A critical health-focused ballot measure on the November 5 election ballot is Amendment 3, or the “Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative.” The amendment would establish the constitutional right to an abortion. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022, nearly all abortions became illegal in Missouri, with few exceptions for the health of the pregnant person.
To achieve our vision of zero health disparities, the Community Health Commission of Missouri prioritizes achieving health equity. The passing of Amendment 3 would support and improve maternal health outcomes by removing barriers to access to necessary health care and reinforcing the belief that everyone in our state should have the opportunity to determine if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant.
In addition to abortion, the amendment would also solidify other reproductive rights into the constitution, such as postpartum care, miscarriage care, respectful birthing conditions, and birth control. Birth control is still legal in Missouri, but the amendment would enshrine the right to access forms of contraception into the Missouri Constitution.
If the Amendment passes, the General Assembly will have the opportunity to regulate abortion after the point of fetal viability. When a pregnancy reaches fetal viability, it means the fetus could survive outside of the womb. However, the government will not be allowed to delay or restrict an abortion past that point if the pregnant person’s life is at stake and a health care provider deems an abortion necessary. The proposed amendment eliminates penalties for pregnancy outcomes, including miscarriage, stillbirth, and abortion. The government will also not be allowed to “discriminate against persons providing or obtaining reproductive health care or assisting another person in doing so.”
Frequently Asked Questions
No, not without government regulation and only to protect the health of the birthing person. Amendment 3 allows for government regulations after the point of fetal viability, which is typically around 24 weeks.
When rare third-trimester (weeks 28-40) abortions do happen, these decisions are made in the context of serious and often life-threatening medical conditions or severe fetal abnormalities. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show less than 1% of abortions were performed at or after 21 weeks
Seeking an abortion after the point of viability is not a decision made in isolation or on a whim—they involve licensed healthcare professionals, who follow strict medical guidelines to ensure that any care provided is in line with the patient’s needs and with the goal of minimizing suffering.
No. Amendment 3 has nothing to do with gender-affirming health care for minors or adults and does not include language about gender-affirming care. Amendment 3 would not change the way Missouri regulates this care or the insurance that covers it.
While some may speculate about gender-affirming care being included under reproductive freedom in the future, it is not the focus or intent of this particular amendment, nor is that likely to be considered by the courts of Missouri. If broader definitions were considered down the road, all care in Missouri would still need to adhere to widely accepted clinical standards and evidence-based medicine. This means that any care provided—whether it’s care protected in this amendment or otherwise—will continue to be subject to rigorous medical oversight to ensure it’s safe and appropriate.
Yes! Missouri’s Western District Court of Appeals already ruled in October 2023 that abortion providers would remain liable for malpractice if abortion rights were restored in the state.
In reality, Amendment 3 seeks to protect the right to abortion and ensuring it’s treated as a legitimate medical procedure, governed by the same rigorous clinical and evidence-based standards that apply to other healthcare services. Rather than making abortion lawless or unregulated, Amendment 3 restores abortion as a protected medical service and empowers providers to make decisions based on science and the health of their patients, rather than politics. Ultimately, this helps ensure that anyone seeking an abortion in Missouri receives safe, medically sound care.
Current Missouri law does not provide exceptions for rape or incest. The only exceptions are for medical emergencies that endanger the life of the pregnant individual or pose a serious risk of significant and irreversible damage to a major bodily function. If amendment 3 is rejected, current Missouri law will remain in place, which outlaws non-medically necessary abortions.
Access to abortion in Missouri—and in many states—raises significant equity concerns due to how restrictions disproportionately affect people based on socioeconomic status, race, geographic location, and other factors.
Socioeconomic Status
Abortion access restrictions often place a heavier burden on lower-income individuals. Missouri, for example, has implemented waiting periods and mandatory counseling, which means people may need to take multiple days off work and incur travel and lodging costs to access services, as clinics are often scarce or far from rural areas. Lower-income individuals have fewer resources to cover these additional costs and often cannot afford to travel out of state if necessary.
Racial Disparities
Racial inequities in healthcare access compound the issue. Black and Hispanic communities face higher poverty rates in Missouri, increasing their reliance on accessible reproductive healthcare. Limited abortion access disproportionately impacts women of color, who often experience systemic barriers in healthcare, leading to poorer health outcomes, higher maternal mortality rates, and reduced access to family planning resources.
