Why this mother, grandmother doesn't support Prop 1

I am a mother. I am a wife. I am a grandmother. Those titles are not slogans to me — they are the reason I will vote no on Idaho’s Proposition 1.

I carried my children. I felt them kick. I held them the moment they arrived, and later I held my grandchildren the same way. That experience leaves no room for the claim that a developing baby only becomes worthy of protection at some arbitrary, shifting line.

Prop 1 claims to allow abortion only until “viability.” But look closely at the definition. Viability is the point when a baby can survive outside the womb without extraordinary medical measures. That means a baby who needs breathing help, a warmer, or a feeding tube may still be considered non-viable under this measure. In other words, the law could treat a child who simply requires ordinary newborn care as fair game for abortion. After that point, a broad “medical emergency” exception for the mother’s life or health — decided by the provider alone — can stretch the procedure even further. There is effectively no firm limit on when an abortion can be performed.

Idaho already protects a mother’s life and provides exceptions for rape and incest. Prop 1 goes far beyond that. It rewrites the meaning of viability so that many babies who would live with basic medical support are left unprotected, then adds an open-ended health exception that can reach late into pregnancy.

As a mother, I will not accept a law that treats the child I once carried as disposable. As a wife, I believe families deserve clear boundaries, not elastic language. As a grandmother, I look at the little faces who call me Meema and know I would fight for them before they ever took a breath.

I will vote no.

JANINE SHEPARD

Sandpoint