A very bizarre moment occurred during last night’s committee hearing over Iowa House Republicans’ 20-week abortion ban. Republican Representative Shannon Lundgren, during an exchange with Democratic Representative John Forbes, suggested that a woman who suffered a miscarriage would need to carry that fetus to term.

Forbes posed the question to Lundgren in relation to his daughter, who is in her 21st week of pregnancy. He said that while everything is going well with the pregnancy, he worried what would happen if she were to miscarriage, whether this new legislation would force her to continue on with the fetus until her own life becomes in danger.

“[This bill] was written to save babies’ lives,” Lundgren told Forbes. “I understand what you’re saying. This fetus, baby, is not alive, I would concur, in that instance, if your daughter’s life was not in danger, that yes, she would have to carry that baby.”

House Republican staff clarified soon after that Lundgren misspoke, and the bill does have a section that allows for removal of a dead fetus.

But what is disturbing is both that Lundgren apparently didn’t realize that and that no fellow Republican legislators corrected the error in committee. 11 of 12 Republicans on the committee ended up voting for the bill, so it’s fair to question whether they did so believing what Lundgren seemed to – that women who have a miscarriage in Iowa will have to bring the dead fetus to term, or at least continue to carry it until it endangers the mother’s life.

There’s all kinds of problems with that idea, aside from the incredible cruelty to force a woman who’s had a traumatic experience to continue suffering through it because of some misinterpreted religious zeal. Medically, it’s just downright dangerous, raising the risk of a sepsis infection that can be deadly.

Republican legislators had already scaled back the bill after previously introducing a draconian “fetal heartbeat” amendment, which would have effectively banned most abortions after 6 weeks.

Shannon Lundgren is a freshman legislator from rural Dubuque, who won over the heavily-Catholic district while running on a strongly pro-life platform. She likely made a big ask of House leadership to be the floor manager of this very high-profile bill. Perhaps it should have been given to someone with a little more experience, or someone who had actually studied their own legislation and was better prepared to defend it accurately.

All Lundgren and her fellow Republicans did last night was reaffirm many Iowans’ concerns that this abortion legislation is heartless and punitive to women, as well as medically unsafe. Even with the miscarriage exception that is actually in the bill, it still targets women who often find themselves in difficult situations. Abortions that occur after 20 weeks often involve some sort of serious medical problem with the fetus, or involved women who were raped, were emotionally distressed, and didn’t discover the pregnancy until later in its term.

So while Republicans can pat themselves on the back for potentially stopping some abortions in Iowa if this legislation is signed into law, in reality they’re just targeting vulnerable women, and Lundgren’s verbal slip-up revealed more about Republicans’ real intentions than perhaps they wanted to.

 

by Pat Rynard
Posted 3/30/17

16 thoughts on “Does Iowa GOP Think Miscarriages Should Be Brought To Term?

  1. As a grown woman with 2 grown daughters the absolute ignorance shown by these women about their own anatomy is sickening. The total disregard for anyone else’s opinion I find quite in line with “alternative reality” world view today. I think I will stick with your opinion does not trump my civil rights whoever you think you are.

  2. The language in the bill is quite imprecise grammatically and could be construed either way. The phrase “or to remove a dead fetus” can be read grammatically either as an extension of the “other than …” phrasing or as an additional description of what constitutes an abortion. Very sloppy drafting of legislation. Another reason for more, not less, funding of education in Iowa, especially English and grammar!

  3. Actually, the language in the bill is precise enough. Now, had there been a comma before “or to remove…” THEN the removal would have been considered an abortion. However, there is no comma so it is part of the “other than…” phrase. That said, I’m with Dennis. Republicans, keep your “small government” out of women’s privates!

  4. So, a man can refuse or forget to wear a condom and there are no repercussions, but a woman can be a victim or rape or incest, have a dead fetus in her uterus and be required to carry it full term, possibly suffering septicemia — This bill needs to die a slow, painful death!

  5. How dare this woman–this elected official–damn a woman to such personal hell and grief? Hopefully, her own daughters just may have to experience such personal trauma. Shame on you, Lundgren.

  6. When even women do not care if women live or die, something terrible has happened! How is it a woman knows nothing of women’s reproductive processes or is it better the woman just dies? Republicans-AND democrats-just stay away from sex, you obviously are not familiar with the subject! GEEZUZ this is beyond stupid!

  7. Ms. Lundgren is something wrong with your brain? Are you stupid? Just mean? What is your problem? Clearly you are not an educated person, especially when it comes to medical issues. Your twisted religious extremism is a mental illness. Resign and get help. The people of Iowa deserve better and you clearly have serious problems.

    1. You are so correct with your analysis. It isn’t smaller or smarter government. It’s dumb and dumber.

  8. This does not make sense to me. The human body will abort the fetus when needed. So if it;s in the 21 week and a natural misscarriage happens is this against the law? Because this would not be full term. I’ve got an idea. how bought you’ll stay out of our vaginas.

  9. This is beyond stupid ??How in the entire hell do you “bring a miscarried baby to term?!” Furthermore,like someone else mentioned,making the mother go forward raises even more problems such her being more traumatized,running the risk of infection and even death. How about you do some research before you open your mouth!!!
    Signed
    A mother whi has had multiple miscarriages.

  10. Shannon Lundgren is a self-hating troglodyte. She ought to have to take delivery of all the women’s corpses that will result from deaths from hemmorhages and sepsis after women are denied common-sense health care to assuage her non-science-based superstition.

  11. I can only pray that she is still of childbearing age and quickly finds herself in precisely this tragic, heartbreaking, and dangerous circumstance. Apparently nothing else will teach her empathy.

  12. I always thought a miscarriage meant that the baby came out already but not alive. If the baby is dead, they should be able to take it out. If the baby is alive, abortion should not be an option. IMHO

  13. I don’t know what is more egregious, the Republicans playing “God” with the very personal choices of others or
    their poor understanding of reproduction.
    This bill will affect the number of ob-gyn physicians practicing in Iowa and jeopardize the accreditation of the
    ob-gyn residency program at the University of Iowa.
    Forcing a female who becomes pregnant as a result of rape and incest is unconscionable and lacking in compassionate.
    Perhaps the Republicans in the legislature will take on the responsibility of rearing a child that is the product of rape or incest. But then, it is about the fetus, not the child. Look how they are shortchanging education and healthcare.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *