right? RIGHT????
According to a draft of the recommended change in state law, every woman in Indiana seeking to become a mother through assisted
reproduction therapy such as in vitro fertilization, sperm donation, and egg donation, must first file for a "petition for parentage" in
their local county probate court.


Only women who are married will be considered for the "gestational certificate" that must be presented to any doctor who facilitates the pregnancy. Further, the "gestational certificate" will only be given to married couples that successfully complete the same screening process currently required by law of adoptive parents.
As it the draft of the new law reads now, an intended parent "who knowingly or willingly participates in an artificial reproduction
procedure" without court approval, "commits unauthorized reproduction, a Class B misdemeanor." The criminal charges will be
the same for physicians who commit "unauthorized practice of artificial reproduction."
The change in Indiana law to require marriage as a condition for motherhood and criminalizing "unauthorized reproduction" was introduced at a summer meeting of the Indiana General Assembly's Health Finance Commission on September 29 and a final version of the bill will come up for a vote at the next meeting at the end of this month.
Republican Senator Patricia Miller is both the Health Finance Commission Chair and the sponsor of the bill. She believes the new
law will protect children in the state of Indiana and make parenting laws more explicit.
[more]
Don't believe me? Read the draft legislation from the Indiana government's website (.pdf). Read the sickness. I've cut and pasted from the bill itself, line numbers and all.
This is not science fiction -- this is Indiana!
20061258.001/84 (19) October 3, 2005 (1:24pm)
(OBDAR)
Sec. 12. (a) Before intended parents may enter into a gestational agreement
4 and before conception occurs, the intended parents shall obtain an assessment from
5 a licensed child placing agency in the intended parents' state of residence.
6 (b) The assessment must follow the normal practice for assessments in a
7 domestic infant adoption procedure and must include the following information:
8 (1) The intended parents' motivation for entering into a gestational
9 agreement.
10 (2) The fertility history of the intended parents, including the
11 pregnancy history and response to pregnancy losses of the woman.
12 (3) An acknowledgment by the intended parents that the child may
13 not be genetically related to at least one (1) of the intended parents
14 depending on the type of medical procedure used.
15 (4) A list of the intended parents' family and friend support system.
16 (5) A plan for sharing any known genetic information with the child.
17 (6) Personal information about each intended parent, including the
18 following:
19 (A) Family of origin.
20 (B) Values.
21 (C) Relationships.
22 (D) Education.
23 (E) Employment and income.
24 (F) Hobbies and talents.
25 (G) Physical description, including the general health of the
26 individual.
27 (H) Birth verification.
28 (I) Personality description, including the strengths and
29 weaknesses of each intended parent.
30 (7) Description of any children residing in the intended parents' home.
20061258.001/84 (20) October 3, 2005 (1:24pm)
(OBDAR)
1 (8) A verification and evaluation of the intended parents' marital
2 relationship, including:
3 (A) the shared values and interests between the individuals;
4 (B) the manner in which conflict between the individuals is
5 resolved; and
6 (C) a history of the intended parents' relationship.
7 (9) Documentation of the dissolution of any prior marriage and an
8 assessment of the impact of the prior marriage on the intended
9 parents' relationship.
10 (10) A description of the family lifestyle of the intended parents,
11 include a description of individual participation in faith-based or
12 church activities, hobbies, and other interests.
13 (11) The intended parents' child rearing expectations and values.
14 (12) A description of the home and community, including verification
15 of the safety and security of the home.
16 (13) Child care plans.
17 (14) Statement of the assets, liabilities, investments, and ability of the
18 intended parents to manage finances, including the most recently filed
19 tax forms.
20 (15) A review of the local police records, the state and violent offender
21 directory, and a criminal history check as set forth in subsection (d).
22 (16) A letter of reference by a friend or family member.
23 (17) A written consent from:
24 (A) the gestational mother; and
25 (B) a donor, if used and if known, to use of the donation in the
26 medical procedure.
27 (18) The recommendation for participation in the gestational
28 agreement.
29 (c) The gestational mother shall receive psychological counseling. The
30 licensed child placing agency shall provide a certificate stating that the gestational
1 mother has received psychological counseling. The gestational mother may not
2 enter into a gestational agreement unless the person who provided the psychological
3 counseling states in writing that the gestational mother is psychologically competent
4 to enter into the agreement.
5 (d) Except as provided in subsection (e), the licensed child placing agency
6 shall conduct a criminal history check on each intended parent and any other
7 person who is currently residing in the intended parents' home.
8 (e) A licensed child placing agency is not required to conduct a criminal
9 history check on an intended parent if the intended parent provides the licensed
10 child placing agency with the results of a criminal history check conducted:
11 (1) in accordance with IC 31-9-2-22.5; and
12 (2) not more than one (1) year before the date on which the licensed
13 child placing agency provides written approval for the
14 commencement of the assisted reproduction procedure.
15 (f) The intended parents shall pay the fees and other costs of the criminal
16 history check required under this section.
17 (g) After completing the assessment described in this section, and if the child
18 placing agency approves the intended parents to enter into the gestational
19 agreement, the agency shall issue a certificate that the intended parents have
20 satisfactorily completed the assessment and are ready to enter into a gestational
21 agreement.