Geographic Inequality
Missouri has very few abortion providers, and most are located in urban areas, making access difficult for people in rural regions. Residents in rural Missouri, where there are few reproductive healthcare services, must travel long distances to find a provider, facing additional transportation costs and the potential stigma of traveling openly for an abortion.
Gender Equity
Restricting abortion access reinforces inequities in gender autonomy. Reproductive choices significantly affect educational and career opportunities, financial stability, and personal agency, disproportionately impacting birthing people who may become pregnant. Limited abortion access restricts these opportunities, entrenching gender disparities.
For more information about frequently asked questions and clarification around misinformation, check out this article by the Kansas City Star.
Ballot Summary Lawsuit
The Secretary of State created a summary of the amendment designed to mislead voters. As a result, abortion-rights activists challenged this summary, claiming that voters were being misled.
A Missouri judge agreed with the activists and ruled that the summary was unfair and created unnecessary confusion about the amendment. The initial summary led voters to believe the amendment would allow medical professionals to perform abortions negligently or criminally.
In reality, the proposed amendment aims to eliminate criminal penalties for providers who perform abortions and for patients who are seeking them. Physicians in Missouri currently face penalties of up to 15 years in prison if they perform an abortion.
Maternal Health Cost in Missouri
Many birthing people struggle to afford abortions, especially those without health insurance. The Hyde amendment was introduced at the federal level in order to restrict funding for abortion access. The Hyde Amendment requires that federal funds cannot be used to cover abortions unless the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, or if the pregnancy endangers the mother’s life. This means that abortions in Missouri are only funded by Medicaid if their abortion meets those specific requirements. However, the majority of people who tend to seek abortions are covered under Medicaid, and this lack of funding due to the Hyde Amendment often leads to devastating consequences, both physically and financially.
Restricting reproductive health care, such as abortions, has far-reaching consequences. If abortion was completely banned in the United States, the overall number of maternal deaths would rise by 24%. Maternal deaths among Black birthing people would rise by 39%. The US currently has one of the highest maternal mortality rates among industrialized countries.
Missouri already presents a high risk for unfavorable reproductive health outcomes. These outcomes are primarily due to inadequate access to quality reproductive health services, which is driven by socioeconomic determinants, limited access to primary healthcare, lack of mental health support, and substance use. The abortion-restriction in Missouri only exacerbates the maternal, perinatal, and neonatal mortality rates. 39% of the counties in Missouri are maternity care deserts, meaning birthing people must travel farther to see providers.
Abortion-Access Data
The point of Fetal Viability is considered to be around the 24th week of pregnancy. In 2022, the majority of abortions were performed prior to the 24 week mark (just over 99%). The bulk of abortions are typically performed before the 9 week mark (59%). This data is based on recorded abortions in 2022, and does not take into account the trigger ban that went into effect after Roe was overturned. The Guttmacher Institute has recorded that in 2023 over 10,000 Missouri women sought reproductive care in Kansas and Illinois. Self-managed medication abortions have increased by 26,000 across the country.
The Bottom Line
When abortions and reproductive health care are restricted, people die of preventable causes. Thousands of women across Missouri have been facing struggles since the abortion ban. Many struggle to find a provider to care for their basic needs. Others are struggling with unplanned pregnancies. Abortion bans do not help women and birthing people, but a “yes” on Amendment 3 helps all Missourians achieve health equity.
We know that access to reproductive healthcare is critical for health equity. Restricting abortion disproportionately affects marginalized groups, including low-income women, women of color, and those with limited access to healthcare, exacerbating existing health disparities. By safeguarding abortion rights, the measure would ensure that all women, regardless of socioeconomic status, have the ability to make informed decisions about their health, reducing barriers to comprehensive care and promoting overall reproductive justice.
I am in favor of amendment 3. However, I do not believe that abortion should be a form of birth control. Why is there not a bigger push on educating and providing birth control? This would help eliminate the birth control abortions. I think this is a huge problem, not just in Missouri, but the whole country.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment and for supporting Amendment 3. We share your belief that comprehensive education and access to birth control are essential in addressing reproductive health needs and reducing the need for abortion. At the core of Amendment 3 is the protection of reproductive freedom, ensuring that people retain control over their health care decisions. Supporting both access to birth control and the right to choose are essential parts of a broader reproductive justice framework, and we will continue advocating for both.
There is a vast array of OTC birth control methods, including the pill now. There should be no unwanted pregnancies!!!!
