That draconian fertility law in Indiana
OK, so I was really restrained when I blogged about this one yesterday. I didn’t say anything about the American Taliban, or about slavery, nor did I mention the Handmaid’s Tale once. The feminist blogosphere in general has been more sharply critical. In fact, even the bloggers over at Family Scholars, where doubt is often expressed about the ethics of current use of assisted reproductive technology (ART), are dubious about the proposed Indiana law (some commenters are defending it, though).
I suspect that a desire to prevent gay and lesbian couples from having children using ART may be a driving force behind the bill, but if you look at the text of the bill, it goes way beyond that. Not only are unmarried people barred from receiving ART, but married couples have to apply for a certificate allowing them to get fertility treatment, and, in doing so, have to supply large amounts of information about their medical history, work, hobbies, and church involvement. I seriously doubt this law, if passed, would be constitutional, and I expect it won’t be passed (surely even people who want to legally bar unmarried people from using ART aren’t prepared to allow the government to discriminate based on religion?). Still, given how quickly Italy flipped from being the Wild West of reproductive technology to being really strict about it, I’m not sure even an outlandishly draconian proposal may not be a harbinger of things to come.