By Evelyn Lucado
Opinion Editor
In Jan. of 2025, Missouri Congressman Eric Burlison introduced to the House of Representatives House Resolution 722, also referred to as the Life at Conception Act. The bill, which aims to “protect the rights of unborn children,” raises serious concern for women’s reproductive rights in the wake of Roe vs. Wade.
Since the overturning of Roe, the arguments surrounding women’s rights have largely focused on morality and supposedly righteous vindication, as exemplified by this proposed bill. While this bill has yet to pass the house, it speaks to the larger conservative push for restrictions on abortion. The prevalent theological and moral arguments surrounding women’s reproductive rights are gravely overshadowing the tangible and deadly impacts of strict abortion bans.
According to congress.gov, the proposed bill aims “to Implement equal protection under the 14 article of amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.”
Congressman Burlison, a self-proclaimed Christian according to his website, appears to approach legislation through the lens of his religious convictions.
“Every life is a sacred gift from God, deserving of dignity and protection from the moment of conception,” Congressman Burlison said in a press release regarding H.R. 722.
Congressman Burlison’s proposed bill raises a multitude of questions surrounding how it would affect reproductive healthcare, pregnancy, and women’s rights. While there is no available text for H.R. 722, West Virginia Representative Alexander Mooney introduced a similar bill to Congress in Jan. 2023.
Representative Mooney’s proposed bill, House Resolution 432, titled the Life at Conception Act and backed by Congressman Burlison, aims to define life as beginning at conception under the Fourteenth Amendment, granting the “right to life” for every “unborn child.”
These bills fail to explain how the “right to life” of a fetus should be enforced or legislated.
While H.R. 432 specifies that the act does not call for the persecution of women in the event of a terminated pregnancy, it states no exemptions for cases of rape, incest, or risk to the mothers’ life.
Even so, similar legislation at the state level has proven that these exceptions to the rule are confusing to healthcare providers and may not be effective.
According to Tulane University, studies suggest that women in states with restrictive abortion bans suffer higher rates of maternal mortality. America’s maternal mortality rate, which has grown since the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, measured as death during or up to one year following pregnancy, is substantially higher than other developed nations.
While abortion law may stipulate exceptions to strict abortion bans in the event that a mothers’ life is in danger, the language of such bills does not take into account the fast-moving realities of medicine and medical emergencies. According to ProPublica, delays in emergency medical care have been heightened in states like Georgia under strict abortion bans.
Amber Thurman, a young Georgia mother who passed away after reportedly being forced to wait around 20 hours for an emergency dilation and curettage is one such woman affected by these restrictions.
According to CBS, Thurman suffered from complications following the use of a commonly used FDA-approved abortion pill. Thurman passed away from septic shock during an operation to remove the dead fetal tissue. It is unknown why Thurman did not receive surgery sooner. However, according to ProPublica, experts say her death was preventable.
At the time of Thurman’s passing, Georgia legislators had just implemented a strict six-week abortion ban following the overturn of Roe, according to CBS.
Some experts, according to ProPublica, have even gone as far as to say that restrictive laws “would pit doctors’ fears of prosecution against their patients’ health needs, requiring providers to make sure their patient was inarguably on the brink of death or facing ‘irreversible’ harm when they intervened with procedures like a D&C.”
Thurman is sadly one of many who have suffered under oppressive abortion bans.
According to an Associated Press analysis of federal hospital investigations, over 100 pregnant women who experience medical emergencies have been denied healthcare or turned away from emergency rooms since the fall of Roe in 2022, especially in states where medical professionals can face legal consequences for providing illegal abortions.
The confusing and repressive laws surrounding abortion in states like Texas, Florida, and Georgia have proven to be fatal, even with exceptions meant to save the life of a mother.
The arguments for the immorality of abortion do not take into consideration the women who have suffered without proper access to healthcare. Bills like the Life at Conception Act and the legislators behind these bills have yet to account for the real and palpable consequences of this legislation.
Congressman Burlison and Congressman Mooney arguments, while supposedly aiming to preserve life, may prove to have the opposite effect even with written exemptions to the rules.
Legislation surrounding reproductive healthcare must take into account the proven data and the expertise of professionals within the field instead of solely focusing on the perceived morality of terminating a pregnancy.
Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Photo Caption: Strict abortion bans are detrimental to women’s reproductive healthcare.