Hi Marcia! While there are many over-the-counter birth control options available, no method is 100% effective, even with the use of condoms, and access to these methods are not equal across communities. Life circumstances, health factors, and even financial limitations can affect people’s ability to access and consistently use birth control. Amendment 3 is designed to protect the full range of reproductive healthcare options to support all Missourians in making the best choices for themselves.
The point of visibility? If aborted is murder. Right? What are the reasons a person would wait until the fetus can survive outside of the womb? That is why I want to vote in the negative
Thank you for your comment and for sharing your perspective. We recognize that this is a complex issue that evokes strong feelings on all sides, especially when it comes to defining and understanding medical milestones like viability.
At its core, we believe that access to abortion is an equity issue. The ability to choose when and how to receive medical care, including abortion, is fundamental to ensuring that everyone has control over their body, livelihood and future. While we respect the importance of nuanced discussions around topics like reproductive health care, our support will always stand by the belief that reproductive freedom includes the right to make deeply personal decisions without interference, including abortion.
There are cases where the fetus dies in the womb at 6-9 months along, right now women have to carry a dead baby to term. That can cause immense health issues, even killing the mother. There are many more reasons. It’s not just about killing babies. We are trying to protect our right to stay alive in the case of a pregnancy gone wrong.
Thank you for sharing your perspective, April! We appreciate your support of Amendment 3 and also want to emphasize how important it is able to voice our differences and create a space for conversation- we know that the health, safety, and wellbeing of Missourians is the final goal for all of us community members!
I feel woman should be able to get n abortion in the case of : rape,incest, or the life of the mother is at stake. Abortion shouldn’t be used as birth control. Past the 1st month is too late for one.
Hi Teri, thank you for your comment and sharing your perspective! As we have shared in other comments, we strongly support access to all reproductive health care, including birth control, and believe that Amendment 3 ensures individuals maintain control over their healthcare choices. Advocating for both access to birth control and the right to choose is a key aspect of a broader reproductive justice approach, and we remain committed to supporting both.
Why shield healthcare providers from accountability? Paragraph 5 is a get-off-the-hook clause for healthcare providers regardless of the services provided. That doesn’t seem very equitable or even remotely woman-friendly. It sounds to me like women are being exploited so that those profiting from providing services can make more money without the threat of lawsuits.
Hi Joy, thank you for your thoughtful comment and commitment to health equity! We understand your concerns, but it’s important to clarify the intention and impact of Missouri Amendment 3. Right now, under current law, performing or receiving an abortion in most cases is illegal in Missouri, which can lead to severe legal consequences for both healthcare providers and patients. Amendment 3 seeks to change this by protecting the right to abortion and ensuring it’s treated as a legitimate medical procedure, governed by the same rigorous clinical and evidence-based standards that apply to other healthcare services. Rather than making abortion lawless or unregulated, Amendment 3 restores abortion as a protected medical service and empowers providers to make decisions based on science and the health of their patients, rather than politics. Ultimately, this helps ensure that anyone seeking an abortion in Missouri receives safe, medically sound care.
None of the comments were clear if the amendment is rejected will women have the ability to have an abortion that through incest or rape and special medical health issues yes or no
Thank you for your question! Current Missouri law does not provide exceptions for rape or incest. The only exceptions are for medical emergencies that endanger the life of the pregnant individual or pose a serious risk of significant and irreversible damage to a major bodily function. If amendment 3 is rejected, current Missouri law will remain in place, which outlaws non-medically necessary abortions.
Abortion in any case beyond 12 weeks is murder in my opinion but should be allowed in a few circumstances/exceptions before the 12 weeks. It seems to me a yes vote on this amendment is removing all restrictions and that’s just not acceptable. I also don’t feel that the responsibility should fall onto the taxpayer. I do feel Missouri law should be changed to include rape and incest but this amendment does more harm than that little bit of good. Of course this blog shows the few worst case scenarios but statistics for rape and incest abortions are very low as well. The fact remains we are a mobile society and since abortions are provided in states all around us I am not persuaded that supporting Amendment 3 is the best thing for Missouri.
Thank you for sharing your perspective! We understand your concerns about the balance between protecting certain exceptions and maintaining restrictions on abortion.
