A Kentucky bill with bi-partisan support could radically change how child support works in the state. On Tuesday, the Kentucky Senate passed a bill granting the right to collect child support for a child before they’re born — allowing parents to re-coup expenses from during their pregnancy.
The bill, which passed the senate 36-2, would allow parents to retroactively apply for child support for pregnancy expenses a year after they’ve given birth.
Many have noted the potential benefits for pregnant people, particularly Black mothers for whom childbirth is not only more dangerous — but also, in many cases, more expensive.
Black mothers also disproportionately suffer from the “motherhood tax” — i.e., the earnings hit from pregnancy and motherhood. This means that increased financial support post-pregnancy could disproportionately benefit Black mothers. Although, there’s a strong case to be made that state’s like Kentucky could do a much better job creating a safety-net for Black pregnant people outside of child support.
Despite the bipartisan support for the measure, not everyone is pleased. Online some men shared that they were concerned about being scammed into paying for someone’s pregnancy and the impact on relationships.
“@theevulgarbabe look at the pregnancy scammers looking for a payday,” wrote one social media users.
“What the fuck is happening,” tweeted @basbillions under a post about the law.
“They coming after couples and marriage low key,” commented another social media user on Instagram.
“Allowing this without mandatory testing is a horrible situation for men. Hopefully, this requires a Paternity test, seeing as how 1/3 come out negative,” wrote another user.
“So Any man can be accused of fathering a child and forced to pay without any proof of paternity? If you thought men were done before , you aint seen nothing yet,” tweeted @Pretty_Tony187.
To be clear, in Kentucky, both parents have the right to request genetic testing to establish paternity and child support — which this law falls under. Parents requesting support would be able to do so up to a year after the child is born for the help with the cost of pregnancy — which nationally is around $19,000.
However, reproductive rights groups and Reproductive rights activists have raised legitimate concerns about whether the House bill will include fetal personhood language, which gives legal protections to the fetus within the womb, often at the expense of the rights of the pregnant person.
These concerns are amplified by the recent ruling in Alabama that found that frozen embryos are children with legal rights. Fetal personhood laws have disproportionately been weaponized against Black pregnant people and other marginalized communities.
Six other states, including Georgia and Utah, are considering similar laws. Advocates will monitor each case closely to see whether fetal personhood language sneaks its way into the legislation.