Creates the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act"
HB195 repeals and replaces Missouri’s existing section 188.035 with a new law titled the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” The bill states that any child born alive during or after an abortion or attempted abortion has the same rights, privileges, and immunities as any other live-born child. It requires a licensed, registered, or certified healthcare provider present at such a birth to use the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence that would be used for any other child born alive at the same gestational age, and to ensure the child is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.
The bill also creates reporting and enforcement requirements. Healthcare providers or hospital, physician’s office, or abortion clinic employees who know of a violation must report it to appropriate law enforcement, and failure to report is punishable by up to five years in prison and/or a fine. A person who knowingly performs or attempts an overt act that kills a child born alive in these circumstances is guilty of first-degree murder. In addition, the bill creates civil liability for a range of conduct related to unlawful abortions, self-induced abortions, and failures to comply with the born-alive care requirements, and it authorizes damages, attorney’s fees, and litigation costs in personal injury, bodily injury, and wrongful death actions.
HB195 would significantly affect abortion-related law in Missouri by expanding statutory protections for infants born alive after an abortion attempt and by adding both criminal and civil penalties tied to abortion-related conduct. It also specifies that a natural and spontaneous loss of an unborn child before fetal viability is not considered an abortion under Missouri law. The measure would affect healthcare providers, abortion clinics, hospitals, physicians, and others who may be involved in abortion care or in responding to a live birth after an abortion attempt.
The available voting history suggests the bill had substantial support in the House, passing perfection 107-42 and third reading 109-32. No committee transcript is available, but the vote margins indicate the bill was generally favored by a majority of members. The bill’s title and structure suggest it is part of a broader abortion-policy debate, and the inclusion of criminal penalties, mandatory reporting, and civil liability are the most likely areas of concern for opponents.
The main points of contention are likely to center on abortion rights, the scope of provider duties, and the bill’s enforcement mechanisms. Supporters would likely view the measure as a child-protection and medical-care safeguard for infants born alive, while critics may object that it increases criminal exposure for providers, creates broad civil liability, and could have a chilling effect on abortion care and related medical decision-making.
HB195 would repeal the current abortion-related born-alive provision in section 188.035, RSMo, and replace it with a broader statutory framework imposing affirmative care duties, mandatory reporting obligations, criminal penalties, and civil causes of action. It would directly affect abortion providers, hospitals, physician offices, and healthcare workers, while also creating new remedies for patients, families, and others harmed in abortion-related circumstances. The bill would also clarify that a spontaneous pre-viability loss is not an abortion under Missouri law.
The House votes show clear majority support for the bill, with passage on perfection and third reading by wide margins. That suggests the measure was viewed favorably by most House members, likely along partisan and policy lines associated with abortion regulation. No committee testimony is provided, but the bill’s framing as a “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” indicates strong support from proponents of abortion restrictions and likely opposition from abortion-rights advocates.
The most significant controversy is the bill’s abortion-related enforcement scheme. Opponents are likely to object to the mandatory reporting requirement, the criminal penalties for failure to report, the first-degree murder provision for intentional killing of a child born alive, and the broad civil liability provisions covering unlawful abortion, self-induced abortion, and speech integral to unlawful conduct. Supporters are likely to argue that the bill ensures appropriate medical care and legal protection for infants born alive after an abortion attempt. The bill’s treatment of consent, assumption of risk, and public-policy voiding of exculpatory agreements also suggests potential disputes over liability and patient autonomy.