We would like to clarify that the amendment does not remove all restrictions on abortion. In fact, it allows for regulations that are consistent with widely accepted clinical standards and evidence-based medicine. This framework ensures that abortion remains a safe, medical procedure, while still permitting reasonable regulations. The amendment also explicitly permits restrictions on later-term abortions after the window of fetal viability, consistent with the health and safety of the pregnant person. While it’s true that cases involving rape and incest are statistically less common, the impact of these exceptions is profound for those affected. Currently, Missouri law lacks adequate protections for survivors or birthing people generally, and this amendment would allow for care in traumatic or complicated circumstances without criminal penalties for providers or patients. It is also worth considering that not everyone has the resources to travel to another state for care, and many face significant burdens when trying to access essential healthcare services, particularly in emergency situations.
Ultimately, we believe that Amendment 3 is about restoring access to safe, equitable health care.
“Restricting reproductive health care, such as abortions, has far-reaching consequences. If abortion was completely banned in the United States, the overall number of maternal deaths would rise by 24%” But we are not wanting to completely ban abortions. As you mentioned, “If amendment 3 is rejected, current Missouri law will remain in place, which outlaws non-medically necessary abortions.” So we will still allow abortions when it comes to the safety of women. The only thing that changes with this amendment is now we will allow people to use abortion as a back up for birth control.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts! While it’s true that Missouri law allows for abortions in cases where a woman’s life is in danger, Amendment 3 focuses on improving access to reproductive healthcare and addressing health disparities across the state. As highlighted in the blog, the Community Health Commission of Missouri prioritizes achieving health equity, and part of that vision includes ensuring everyone has the opportunity to make decisions about their reproductive health, including if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant. Amendment 3 would remove barriers to necessary healthcare, which can have a demonstrably positive impact on maternal health outcomes. By allowing birthing people more control over their reproductive choices, we can support better health outcomes and ensure that everyone has access to the care they need based on their unique circumstances, not just in medical emergencies.
Thank you for taking such an important and thoughtful stance. This amendment is not only essential in securing our most fundamental right-to control what happens within our own bodies, but also paves so many pathways for improving maternal and child health across the state.
Thank you so much for your support and for recognizing the importance of this amendment, Emily! We agree that the right to make personal healthcare decisions is fundamental, and it’s encouraging to hear that others appreciate the broader impact its passage will have on improving maternal and child health in Missouri.
Thank you for providing this forum to educate voters and to create dialogue around this issue. I think no one is “pro-abortion.” Missourians are smart enough to know that women who seek abortions are not doing so as a method of birth control. They may seek an abortion because their birth control failed and they are not equipped, for whatever reason, to go through with a pregnancy and carry the pregnancy to term. But most women don’t intentionally have unprotected sex with the plan of just having expensive (and now illegal) procedure to end the pregnancy as their primary form of birth control. The poor and the most vulnerable are adversely impacted by anti-abortion laws. Well-to-do women will still have abortions, just as they did before Roe. They can afford to go to other states or overseas. The poor will resort to back alley abortions, just as they did pre-Roe. Women will die. Make no mistake about what life will be like in the future if some politicians have their way. They will be tracking women’s periods, and arresting women who try to obtain out of state abortions. The government does not belong in our bedrooms or our doctors’ offices. We should keep our laws off women’s bodies.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comment and for contributing to this important conversation, Jodi! We appreciate your recognition of how complex and personal these decisions are, and how restrictive laws can have significant consequences, especially for vulnerable communities. we know that reproductive care can be a complicated issue for a lot of folks, but it is essential that voters understand the real-life impact these laws have on our communities and are able to make informed decisions. Thank you again for your insight!
I’m not against abortions , I do believe that the woman has the right to decide. But I also think at 12 weeks they should know what they want. Beyond 12 weeks I don’t believe they should . Unless they are in medical necessity or the baby is in medical problems. This amendment lets the baby grow to long . 12 weeks should be limit .
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your support of abortion-care, Cindy! We completely understand your concerns about pregnancy milestones and wanting to protect both the health of the pregnant person and their infant. we want to emphasize that Amendment 3 still allows for government regulations after the point of fetal viability. Many women do make decisions earlier in pregnancy, but for some, medical issues or personal circumstances don’t arise until after the first trimester. This amendment aims to ensure that when those situations happen, they can access the care they need without facing unnecessary barriers. We believe these protections are not about encouraging late-term abortions, but rather making sure that those difficult decisions can be made in consultation with a healthcare provider when absolutely necessary.
