Are They Really Pro-Life?

It's easy to puff about labeling a newly fertilized egg a "person," but if Georgia legislators are really serious about wanting babies have a chance at life, then they ought to be advocating for women's health care instead of trying to create loopholes for insurance companies. Why? Healthy women are less likely to have premature babies-babies who are at increased risk of early death and who come with a 26 billion dollar a year national price tag for services like prenatal care.

According to the Annie E. Casey Foundation, in the U.S., one in every eight babies is born prematurely and is at increased risk for many developmental disorders and health problems. In Georgia, more than 12% of babies are born too soon, earning the state a ranking of 32nd in the nation-nothing to brag about.

Healthy mothers-including mental health-are less likely to deliver before 37 weeks. Babies are more likely to be born healthy if we improve access to quality health care for women, especially for those at higher risk for preterm birth.

We hear so much about the "paramount right to life" from Georgia republicans (and a couple of democrats), but when it comes to making sure mothers have access to health care, their silence is deafening. It's easy to engage in political rhetoric and drive wedge issues onto the ballot. It's a whole lot harder to actually do something to help babies arrive healthy and remain healthy. It seems to me that these legislators are on board as long as we're just talking about sperm and eggs, fine as long as the baby lives inside the mother, but when they can look the person in the eye, their commitment to life diminishes. Are they really pro-life, or just pro-birth, no matter how early?

Sphere: Related Content

We Have Completely Lost Our Minds

The "adultification" of children is now officially absurd. We expect our children to swim in a sea of sexually exploitative media that adults use for fun and profit, and then are surprised when kids act out sexually.

This morning, when I turned on the computer, one of the top stories was about thirteen-year-old boys being charged with sex crimes for slapping girls on the butt at school, and another was about a nine-year-old getting offered a credit card. In our public schools, a child who gets into a fight or "disrupts a school"(a rather broad concept that surely would've included some of the pranks we all pulled as teens), doesn't just get disciplined by the school, but, in addition, often faces charges in juvenile court. We are criminalizing typical teen behavior, applying a one-size-fits-all model and failing to empower the adults closest to the situations-parents and teachers-to apply discipline, reason and compassion.

We have simply forgotten to treat children like, well, children. In Georgia, the Genarlow Wilson case has gotten lots of attention, but the truth is, it's just the tip of the iceberg. I'm no idealist when it comes to addressing sexual offenders or disruptive or dangerous teens. At one point in my life I supervised a residential treatment program for children who had committed sexual offenses and had other significant behavior problems. Gov. Perdue would never be able to cure these children with just the right foster family. For most the intervention was too little, too late. We have dealt our children a ridiculous hand-we expect them to manage adult information and responsibilities and then suffer adult consequences. And, at the same time, we fail to provide their most basic needs, and then marvel that they behave as they do.

Check the new Kids Count data.

Sphere: Related Content