Men Who Impregnate Women Won’t Face Any Consequences Under New “Pro-life” Bill


As Gov. Kay Ivey signed the draconian “pro-life” bill in her state last week, many people were devastated with the horrifying details about doctors who terminate a pregnancy could receive up to 99 years in jail, and that there will be no exceptions for men who have forced themselves upon girls, and that women and girls, no matter the age, will have to carry a fetus to term – no exceptions.
However, many forgot one “small” detail that is missing in all of this: Men.

What is missing from all of these new bills in Alabama, Missouri, Kentucky, Georgia, Utah, Mississippi, Ohio, Arkansas, is accountability or penalties for the impregnators.

Men who abandon their children and are later legally immune from both past and future child support don’t seem to be on anyone’s minds during this new rush to criminalize terminating pregnancies, and they should be! A woman can’t get pregnant on her own, of course, and this new definition about “when life begins” should prompt a lot of questions about how the law works when it comes to the moral and financial responsibilities of men.


So, if life starts at conception, shouldn’t the father also be required to pay for 50% of the medical bills incurred during pregnancy? Also, where is the list of actions required, under penalty of law, for fathers? For example, will the mother be allowed his health insurance plan if they are not married? Or, even worse, if the mother has a difficult pregnancy and cannot go to work, will the father be required to support her financially? It’s only logical, since life begins at conception, right? And what will be the penalty for the father that abandons their fetus? 99 years?