Hi!
How would you address the myths about the mental health portion of the ammendment?
How would you also address the fear mongering around gender affirming care?
Great questions, Meghan!
1.We assume you are referring to the fear that “mental health” will create some sort of third trimester “loophole” and create unregulated abortion access. To those with that fear, we would say that when it comes to third-trimester abortions, these decisions are made in the context of serious and often life-threatening medical conditions or severe fetal abnormalities. It’s crucial to understand that mental health, in this context, is not a catch-all excuse. Seeking an abortion after the point of viability is not a decision made in isolation or on a whim—they involve licensed healthcare professionals, who follow strict medical guidelines to ensure that any care provided is in line with the patient’s needs and with the goal of minimizing suffering. Additionally, abortions that are necessary after the point of fetal viability are exceedingly rare- data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that 93.1% of abortions were performed at or before 13 weeks of gestation and less than 1% were performed at or after 21 weeks.
This amendment would not change the evidence-based practice of medicine—it ensures that people in these rare, complex situations can still access the care they need, with the support of medical professionals, without facing legal penalties.
2. It’s true that the amendment includes language stating that reproductive freedom “includes but is not limited to” the listed areas, so some may wonder about its broader implications, including gender affirming care. However, it’s important to focus on what the amendment is currently addressing, which is necessary reproductive healthcare, including prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, and related services.
While some may speculate about gender-affirming care being included under reproductive freedom in the future, it is not the focus or intent of this particular amendment. If broader definitions were considered down the road, all care in Missouri would still need to adhere to widely accepted clinical standards and evidence-based medicine. This means that any care provided—whether it’s care protected in this amendment or otherwise—will continue to be subject to rigorous medical oversight to ensure it’s safe and appropriate.
Hi!
How would you answer some of this misinformation that’s going around?
Amendment 3 would invalidate any existing Iaws and prohibit new laws that voters on both
sides of the abortion issue support, including health and safety laws that protect women.
Amendment 3 prohibits any person from being penalized or prosecuted, regardless of the
outcome of actions associated with “reproductive” health. A health care professional could be directly responsible for the harm or death of a woman during an abortion, or the harm or death of a wanted child during delivery, and not be held liable for their actions. Women and families would not be allowed to sue the negligent person or organization, nor could the
government prosecute them.
Should Amendment 3 be onshrined in the Missouri constitution, well-funded, out-of-state
groups could sue Missouri to force taxpayer funding of abortions, which is already occurring
in Michigan.
More great questions!
Questions 1 and 2: The amendment does not invalidate all health and safety laws that protect women. In fact, it still allows for regulation, especially after fetal viability, as long as those regulations are consistent with accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine. The amendment would ensure that reproductive healthcare is safe and accessible, and any medical care provided must still meet the professional standards required in healthcare settings. That means regulations that are genuinely focused on protecting women’s health and safety, like ensuring procedures are performed by licensed professionals in proper medical facilities, will remain in place. The goal of the amendment is to protect access to essential reproductive healthcare and prevent criminal penalties for individuals seeking care, not to eliminate protections for patients.
3. We would respond that while some may fear Amendment 3’s passage could lead to lawsuits for funding, the amendment itself does not include any language that requires state funds to be allocated for abortion services. In Missouri, existing laws (such as the Hyde Amendment at the federal level), restrict the use of federal funds for abortions except in specific cases, such as when the life of the mother is in danger. At this time, Amendment 3 would not change this framework regarding funding. Additionally, we believe it’s crucial to distinguish between the potential for lawsuits and the actual provisions of the amendment. Amendment 3 is primarily focused on protecting access to reproductive healthcare and ensuring that individuals can make personal healthcare decisions without facing criminal penalties.
We would also encourage you to bring these questions regarding the legal and funding implications of the amendment to community partners who are legal experts!
Who is considered a healthcare provider and is allowed to perform abortions? I saw a psychologist is noted in the amendment as an individual who can perform abortions.
Hi Peggy, thank you for your question! It’s important to clarify that the amendment does not designate psychiatrists as healthcare providers who can perform abortions. Instead, it emphasizes that healthcare providers involved in reproductive health, including abortion care, must do so within the bounds of widely accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine. Abortion care would only be performed by appropriately licensed medical professionals- this typically includes obstetricians, gynecologists, and other qualified healthcare providers who are trained and authorized to perform these procedures.
