Angela Hay
On Nov. 19, 2025, the Ohio House of Representatives passed House Bill 485, also known as “Enact the Baby Olivia Act.” This bill mandates that public school children in grades 5-12 be shown both a high-definition ultrasound video and “Baby Olivia,” a three-minute computer-generated film described as a “window to the womb.” The measure now moves to the Senate, where its potential effect on reproductive education will face additional scrutiny.
The bill was sponsored by Rep. Melanie Miller (R-Ashland), who acts as executive director of the Ashland Pregnancy Care Center and describes herself as “a fierce advocate for the unborn.”
Voting for the bill fell completely along party lines, with 59 Republicans in favor and 27 Democrats opposed.
The bill allows students to be excused from instruction upon written request by their parent or legal guardian, and nonpublic charter schools are exempt from compliance.
An Ohio House press release celebrated the bill’s passage as a way to “enhance science education in Ohio public schools” and described the video as “medically accurate.” The press release employs language specific to the anti-abortion movement, choosing “baby” instead of “fetus” and describing conception as “the moment life begins.”
What is the ‘Baby Olivia’ video?
The “Baby Olivia” video was created by the nonprofit organization Live Action, which describes itself as “the most effective pro-life movement in America,” and was reviewed by six medical professionals. The video depicts the fertilized egg as a glowing ball rolling through cozy pink uterine lining and shows a fetus with distinguishable eyes, ears, and fingers at six weeks after conception.
The $15 million nonprofit organization has created hundreds of other videos, including the series “Pro-Life Replies to Pro-Choice Arguments” and “Can’t Stay Silent: Stories of Abortion Regret and Healing.”
Ohio representatives received testimony from 15 parties in support of the bill and 45 who opposed it. Northeast Ohioans delivered testimony on both sides of the issue.
Cleveland right-to-life activists argue in favor of the bill
“This is factual material,” Kate Makra, president of Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio, testified in support of the bill. “This is biology. If we teach life cycles of plants and animals, why aren’t we teaching humans from conception?”
Jeannine E. Jones, president of Cleveland Right to Life, also testified in favor of the bill during its second hearing.
“The purpose of the Baby Olivia Act is to clearly refute, in a visual format, the claim by abortion proponents that a fetus is ‘just a clump of cells,’” Jones said in an email to The Cleveland Observer. “It is only fair to young people that they fully understand what a baby is at each stage of development.”
Jones believes issues of reproductive justice and freedom should be of particular concern to Cleveland’s Black population.
“For the past 50 years in Cleveland, there has been a steady decline in the Black population while Hispanics have grown and Asians have remained flat,” Jones said. “This is nothing less than a genocide on the Black people of Cleveland. … The Black babies of Cleveland and America are being killed.”
Danielle Firsich, director of PlannedParenthood of Greater Ohio, disagreed with Jones’s perspective.
“She’s saying genocide as if it’s being imposed by an oppressor, but these are people making reproductive health care choices for themselves,” Firsich told The Cleveland Observer. “She’s ignoring the fact that abortions often increase in times of economic or social turmoil, when people literally cannot afford or have and raise a child. She’s completely ignoring the racial dynamics of that.”
Census data shows Cleveland’s Black population declined by 37.3% between 1970 and 2020. Cleveland’s overall population declined by 50.3% in the same 50-year period.
Opponent perspectives
Opponents of the bill dispute both the scientific validity of the video and its effectiveness as an educational tool.
“The ‘Baby Olivia Act’ was problematic from the start for quite a number of reasons,” Firsich said. “Ohio is literally the only state in the country with no standards for health education already. We are starting from an incredibly weak point when it comes to educating our kids on their own health, reproductive health care, sexuality, and sex.”
Cleveland teacher M. Jennifer Martin Silva testified that the video was medically inaccurate and created as propaganda.
“Students should learn accurate and scientific facts about human reproduction and development,” Silva wrote, “but requiring the use of this video negates any factual science lessons.”
Ohio middle school educator Melissa Meyer claimed the video was “designed to promote a political agenda rather than educate.” She advocated for better resources for the students in her classes.
“They deserve truthful, developmentally appropriate education,” Meyer wrote, “that empowers them to understand their bodies, make informed decisions, and trust the adults responsible for teaching them.”
“These organizations don’t know a single thing about racial disparities in reproductive health, maternal care, and infant mortality,” Firsich said. “Ohio has horrific maternal and infant mortality rates, with Black infants dying at roughly three times the rate of white infants. Instead, we have $20 million going to crisis pregnancy centers that provide zero actual reproductive health care services.”
The bill was introduced to the Ohio Senate on Nov. 25 but has not yet been assigned to a committee.
If the Senate advances HB 485, Ohio would be among the first states to require a specific advocacy‑produced video as part of public school instruction. The bill’s progress will determine how future reproductive health lessons balance outside materials, existing science education standards, and the concerns raised by parents, students, educators, and advocacy organizations across Ohio.
Angela Hay is a journalist and body positive movement instructor in Columbus, Ohio.
