‘Fetus’ or ‘preborn child’? Idaho lawmaker introduces bill to change dozens of words
BOISE – A Republican lawmaker introduced a bill Tuesday to replace the term “fetus” in Idaho law with “preborn child.”
Rep. Julianne Young, R-Blackfoot, introduced the bill to the House State Affairs Committee on the second day of this year’s legislative session.
Young said the bill does not “change legal definitions” and is therefore not a policy change. The bill changes the wording in at least 70 places in Idaho law.
“It does replace a medicalized term with a term that we all understand to be a person, which is the position of the state of Idaho,” Young told the committee.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade, which ended the constitutional right to an abortion, Idaho has enacted some of the most limiting abortion laws in the country and almost entirely outlawed the procedure.
The state faces multiple ongoing lawsuits over its abortion bans, and Republican lawmakers have discussed in recent months how the state’s exemptions apply to doctors who face medical decisions when the health of a pregnant patient is seriously threatened. Maternal-fetal medicine doctors have reported leaving the state over the laws.
Rep. Colin Nash, D-Boise, told Young that he wants to know whether the wording changes could convey further legal rights to fetuses. The bill was introduced Tuesday and will be scheduled for a committee hearing.
The bill has caused unease among abortion rights advocates, who fear that giving rights to fetuses would take rights away from pregnant people.
Elisabeth Smith, state policy director with the Center for Reproductive Rights, told the Idaho Statesman in an interview that similar language changes have been enacted in other states, but they alone do not generally give more rights to fetuses. She said the legal ramifications hinge on the specific places where words would be altered.
Smith pointed out that “preborn child” already appears in Idaho law and is the language used in the state’s six-week abortion ban.
“This gets to the larger question of, ‘What does it mean if a fetus has the same rights as a living, breathing, existing human being, in Idaho or in any other state?’ ” Smith said.
Since the end of Roe v. Wade, some states have pushed to enact “legal personhood” for fetuses.
Smith said some states have passed laws attempting to confer rights to fetuses similar to those that people have, but that those laws have yet to be litigated. She said she had concerns about how wording changes might affect surrogate pregnancies or child support prior to birth.
“If the goal is to treat embryos and fetuses like people, that is an absurd result that would harm pregnant people, their families (and) communities even more than the Idaho abortion ban has already harmed all of those people,” she said.
In a news release, Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates for Idaho called the proposal a move away from “medical accuracy” that could create “legal ambiguity.”
“Despite the blatant pain and suffering caused by the abortion ban on the books today, the fact that this is where lawmakers are choosing to put their energy is beyond disappointing,” Mistie DelliCarpini-Tolman, Planned Parenthood’s state director, said in the news release.