The amendment is designed to ensure that any abortion care is provided by licensed professionals who adhere to established medical standards. This protects patient safety and ensures that individuals receive appropriate, high-quality care. If there are any concerns about the qualifications of those providing care, it’s essential to refer to the specific regulations and standards set forth by medical boards and professional organizations in Missouri.
If yes(passed) what ELSE does this admendent allow?
If no (not passed) abortion is still illegal unless medically necessary? And still allows birth control?
Hi Tara, thank you for your questions! According to the language of the amendment, if passed, this amendment would allow Missourians to make and carry out decisions related to reproductive health care which includes but is not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care and respectful birthing conditions. While the language of the amendment leaves some room for interpretation of additional aspects of reproductive freedom going forward, the current language ensures access to essential healthcare services without imposing criminal penalties. Concerns about gender-affirming care, tax-payer funding, sex work, or any other hypothetical, future scenarios are important discussions, but they are not addressed in the amendment itself.
If not passed, you are correct that abortion remains illegal in Missouri at any point in pregnancy except in very limited circumstances where it is deemed medically necessary to save the life of the pregnant person, without exceptions for rape or incest. Though birth control would currently remain legal in Missouri, the passage of the Right to Life of the Unborn Child Act (the law that made it illegal to perform an abortion) has created a highly restrictive environment for reproductive healthcare in our state. Lack of clear protections for reproductive rights has led to many barriers in accessing necessary healthcare. Amendment 3 seeks to protect reproductive freedom broadly, which includes not only access to abortion but also essential services like birth control and contraceptive methods. By enshrining the right to reproductive healthcare in the Missouri Constitution, Amendment 3 would help safeguard access to contraception and ensure that individuals have the ability to make informed choices about their reproductive health.
So were is all the information / explanations of the transgender surgery for minors without parental consent? I am seeing bill boards that say passing Prop 3 would make this legal. I have been told that this isn’t something that actually happens except in like .01% of cases.
Thank you for bringing up this important topic. It’s understandable to have concerns given the widespread confusion and misinformation circulating about this amendment.
To clarify, the language of Amendment 3 does not address or legalize transgender surgeries for minors without parental consent. If passed, this amendment would allow Missourians to make and carry out decisions related to reproductive health care which includes but is not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care and respectful birthing conditions. While the language of the amendment leaves some room for interpretation of additional aspects of reproductive freedom going forward, the current language ensures access to essential healthcare services without imposing criminal penalties.
As we have noted in other comments, while some may speculate about gender-affirming care being included under “reproductive freedom” in the future, it is not the focus or intent of this particular amendment. If broader definitions were considered down the road, all care in Missouri would still need to adhere to widely accepted clinical standards and evidence-based medicine. This means that any care provided—whether it’s care protected in this amendment or otherwise—will continue to be subject to rigorous medical oversight to ensure it’s safe and appropriate. Procedures involving gender-affirming care will continue to follow established medical guidelines, which prioritize informed consent and the well-being of the patient.
Open dialogue and accurate information are essential as we navigate these important discussions about healthcare rights. We encourage our community members to look at the facts and the actual language of the amendment rather than rely on sensationalized claims.
Thank you for putting together this summary and voicing your stance! So important for voters to hear the facts so we can make the best choices for reproductive healthcare in Missouri.
Thank you for your kind words! We completely agree that sharing accurate information is crucial for helping voters make informed decisions about reproductive healthcare in Missouri. We know that this amendment is essential to our mission of eliminating health disparities and ensuring that everyone has access to the care they need. Thank you for your continued support!
What about parental consent? I’ve seen nothing about that in Admenment 3. Can a minor get an abortion if amendment 3 is passed? And if so at what age? Can a minor also get contraceptive, top surgery, miscarriage care, or puberty blockers without parental consent?
Thank you for your question! The language in Amendment 3 itself does not specifically address parental consent for minors seeking abortions or other reproductive health care. If the amendment passes and restores abortion rights in Missouri, the existing laws that were in place before the 2022 abortion ban would still apply. These laws require minors to obtain parental consent or a court order before getting an abortion, unless the minor is legally emancipated.
While the amendment protects broader reproductive rights, any changes to parental consent laws would need to go through the courts, and it would be up to a judge to determine if those laws constitute government interference with reproductive decisions.
