Bookmark and Share

On Prenatal Care, Pro-Life Principles Trump Other Issues

 

March 2, 2012 

Having moved past the mid-point of its 2012 regular session—37 of the 60 legislative days were completed as of March 1—the Nebraska Legislature is focused on legislation with priority status. Each of the 49 lawmakers has chosen a priority bill and each of 14 standing committees, plus the Executive Board, has designated two priority bills. In addition, the Speaker of the Legislature has prioritized 25 other proposals.

The Speaker, Sen. Mike Flood of Norfolk, will determine the scheduling of the 104 priority bills for the remaining days of the session. Some time might be set aside as well for moving some minimally substantive, non-controversial measures through the process on a time-limited basis known as the consent calendar.

From the perspective of the Nebraska Catholic Conference, LB 599 is a highly significant priority bill. It would reinstate a pro-life policy that was rather suddenly terminated two years ago, after decades of assisting the health and well-being of unborn children of impoverished mothers.

In late 2009, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services notified Nebraska that its decades-long policy of providing access to prenatal health care through Medicaid had to be terminated for some unborn children. The reason? Medicaid does not include the unborn as eligible recipients of financially-assisted medical care, which is the way the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services had long been administering coverage for prenatal health care. Nebraska was warned that Medicaid only considers the eligibility of the pregnant woman. Under Medicaid rules, pregnant women who, even though they qualify as impoverished, are nevertheless ineligible for prenatal care coverage if they are unauthorized immigrants or incarcerated or subject to public-assistance sanctions.

So, Nebraska had to stop what it had been doing on behalf of some vulnerable unborn children in impoverished families. It was estimated the number of cases so impacted on an annual basis was more than 1,500.

Nevertheless, a way of re-instating access to prenatal care for these vulnerable unborn children, notwithstanding the disqualification of their mothers, was readily apparent. Another federal-state joint program, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, recognizes the unborn as eligible recipients in their own right. For CHIP purposes, the definition of "child" explicitly includes unborn children "from conception to birth."

CHIP has a specific unborn-child option that states can apply for and implement. What’s more, the state’s financial match rate is less for CHIP than it is for "regular" Medicaid. This is a significant economic factor, but an even more significant economic factor is the undisputable evidence that prenatal health care results in healthier babies and considerable cost savings over time.

In early March 2010, Archbishop George Lucas, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz and Bishop William Dendinger joined in writing to Governor Dave Heineman, urging him to authorize application for the CHIP unborn child option.

Describing it as "an important and urgent Pro Life matter," the Bishops wrote: "The immigration status of their mothers should not be allowed to adversely affect the health and well-being of the unborn children. When balanced against the legitimate public-policy concerns about illegal immigration, caring for the unborn children should be the higher priority, as the right thing to do."

Regrettably, the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services has declined to apply for CHIP’s unborn-child option. Readily apparent is that Governor Heineman’s administration has chosen to view this as an immigration issue rather than a pro-life or health-care issue. "No benefits for the illegals" is the political mantra.

The flaw in that assertion is that these unborn children, who are at risk of not receiving vitally important prenatal health care with this means of access denied, are not "illegals." Either they have no immigration status or they are presumptive citizens, because they will be citizens upon birth. In any event, they are CHIP-eligible.

In 2010, an effort was made—through LB 1110—to legislatively direct Nebraska DHHS to apply for the unborn-child option under CHIP. That effort failed to garner enough support. LB 599 is a renewed effort to accomplish the objective.

There are at least four reasons why LB 599 is a significant pro life issue; for which pro life Nebraskans urgently need to speak up in support of the unborn as the Legislature decides on public policy. First, it is potentially harmful to the health and even the lives of unborn children not to provide for their prenatal care. Second, failing to implement this specific and readily available means of access to prenatal health care for unborn children unjustly punishes them for the circumstances and actions of their mothers. Third, the lack of access to prenatal health care could be a decisive factor in causing some pregnant women to choose abortion over childbirth, each time a tragedy. Fourth, denying prenatal care coverage in these circumstances of family poverty is an affront to the individual human dignity of the unborn and to pro life principles.

For more information ion this issue, visit www.nebcathcon.org.

 

You can contact Jim at the

Nebraska Catholic Conference, 215 Centennial Mall South

Suite 310, Lincoln, NE 68508;

jrcncc@neb.rr.com

2013 Southern Nebraska Register Publication Dates

January 4
January 11
January 18
January 25
February 1
February 8
February 15
February 22
March 1
March 8
March 15
March 22
March 29
April 5
April 12
April 19
April 26
May 3
May 10
May 17
May 24
May 31
June 14
June 28
July 12
July 26
August 9
August 23
September 6
September 13
September 20
September 27
October 4
October 11
October 18
October 25
November 1
November 8
November 15
November 22
November 27 (Wed.)
December 6
December 13
December 20
(Resume Jan 4, 2014)