A recent involving whether a couple undergoing in vitro fertilization could sue a fertility clinic for negligently destroying embryos sparked contentious debates about assisted reproductive technology (ART). These debates led the U.S.
Senate to bring up two expansive ART bills for a vote on unanimous consent. . While the moral and ethical questions on the merits of ART are worthwhile to consider, the introduction of this topic in
Congress has also opened the door for a long-awaited discussion about women’s reproductive conditions and infertility more broadly. Since the 1960s, women’s reproductive health has been co-opted by the second, third and fourth waves of the feminist movement. Reproductive health is viewed simplistically and synonymously with access to
abortion and contraception. With the backing of the political and medical community, the feminist movement seemed focused purely on self-determination and women’s autonomy rather than addressing some of the most prevalent female health conditions. Until now, Congress has shown little interest in addressing common reproductive conditions. Of the five bills introduced in the 118th Congress that mention endometriosis, fibroids or polycystic ovary syndrome, none have made it out of committee, and not a single one is sponsored or co-sponsored by a
Republican member of Congress. While
Republicans need to speak clearly about the dignity of human life during the embryonic stage of human development, they, as the self-described pro-woman and pro-family party, should also support the funding and research for reproductive conditions and illnesses that affect
Women and their fertility. That is pro-life, pro-woman and pro-family. At least , although the number of women with endometriosis is believed to be even higher. This is because it takes, on average, a decade or more to receive a diagnosis. There are many reasons for this delay. First, at an early age, females are told that painful periods, irregular periods, heavy periods and leg and back pain—characteristic symptoms of endometriosis—are normal and should be ignored. Second, often, the first response to reproductive illness symptoms is prescribing contraception, which masks the symptoms and ignores the underlying cause. Third, the only reliable way to diagnose and treat endometriosis is laparoscopic excision surgery, which is a surgical procedure where the diseased tissue is cut from the visible organs and structures. Finding a surgeon with the expertise and willingness to perform this surgery is difficult. In addition to barriers within the medical community to accurately diagnose and successfully treat women’s reproductive conditions, there is also a dearth of funding for research. Endometriosis, for example, is a generally unknown disease. There is no agreed-upon cause, and as of now, there is no cure. In 2022, amounted to only $16 million, which is “0.04% of the total NIH budget,” or “$2/person with endometriosis/year.” Other reproductive health conditions fair no better. With such a significant percentage of women struggling with these conditions and the absence of information available, there is a gap to fill for the research on these conditions. But to perform research, funding is required. Members of Congress, especially Republicans, ought to consider their role in supporting women’s health holistically beyond questions about the polarizing topic of abortion. Republicans have an opportunity to step into a supportive role for an undisputed demand. With President Biden’s recent , which “seeks to fundamentally change how we approach and fund women’s health research in the United States” and gives a number of directives to federal agencies to support this goal, Republicans should consider the crucial constituency, especially suburban women, who might be swayed by the Democrats’ new approach to a wider view of women’s reproductive health. Republican members of Congress should fill the gap of support for women’s reproductive health, which is still largely unexplored by the legislative branch. Funding for research, treatment and exposure for reproductive conditions and fertility awareness methods/natural family planning, such as the Creighton Model or Marquette Method, could occur through stand-alone bills or, as has been done in the past, the appropriations process. Such an approach, if done well, presents an opportunity for a bipartisan pro-woman policy without confronting differing stances on abortion, contraception or assisted reproductive technology. It’s a win-win for the Republicans. They can support women and families without touching the morally complex debate around in vitro fertilization, a practice that, in the
United States, routinely involves the destruction of embryos and selective abortions.