A bill in the Kentucky Senate passed with bipartisan support allows a woman to ask for child support for her unborn baby. She can do so up to a year after the baby is born.

Senate Bill 110 passed on a vote of 36-2. The Kentucky Senate is controlled by Republicans. The bill now goes to the House. Republicans have supermajorities in both the Senate and House. The two no-votes were Republicans. 

The purpose of the legislation is to allow a mother to receive child support while she is pregnant to cover pregnancy expenses. It is reasonable to expect the father of the child to share the financial responsibility. 

Pro-life people believe that life begins at conception. The bill's sponsor, Republican state Senator Whitney Westerfield, said that the overwhelming support for the bill shows that lawmakers understand that the father must help cover expenses over the nine months before the baby is born. Pregnancy expenses begin when a woman confirms her pregnancy. The time limit for requesting child support is firm. No exceptions.

"I believe that life begins at conception," Westerfield said when presenting the proposal to his colleagues. "But even if you don't, there's no question that there are obligations and costs involved with having a child before that child is born."

The measure establishes a strict cut-off time, requiring a parent to retroactively seek child support for pregnancy expenses up to a year after giving birth and no time after that.

"So if there's not a child support order until the child's 8, this isn't going to apply," Westerfield recently said when the bill was reviewed in a Senate committee. "Even at a year and a day, this doesn't apply. It's only for orders that are in place within a year of the child's birth."

This all seems reasonable. It's refreshing to see a state legislature that comes together to grant a common-sense solution. I didn't realize that states are starting to do this, but some are. There are six state Houses across the country with such legislation and Georgia has one law that has already taken effect.

Westerfield knows what he is talking about. He and his wife are expecting triplets. They already have two children. 

'We've got health insurance and I've got a stack of bills with co-pays and premiums and so forth on my desk right now that I'll be paying tonight electronically. So, I know that there are costs involved, and that's before we even get to buying three car seats and three of everything else between now and when these babies show up,' he said.

A Democrat state senator said he agrees with Westerfield. 'Any of us with children know that it isn't cheap. And one thing that I've learned is that, and my colleague has said many times before us, that the other parent should be paying that support. They should be helping out,' he said. 

In Georgia, parents-to-be are allowed to claim an income tax deduction for dependent children before the time of their birth. Utah has put into effect a pregnancy tax break. Other states have similar legislation pending. 

Pro-abortion people are watching as this kind of legislation develops. They are worried this will lead to unborn babies being declared as persons.

In Kentucky, pro-abortion supporters and organizations are keeping a watchful eye on the bill for fear that it will 'set the stage for personhood' for a fetus, a designation that the pro-choice movement strongly opposes, according to Tamarra Wieder, the Kentucky State director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates. 

'All you have to do is look at Alabama. We have been warning people since Dobbs decision, and even before Dobbs fell, that it's not just abortion access that's at risk, it's IVF, it's birth control. Personhood bills directly put that at risk,' she said. 

The legislation seems to be going in a good direction. It's fair. And there are no allowances for retroactive claims after a year. It will be interesting to see if this kind of legislation spreads to even more states.