EDITOR’S NOTE: Timothy Faber serves as legislative consultant for the Missouri Baptist Convention. This is the third in a series of articles covering the actions and results of the First Regular session of the 103rd General Assembly of the State of Missouri.
Some pro-life legislation gets a lot of headlines—like HJR73, which we will discuss at a later time—while other pro-life legislation gets passed over with little media attention, despite strong bipartisan support. One example is House Bill 121 (HB121), which passed the House with only one “no” vote, and then passed the Senate with only one “no” vote. It is still awaiting Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe’s signature.
HB121 began as a five-page bill sponsored by Representative Jim Murphy (R), but by the time it finally passed through the legislature it had grown into a 12-page bill. But there is still some good stuff in it.
First, HB121 creates the “Zero Cost Adoption Fund”. There have always been families willing to adopt, but the expenses of doing so have made it prohibitive. Adopting through a private agency can cost up to $60,000! Thankfully there is the Missouri Baptist Children’s Home and other agencies that provide “free” or at least low-cost adoptions, but even when working through these agencies there are expenses to adding a child to the home.
This bill helps to alleviate costs for families seeking to adopt. An increase in adoptions will result in fewer kids being in foster care and an increase in the number of families that are both willing and able to adopt. It is also good in that more babies will live, since adoption will be a more viable option for mothers who see no alternative to abortion. Everyone claims we want to do the best thing “for the children.” Wouldn’t it be better for a child to be adopted into a loving home with stability and belonging, rather than being bounced from house to house in foster care? And being adopted is certainly better than being put to death in an abortion clinic.
Taxpayers who contribute to this fund will receive a 100% tax credit toward their state taxes, up to a limit of 50% of their total tax liability. Allowing tax credits for those who support adoption is reasonable in that they are aiding in the state’s interest of finding permanent homes for these children. Furthermore, as kids are adopted into loving families, it will reduce the strain and the expense of the foster care system.
HB121 also modifies provisions in the National Diaper Bank program. Diaper banks that are affiliated with the National Diaper Bank program will receive and distribute diapers “to individuals free of charge, with the intention of reducing diaper need.” Contributions to such diaper banks are eligible for a 50% tax credit, up to the taxpayer’s total state tax liability.
HB121 also modifies the “Safe Place for Newborns Act.” Originally passed in 2002, the Safe Place for Newborns program provides for a parent to relinquish a child up to 45 days old by taking them to designated “baby boxes” at fire stations and other monitored locations. However, there have not been many of these Safe Baby boxes placed in the state, mainly because of funding. So HB121 creates a funding mechanism for the placement of more boxes. It also modifies the age by allowing a parent to leave a child up to 90 days old in such a box.
Before we get too upset about parents just leaving a child in a box, let us consider the following:
- First, they could have aborted the child and not given them a chance for life at all.
- Second, they could dispose of the child through neglect or intentional harm. Sadly, this happens too often.
- Third, these baby boxes are always in locations that are monitored 24/7, so the babies get immediate care and are placed in foster care. Hopefully, the “Zero Cost Adoption Fund,” mentioned above, will enable them to be more quickly adopted into homes, where they can be loved and well-cared for.
- Yes, this is a legislative answer for a moral problem. We, the church, must also be working on changing the hearts of individuals, so that there will not be as much need for the baby boxes. But to say that we shouldn’t have to have them is not an answer to the problem of unwanted children.
If you would like to read the actual wording of HB121 follow this link: https://documents.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills251/hlrbillspdf/0797S.06T.pdf.