22 (h) A certificate issued under subsection (g) is valid for two (2) years.
23 (i) A physician may rely upon a certificate issued under this section to
24 commence assisted reproduction with the gestational mother.
25 (j) A certificate issued under subsection (f) must be filed with the petition
26 validate the gestational agreement.
Any questions?
media girl also blogs at other places.
Similar entries
store
Buy stuff here.
Comments
1) Are they fucking nuts?!
2) How much ya wanna bet that Wiccans, other Pagans, agnostics, Atheists, etc. will not be approved due to unsatisfactory ratings on the "values" and "family lifestyles" parts ("It's not religious discrimination, they just don't have good values!")
3) Are they fucking nuts?!
4) Can we say "e-u-g-e-n-i-c-s"?
5) How about "f-a-s-c-i-s-m"?
6) Are they fucking nuts?!
7) Is there any info about how they're making marriage a requirement for motherhood as applied to pregnancies from sexual intercourse?
8) How much ya wanna bet that they won't be accomplishing the above by dispensing birth control?
9) Are they fucking nuts?!
Actually, you can disregard questions 1,3,6,&9. I think we all know the answer.
I've heard lots of people, mostly childless, and many planning to stay that way, make comments about requiring people to get a license or pass a test before being allowed to have kids.
How is this different?
Imagine having to ask permission from some beaurocrat who doesn't know you from Adam, just so you can have a child.
How is that any different than Nazi eugenics?
I'm sorry, but I've had it with these Nazis, and I won't back down from calling them what they are. I've been known to say people should need a license to have a child out of exasperation, but the idea that anyone would take it seriously is just bizarre and draconian. Single women, straight or gay, will be subject to jail and fines if they become pregnant. This violates freedom of religion, it violates privacy - hell, it just plain VIOLATES!
The nerve of anyone to think they have a right to tell me how to live my life is galling. Why do these assholes think they have the right to tell everyone else how to live?
Support the Women's Autonomy and Sexual Sovereignty Movements
I'm sorry, but I've had it with these Nazis, and I won't back down from calling them what they are. I've been known to say people should need a license to have a child out of exasperation, but the idea that anyone would take it seriously is just bizarre and draconian. Single women, straight or gay, will be subject to jail and fines if they become pregnant. This violates freedom of religion, it violates privacy - hell, it just plain VIOLATES!
The nerve of anyone to think they have a right to tell me how to live my life is galling. Why do these assholes think they have the right to tell everyone else how to live?
Support the Women's Autonomy and Sexual Sovereignty Movements
www.manicexpressions.net
www.bitchingandmoaning.org
Yeah, it sucks. I live in Indiana and I was VERY disappointed to read about this because it is so ridiculously invasive and discriminatory. I really really hope it never makes it past the formative stages and from what I've been hearing I don't know that it will.
Anthony: the problem is that they are saying "only married opposite-sex relationships can really be defined as 'family' and therefore are the only place where we can allow you to have kids." So stupid.
Her hand got caught in the reproductive cookie jar. More at Feministe.
It's been on my mind for days, I've just been too stunned to reply. I mean, how do you even comment on such a suggestion?
www.manicexpressions.net
www.bitchingandmoaning.org
Telling a very loud no to the idiots who think they can control us through our children or lack there of.
I honestly had to wonder if the writers of this bill were smoking dope while shooting meth when writing this. Fictionalized creation of the law:
"dude man, listen i got a great idea. We can pass a law that will, like, stop those damn lezzies and welfare queens from having more children that'll vote democrate"
"holdup a sec lemme finish this one. I dunno, that's some strong shit. what if it gives us a bad trip?"
"Nah man, what are they gonna do?"
"Yeah your right, who would care?"
On second thought, I think they would have had to do something much stronger to do this. PCP probably.
Holy self-righteousness.
At least the bill was withdrawn in the face of public outrage.
Lesbians can have as many children as they want. This doesn't change any of that. Take a penis, stick it in. It works pretty much every time. The child has two parents, male and female, and the birth certificate says so. Of course many (if not most) lesbians will lie and falsify the birth record. But that option is always available.
Adoption, which rejiggers parentage by replacing a real parent with a false one, always requires intense scrutiny, at least since the days of the orphan train of early in the last century, and for good reason. Many, many children were abused.
Obviously some of the morons reading this site actually believe the legislation prevents people from fucking and making babies, but I can assure you it doesn't. Put that joint down, sober up, and read carefully, assuming you have any neurons left.
But look, if you are diddling with eugenics, selectively breeding by choosing special racially and religiously correct sperm donors from some cum catalog, you better believe that the government is going to want to know what's going on.
The last thing we need is people selectively breeding themselves and others like some kind of animal stock using IVF and AI to create some master race.
So yeah,when lesbians or straights or queers, or bisexuals, or animal fetishists or mater racers or ANY kind of people start doing selective breeding, the government has some legitimate interest. All this law does is keep on top of the scientific eugenic artificial insemination human breeders to know what is going on.
So government controlled breeding is not eugenics, but people having families on their own is? My my! You might consider a career in Communist China. I hear they're big on the whole War is Peace and Slavery is Freedom thing.
Meanwhile, you should understand that even the most draconian government regulations and controls can't keep you from being gay. It's okay if you are, you know.