Creates the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act"
HB1667 repeals Missouri’s existing section 188.035 and replaces it with a new provision 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 liveborn person. It also imposes duties on health care providers present at such a birth to use the same degree of care they would use for any other child of the same gestational age and to ensure immediate transport and admission to a hospital.
The bill creates reporting and enforcement requirements for health care providers and employees of hospitals, physician’s offices, and abortion clinics who know of a violation. Failure to report can result in criminal penalties, and a person who knowingly kills a child born alive in these circumstances is subject to first-degree murder charges. The bill also creates civil liability for a range of conduct related to unlawful abortions, self-induced abortions, and failures to comply with the provider duties, and it allows recovery of damages, attorney’s fees, and litigation costs. It further clarifies that a natural and spontaneous loss of an unborn child before fetal viability is not considered an abortion under Missouri law.
The bill’s impact is to expand Missouri law governing abortion-related conduct by adding explicit protections for infants born alive after an abortion attempt, along with criminal, civil, and reporting consequences for noncompliance. It would affect licensed health care providers, hospital and clinic employees, abortion providers, and others who supply means for unlawful or self-induced abortions, while also tying the new section to existing murder, wrongful death, and damages provisions in Missouri statutes.
Overall sentiment in the recorded legislative history appears supportive in the House, where the bill advanced on third reading with a strong majority after an earlier failed perfection vote. The available context shows no committee transcript debate, but the caption and vote pattern suggest the measure was treated as a pro-life enforcement bill with substantial backing from supporters. The final listed action, "Voted Do Pass (S)," indicates the bill also moved forward in the Senate.
The main points of contention are likely the bill’s abortion-related enforcement provisions, especially the criminal penalties, mandatory reporting requirement, and civil liability for conduct connected to unlawful or self-induced abortions. Opponents would likely focus on the bill’s effect on abortion providers and speech-related liability language, while supporters would emphasize the protection of infants born alive and the requirement that they receive immediate medical care and legal recognition as persons.
HB1667 would repeal and replace Missouri’s current born-alive abortion statute with a broader framework that defines and protects children born alive during or after an abortion attempt. It would impose affirmative duties on health care providers, create mandatory reporting obligations, and establish both criminal and civil penalties for violations. The bill would also interact with existing Missouri homicide, wrongful death, and damages laws by expressly authorizing first-degree murder charges, civil causes of action, attorney’s fees, and related remedies.
The legislative history suggests generally favorable sentiment among supporters, with the bill passing the House on third reading by a wide margin after an earlier failed perfection vote. The available vote record indicates the measure had enough support to advance despite some opposition, and the bill’s title and structure indicate it was framed as a child-protection and abortion-enforcement measure. No committee transcript is available, so the record does not show detailed floor or committee arguments, but the voting pattern points to clear partisan or ideological division.
The most likely areas of contention are the bill’s abortion restrictions and enforcement mechanisms. Critics would likely object to the criminal penalties, mandatory reporting duties, and civil liability provisions, especially the language reaching providers, employees, and those who supply instruments or drugs for unlawful or self-induced abortions. Supporters would argue that the bill is narrowly aimed at protecting infants who are born alive and ensuring they receive the same medical care and legal protections as any other child.