Op-ed: Childbirth affordability is a pro-life issue
Rising living costs and proposed maternity care billing changes, the piece argues, are making it harder for Americans to afford having children.
A new opinion piece from Live Action argues that reducing the financial barriers to having children should be a central part of the pro-life movement's mission.
In the July 9 op-ed, Mark Wiltz, Live Action’s Director of Government Affairs, contended that many Americans still want children but increasingly question whether they can afford them.
“This is not a crisis of values. It is a crisis of affordability,” he wrote. “Americans have not stopped believing in the importance of family. They have not stopped wanting children. They are responding to the reality around them.”
Wiltz pointed to housing, childcare, healthcare and everyday living expenses as pressures that can leave Americans uncertain about whether they can afford to start or expand a family. He argued that policies intended to strengthen families must take those economic realities into account.
He also focused on maternity care coding changes scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, 2027, through the American Medical Association (AMA). According to Wiltz, the AMA says the updated framework will offer more detailed information about services, increase transparency and better account for the complexity of contemporary obstetric care.
Wiltz warned, however, that the revisions could add further complexity to a healthcare system many patients already find difficult to navigate.
“The American health care system is already complicated enough,” he said. “Patients regularly struggle to understand insurance policies, medical bills, deductibles, and coverage limitations. Adding additional layers of billing complexity risks making it harder for families to understand what they owe and why they owe it.”
Although the AMA does not determine what patients ultimately pay, Wiltz argued that updating billing systems requires insurers, employers, government programs and healthcare providers to revise payment structures, retrain staff and rewrite contracts. Wiltz said that those additional administrative costs could ultimately become part of the broader cost of healthcare, creating another financial obstacle for families preparing to welcome a child.
“A mother should not have to wonder whether she can afford the medical care required to bring her child into the world,” he said. “A father should not have to worry that welcoming a child will put his family under financial strain.”
He connected those financial concerns to the pro-life movement’s broader responsibility to support women and families.
“The pro-life movement has always argued that every life has dignity and value,” Wiltz wrote. “That belief requires action. It means supporting mothers facing difficult circumstances. It means strengthening communities that provide resources for families. It means expanding support systems that allow women to confidently choose life.”
Wiltz concluded by urging the AMA to reconsider the proposed billing changes and encouraging lawmakers to continue pursuing policies that reduce the cost of childbirth.
“America should recommit itself to a simple principle: A country that values life must support the families who welcome it,” he said. “Childbirth should become more affordable. Not more complicated.”