Does this amendment address IVF or what would happen to unviable embryos retrieved during then IVF process? I see a lot of differing information out there about how the passing or lack of passing this amendment would affect those undergoing fertility treatments.
Thank you for your question! While the amendment provides broad protections for reproductive rights—covering abortion, postpartum care, miscarriage care, respectful birthing conditions, and birth control—it does not specifically name in-vitro fertilization (IVF). However, IVF likely falls under the broader umbrella of reproductive freedom and respectful birthing conditions. In states with highly restrictive reproductive health laws, IVF often comes into question, and while it is currently still legal in Missouri, there’s always the risk of further legislation that could impose new restrictions. This is why it’s crucial to establish strong protections for all aspects of reproductive healthcare, ensuring that procedures like IVF remain safeguarded under Amendment 3.
As for unviable embryos retrieved during the IVF process, the amendment does not directly regulate what happens in these cases. For the time being, we are to assume IVF clinics and medical professionals would still follow widely accepted clinical standards and guidelines when dealing with embryos.
Does this also cover rights for women wanting to get their tubes tied but can’t because the doctor won’t let them? If men and women both had the opportunity to “get fixed” when they know they don’t want kids then it would decrease the need for abortion.
Great question, Elizabeth! While the amendment doesn’t specifically name procedures like getting tubes tied (tubal ligation), it broadly protects “reproductive freedom”, which likely includes the right to choose permanent sterilization methods such as tubal ligation for women or vasectomies for men. Amendment 3 reinforces the belief that everyone in our state should have the opportunity to determine if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant. If passed, this amendment would ensure that individuals have the freedom to make decisions about these procedures without unnecessary barriers, helping people take control of their reproductive future and potentially reducing the need for abortions.
If Amendment 3 is passed, what limitations would be in place to ensure abortions past 12 weeks are only in medically necessary situations?
Thank you for your question, Lisa! Under Amendment 3, the right to an abortion is protected up until the point of fetal viability, which is defined as the stage in pregnancy when, in the good faith judgment of a treating healthcare professional, there is a significant likelihood of the fetus’s sustained survival outside the uterus without extraordinary medical measures. This typically occurs around 24 weeks. After this point, the state can regulate abortions, but exceptions are allowed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person. These exceptions would still be based on the good faith judgment of the healthcare provider, ensuring that any abortion past viability is medically necessary and carefully evaluated.
Abortion is healthcare. I want women to have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies. Voting YES on 3!
We’re with you, Andrea! Thank you for your support of birthing people and health equity in Missouri and beyond!
It grieves me that we continue to pit women’s and unborn children’s rights against one another by lumping abortion in with other pregnancy/healthcare services. I would love to be able to vote for a law that protects children from abortion in the cases where their health and their mother’s health are NOT in danger (or as other have stated, “as a form of birth control”). AND I would love to vote for a law that provides all MO women equitable access to pregnancy services, birth control, medical care, pre/post-natal care, counseling, miscarriage, all the things women deserve, and to provide provisions to choose abortion when it is necessary for the survival of the mother or out of compassion for a child that will not survive. Why does it have to be one or the other? I find it important advocate for the rights of BOTH and protect mothers and their children in every way possible, not one or the other. There is SO MUCH about Amendment 3 that I am in favor of, and so many women suffering at the hands of MO lawmakers who are denying basic rights to women in the name of protecting the unborn. If we are truly pro-life than we should be working to help women flourish as much as we work to protect their babies. Outlawing abortion should not deny women pregnancy care services, and providing abortion options as essential life saving care should not mean there should not be restrictions and boundaries. It pains me that we have made such a complex issue into an all-or-nothing decision.
Hi Russel,
Wanting to protect both women and unborn children is a compassionate and deeply held view. However, abortion itself is a medical procedure that sometimes becomes necessary in ways that can’t be universally legislated or restricted without unintended harm. Protecting the right to abortion means that, in life-threatening situations or circumstances of unviable pregnancies, doctors can provide essential, often life-saving care without hesitation or legal risk. Ultimately, a law that protects abortion and pregnancy care services isn’t about choosing one over the other. It’s about acknowledging that all birthing people deserve access to the full spectrum of reproductive healthcare, regardless of their personal circumstances. In states with restrictive abortion laws, women face higher risks during pregnancy, especially in complex cases. Amendment 3 reflects a commitment to health equity, supporting both those who want to carry pregnancies and those who, for medical or deeply personal reasons, may need other options.