Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) has sought to minimize fears regarding access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) being jeopardized by far-right lawmakers, suggesting that Democratic efforts to introduce protective legislation are merely attempts to “falsely push fear” ahead of the 2024 elections.
In an interview with PBS Wisconsin on Monday, Johnson asserted, “IVF, access to it, is not under threat anywhere.” However, this claim has been challenged by reproductive rights advocates and experts, particularly in light of recent rulings and legislation in Alabama.
Johnson referenced a decision from the Alabama Supreme Court earlier this year, which declared embryos to have the same political rights as children based on the state’s “fetal personhood” standards. This ruling led to a temporary suspension of IVF treatments across Alabama. Johnson inaccurately stated that the issue had been fully resolved, claiming, “Alabama legislature corrected that and reinstated their ability in Alabama to have IVF.” While the state did pass a law shielding IVF clinics from the court’s ruling, legal experts warn that this law could face challenges, potentially reversing the protections it provides. Even the law’s sponsor acknowledged it as a “temporary fix.”
Furthermore, Johnson’s assertions overlook the precarious status of IVF in Alabama, where it remains only marginally protected. Ten other states in the U.S. have similar “fetal personhood” laws that could also threaten IVF access, and around a dozen more states are contemplating enacting such measures.
“You can get IVF in every state. It’s not under any threat,” Johnson insisted, labeling concerns as “a made-up issue.” He dismissed any protective legislation as attempts to instill fear regarding potential GOP actions against IVF and contraceptives. “I support IVF; I just don’t, I’m just not gonna go along with the fearmongering,” he added.
However, reproductive rights experts counter Johnson’s claims, highlighting that fetal personhood laws can significantly restrict access to IVF treatments and other aspects of reproductive healthcare. Dana Sussman, deputy executive director at Pregnancy Justice, articulated concerns that such laws could be weaponized against individuals seeking to self-manage abortion, navigate pregnancy loss, or utilize IVF. “The concern that we have here is that prosecutors or litigants will start to use those laws to criminalize behavior during pregnancy or go after IVF,” Sussman stated.
Grace Howard, an associate professor of Justice Studies at San Jose State University, warned that once any aspect of reproductive rights is criminalized, the path toward further criminalization against pregnant individuals becomes clearer.
In an op-ed for Truthout, abortion rights activist Lauren Rankin articulated that the push against IVF and the establishment of fetal personhood laws aim to undermine the right to privacy and promote a theocratic approach to reproductive rights. She noted that while Republican leaders may shy away from discussing this unpopular ruling, their silence does not equate to support for reproductive rights, as they continue to oppose efforts to protect IVF access.
Related topics:
