“Expectant Mothers” 32, defeats “Pregnant Persons” 16, at extraordinary Appropriations Committee meeting. Martha Marx champions “pregnant fathers.”

A pitched battle in the culture wars broke out at the Legislative Office Building Thursday afternoon. The Appropriations Committee was considering House Bill 5454, An Act Concerning Mental Health Services for Young Children and Their Caregivers.

The purpose of the bill is “to maximize federal resources for mental health services for young children, their caregivers and pregnant persons.” Representative Robyn Porter (D-New Haven) offered an amendment to add “expectant mothers” to the bill. Porter explained she was offering the amendment to add equity and inclusion to women, like herself, who have a womb.

Representative Jillian Gilchrest (D-West Hartford) was first up for excluding expectant mothers, explaining to Porter, a Black woman, that pregnant persons is the inclusive term. This, Gilchrest concluded, is the way she and others hope we are moving in this country.

Other legislators offered their notions of who gives birth and what a mother is.

Committee co-chair Representative Toni Walker (D-New Haven) offered a typically sensible note when she said the bill is about mental health but why not add “expectant mothers”?

Gilchrest returned to the debate by seeming to suggest that adding “expectant mothers” would damage the mental health of LGBTQ+ people.

Much debate followed, mostly in support of adding “expectant mothers.” There was no suggestion that “pregnant persons” should not be included, only that “expectant mothers” should be excluded.

Senator Martha Marx (D-New London) suggested adding “pregnant fathers” to the bill. Expect Marx’s moment to garner extended attention.

Senator Saud Anwar (D-South Windsor) said it was important that the language of the bill not be changed. Adding “expectant mothers” would be counterproductive to what the bill seeks to accomplish. You shall not, it seemed, speak of mothers in H.B. 5454.

Gilchrest returned to the debate to claim adding mothers to the bill was beyond the jurisdiction of the committee. Gilchrist’s committee voted to refer the bill to appropriations.

After a huddle, presiding co-chair state Senator Cathy Osten (D-Sprague) ruled the amendment and then the bill would be voted on.

The committee voted 32-16 in favor of adding “expectant mothers” to the bill, a proposal that many may be surprised raised such determined opposition in one committee that includes more than 25% of the membership of the General Assembly.

Published April 4, 2024.