This past week the Iowa House of Representatives debated and passed House File 573, a bill requiring an abortion provider to certify that prior to the performance of an abortion, the pregnant woman has been given the opportunity to view the ultrasound image and hear the heartbeat of the unborn baby.
Even though this legislation has virtually no chance of being considered in the Iowa Senate, it did provide for some teachable moments regarding the issue of life. For instance, I (along with nine co-sponsors) filed amendment H-1072 to this bill which included two simple words — “unborn child” — to more accurately describe the life in the womb.
While “fetus” is an innocuous technical term which medically describes the stage of development that the baby is in, it falls short of properly attributing the humanity and personhood of the life in utero.“Unborn child” is a more perspicuous term.
Some may object that “fetus” alone is defined in Iowa Code and “unborn child” is not. Therefore, they surmise, we should not be utilizing terms that have not been previously accepted.
Although a closer examination of this assertion finds that neither “fetus” nor “unborn child” are defined in Iowa Code, per se. However, both terms are defined in Iowa Administrative Code:
• “Embryo/fetus” means the developing human organism from conception until the time of birth. (641 IAC 38.2)
• “Unborn child” shall include an unborn child during the entire term of pregnancy. (441 IAC 40.21; 441 IAC 75.25; 441 IAC 75.50)
In addition to these definitions, Federal law also provides a revealing definition relating to the Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP). In that case “child” is defined as “an individual under the age of 19 including the period from conception to birth” (42 CFR part 457). So “unborn child” is, in fact, defined as much or more so than the term “fetus.”
In the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe vs. Wade decision, the court opined that if the states were ever to establish that the unborn fetus were a person, then all the due process rights and protections in the 14th Amendment would apply to that unborn person, and the so-called “right to an abortion” would have no merit.
It would appear that the State of Iowa and the Federal government already acknowledge the personhood of the fetus in administrative code with regards to entitlement programs. However, when it comes to equal protection under the law — as enumerated in the 14th Amendment — unborn children are being denied their inalienable right to life.
A few weeks ago, to illustrate the point that unborn children are people too, I read excerpts from Dr. Seuss’ “Horton Hears A Who” on the House floor. Once Horton the elephant discovers the existence of life “no bigger than the head of a pin,” he sets out on a mission to protect these life forms that are unable to speak up for themselves.
Horton’s oft repeated conviction throughout the book: “A person’s a person, no matter how small.” The story of the sanctity and preciousness of life is so profound and yet so simple, that even Dr. Seuss can tell it.
Rep. Greg Heartsill (R-Columbia) represents Iowa House District 28.