For some OC congressional candidates, pivot of IVF treatment abortion debate is personal – Orange County Register

When you turn on a television, you’re sure to be immediately hit with a campaign advertisement. And chances are it’s about abortion.

But in this election campaign the discussion – and also the attack advertising – has taken a turn. Candidates should address not just abortion, but reproductive health care more broadly, particularly access to fertility treatments.

“We definitely wanted the candidates to talk about their positions on sexual and reproductive health care and the full scope of what that means,” said Jennifer Wonnacott of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California.

In Orange County’s six congressional races, nearly every candidate said in a Register questionnaire that if elected they would work to protect access to in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments.

And for some, it’s a deeply personal issue.

Rep. Michelle Steel is the Republican incumbent in California’s 45th Congressional District, one of the most closely watched races in the country this cycle — and she’s also a mother of two. She turned to IVF, she said in a campaign ad, when she and her husband were struggling to start a family.

“It was a miracle for us,” Steel said in the 30-second spot. “And today we are blessed with two beautiful daughters.”

For Joe Kerr, it was artificial insemination that gave him his son Joey.

“Without access to fertility treatments and conception alternatives like IVF, I would not have had my son,” said Kerr, a Democrat running for California’s 40th Congressional District. “I wouldn’t have a family.”

“I’m a grandma about IVF,” said Rep. Young Kim, the incumbent in CA-40.

There are countless reasons why access to fertility treatments — as opposed to just abortion — has become a flashpoint this election cycle: the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed states to ban abortions; the Alabama Supreme Court ruling earlier this year that required hospitals to halt IVF treatments until a new law could be passed; Both presidential candidates have spoken out about access to fertility treatments, particularly IVF.

“There is no problem on an island,” said Dan Schnur, a former campaign consultant who teaches political messaging at UC Berkeley and USC. “Once a discussion begins about how to deal with a particular policy issue, it naturally extends to other related policy areas.”

“When a candidate talks about the economy, it’s difficult for them to limit the conversation to just jobs, taxes or inflation because they all move parts of a larger whole,” he added. “The same thing exists in this subject area.”

Abortion has become a top issue for women under 30, according to a recent poll from KFF, a health policy organization that surveyed voters across the country last month.

It was also a key issue for voters in the 2022 midterm elections, but this is the first presidential election since the Supreme Court decision changed the landscape for abortion access. And in these two years, it has become clear how this ruling has affected other healthcare decisions, such as fertility treatments.

“Two years ago, congressional candidates from both parties spoke about these issues, but they were not asked to drown out (former President Donald) Trump or (Vice President Kamala) Harris,” Schnur said. “A candidate running in a competitive House district will be trying to appeal to very different voters nationally than Harris or Trump. Sometimes their messages are the same, but often they are not, especially on issues like these.”

Trump has said he supports access to fertility treatments and has vowed that the government would either pay for treatments like IVF or require insurance companies to cover them.

Orange County’s Republican congressional candidates have also promised, particularly in close races, to support access to treatment.

“I support access to IVF and believe this should be an issue left to each state to establish appropriate health and safety policies,” said Scott Baugh, a candidate in California’s 47th Congressional District, one of the most watched races in the country.

Matt Gunderson of the 49th Congressional District has campaigned as a pro-choice Republican. He said he believes abortions should be “safe, legal and rare” and that women should be able to make their own decisions about their health care.

“I strongly oppose a federal ban on IVF or abortion because I believe these decisions should remain in the hands of the individual, not the government,” Gunderson said. “It is important to protect women’s rights and freedoms as they make deeply personal decisions about their own bodies and their future.”

And Steel, who has been in Congress since 2020, noted that she had co-sponsored legislation that would require private insurance plans to cover IVF and introduced a resolution expressing support for fertility treatment.

However, her critics point out that she signed on as a co-signer of a bill that “declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution belongs to every human being” and defines this as “including the timing of fertilization, cloning or any other She faced backlash for including her name in the bill, which could jeopardize access to IVF, and ultimately withdrew her name from it.

Derek Tran, the Democratic candidate in the CA-45 race, said he believes Congress should ensure that “necessary medical services are accessible and protected so that every woman can make decisions about her body and her family’s future without having to encounter prohibitive obstacles or inequalities.”

“Right now there are extremists in Congress who want politicians to make these kinds of personal medical decisions for women,” he said.

Rep. Mike Levin, the incumbent in the CA-49 race, noted that he brought an IVF doctor to the State of the Union earlier this year.

“I am doing everything I can to raise awareness of the anti-choice threat to IVF and combat that threat,” Levin said.

“Women deserve every right to decide what is best for themselves, their bodies and their families, not for the government,” said Rep. Lou Correa, D-Santa Ana. “Fundamentally, these decisions and a woman’s right to choose are best left to a woman, her doctor and her God.”

Parmis Khatibi, a conservative voter and president of the California Women’s Leadership Association, said she is looking for candidates who will advocate for both women and children – during pregnancy and after birth. For them, that includes things like childcare and fertility treatments to support mental health.

“Financial concerns should not be the reason why a woman decides to end the life of her unborn child,” Khatibi said. “I think we want to see a plan to restore hope in America’s promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all.”

Find all 12 candidates’ answers to our question about fertility treatment protections – and how they felt about other issues like immigration, the cost of living and artificial intelligence – in our voter guide.