The fetal homicide bill still lives.The bill, which would allow those who cause miscarriages to be charged with homicide, was on the brink of death before it got a Monday reprieve.The measure has already passed the GOP-controlled state House, but was bottled up in a Senate democratic committee, where it was expected to die. On Monday, the bill’s Republican Senate sponsor, Shawn Mitchell of Broomfield, asked the committee for extra time to see if he could amend it to make it palatable to Senate Democrats before the committee rules on the measure.The chair of the Senate Judiciary committee, Sen. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, said it was unlikely Mitchell would  gain Democratic backers, but granted him the added time.The measure was introduced by Colorado Springs Republican Rep. Janak Joshi and has been controversial from the start. Republicans and pro-life groups contend it has nothing to do with abortion, while Democrats and pro-choice advocates say it is worded too broadly and could be used against women who terminate pregnancies.Carroll, expected to vote against the bill, said testimony on the measure Monday that the fetal homicide bill would include several “common sense” crimes. She referred to cases cited during the hearing by 4th Judicial District Attorney Dan May and other pro-life advocates, who spoke of women deliberately beaten so they would miscarry.But first, she said, they have to ensure that the proposed law wouldn’t lead down the wrong track.During his testimony, May checked off numerous criminal cases where a charge of murder or homicide would have been appropriate, and repeated an argument from Mitchell that 34 other states have fetal homicide laws.May said a soldier in Afghanistan who shot several civilians was being charged with an extra homicide because he killed a woman who was pregnant.“This is an unborn member of our society,” May told the committee.Planned Parenthood attorney Kevin Paul, however, said the 34 state fetal homicide laws are all very different, and that most have specific burdens of proof to meet that are spelled out clearly. No such definitions are included in Joshi’s bill.Paul argued with Mitchell for more than half an hour over the implications of the bill. Paul said that the bill’s phrasing, “unborn members of the species homo sapiens,” could be interpreted as granting the status of “personhood” on a fetus. And two failed ballot issues over the last five years tried to do that, in an effort to ban abortion, he said.Opponents also said there are laws in place prosecutors can use against criminals who cause miscarriages. Mitchell and others said those laws aren’t strong enough.Joshi said he’s hopeful that Mitchell will be able to amend the bill to the Democrats’ satisfaction, but he won’t accept it being “watered down.”

Photo by Gazette File