| Dearly Beloved Neighbor,
This past Thursday in our Appropriations Committee meeting we had a bill that was referred from the Human Services Committee, "HB5454: An Act Concerning Mental Health for Young Children and Their Caregivers" come before us. At first glance, the bill seemed straightforward. However, a deeper dive into the language showed that what some were calling "all-inclusive" language had indeed left out expectant mothers. As a result, there was a lengthy conversation during our caucus that involved me expressing my concerns and issues with this omission. Unfortunately, we were unable to come to a compromise in caucus, which led me and Rep. Minnie Gonzalez to propose a friendly amendment to insert "expectant mothers" in lines 5 and 22 after the word, "caregivers." Well, as you can imagine, the House Chair of the Human Services Committee and her supporters were not happy, and the debate on our amendment ensued. We had a riveting discussion. I encourage you to watch the video below from the 45-minute, 50-second mark to 1:42:57. Also, you can read all about it in the Hartford Courant HERE and in the CT NewsJunkie HERE.
Now, this wasn't about 'expectant mothers' vs. 'pregnant persons.' This was about putting mothers back into CT state law because we have been on a trajectory in CT of removing mothers out of policy and replacing it with terms like, "pregnant persons," and "birthing parents." I understand why we're doing this. The world has changed. Things are different and people are starting to identify differently than in years past. This is where Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) comes in. However, DEI should not come at the expense of EXCLUDING the foundation of creation - our mothers. So, to be told that the term is inclusive is blatantly inaccurate. Not for nothing, I am a woman with a womb who identifies as a woman, and who also identified during both of my pregnancies as an expectant mother, not a pregnant person. |
|
