Share on facebook
Share on twitter

Missouri Victory for Women and Babies! SB 793 Becomes Law!

The following statement can be attributed to Pam Fichter, President of Missouri Right to Life:

Missouri Right to Life applauds Governor Jay Nixon for not vetoing SB793!

During the 2010 Legislative Session, the Missouri Senate and House took up and passed SB 793 requiring that, 24 hours before a woman has an abortion, she be given the opportunity to view an ultrasound, receive information on the development of her baby including the ability to feel pain, alternatives to abortion, and the father’s responsibility under Missouri law.

Today, Governor Nixon has allowed this legislation to become law. Per the Missouri Constitution, Governor Nixon’s decision to neither veto nor sign the bill is a decision to allow SB 793 to go into effect. In essence, a non-veto is a win for women in Missouri who will now receive critical information before making an abortion decision. Because of Governor Nixon’s decision to allow women to be more fully informed, we believe that more expectant mothers will choose life for their babies. Missouri Right to Life has worked hard for several years to pass this legislation and is very pleased to see it become law.

SB 793 also prohibits abortion coverage in the insurance exchanges created by the new federal health care reform legislation. We can’t stop our federal tax dollars from paying for abortion outside of Missouri, but this legislation will help prevent that from happening in Missouri.

We thank Governor Nixon and the Senate and House members who supported this life-saving legislation.

0 thoughts on “Missouri Victory for Women and Babies! SB 793 Becomes Law!”

  1. Pingback: Reflections of a Paralytic » Home Stretch!

  2. As the phrase “given the opportunity” was used regarding the ultrasound and other information, does that mean it was prohibited by law before? Women in Missouri must be considered very ignorant to believe they don’t know those things already. Who pays the cost of an abortion to protect the life of the woman, or in the case of rape or incest? The rapist or relative responsible?

  3. Exactly how is this considered a “Win” for women? Now, due to this law being passed there is an extra $100-1000 tacked on to the cost of the abortion that the insurance companies are not legally allowed to cover. This by all accounts should be considered a LOSS for women. Religious beliefs aside, I don’t see how the state limiting what the insurance companies (or the patient) is allowed to cover is a win for anybody.

Scroll to Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.