Creates provisions relating to abortion and assistance to pregnant women and families
Impact
If passed, SJR17 would amend the Missouri Constitution to enshrine these restrictions on abortion law, essentially centralizing authority over abortion to the state level. The resolution imposes legal penalties on healthcare providers who perform abortions outside the defined parameters, which may deter physicians from providing necessary care to pregnant women in critical situations. Furthermore, the amendment would allow for an income tax credit for contributions to organizations that support pregnant women, though it expressly prohibits contributions to entities that perform or refer for abortions. This could influence state funding and the resources available to expectant mothers.
Summary
SJR17 is a Senate Joint Resolution that proposes a constitutional amendment regarding abortion laws in Missouri. It establishes strict regulations that restrict abortion procedures to cases of medical emergencies only, further defining what constitutes a medical emergency. The bill outlines significant penalties, classifying violations as class B felonies, and sets forth criteria under which a medical professional could perform an abortion without facing legal repercussions. The language of the bill emphasizes the protection of unborn children and aims to reduce abortion access in the state.
Contention
The proposed changes have generated notable controversy among lawmakers and members of the public. Proponents argue that the bill reflects the moral stance against abortion and aims to protect unborn lives. They believe that the protections offered in the amendment will ensure support for mothers during pregnancy. However, opponents criticize the resolution as an infringement on women's rights and personal healthcare choices, highlighting concerns over the potential for harm when abortion is only permissible under narrowly defined circumstances. The requirement for any future exceptions to be put to a vote adds another layer of contention, as it may limit legislative flexibility to respond to varying healthcare needs.