Last week, the Des Moines Register published an op-ed that declared,“Kamala Harris, Tim Walz support allowing newborns to die. Americans can't support that.”

The headline accompanied an op-ed written by Donald W. Bohlken of Indianola, an attorney and a retired administrative law judge with the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals.

The op-ed is based on arguments such as: Because Harris voted against something called the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” as a senator, she supports infanticide.

Let me be clear: Yes, Harris opposed the law. No, that doesn’t mean she is in favor of killing newborns. But the lie was allowed to run in a major Iowa media outlet without any fact-checking or contextualizing.

The reality: “The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” is a bit of political theater. The legislation, which has been introduced a number of times over the years, would mandate that doctors give infants who “survive abortion” necessary lifesaving care, but that is already mandated. It is an unnecessary law addressing a problem that doesn’t exist.

The bill’s proponents claim it supports survivors of “late term abortions,” but “late term abortions” do not exist. The term itself has no set meaning. Babies are not being aborted up to (let alone after) the moment of birth. When an abortion is necessary after the first 12 weeks, it is often because the person who needs it does not have adequate access to health care. Republican politicians put up barriers to healthcare, then stigmatize women when they need abortions after 12 weeks.

Another common reason abortion is necessary later in a pregnancy is the presence of fetal abnormalities that put both lives of the the fetus and the mother at risk. These are complicated situations — ones where women should be trusted to make the right decisions for their families.

Years ago, I edited an essay about a third-trimester abortion that still haunts me. In it, the author talks about her Jewish faith, her family, her complicated pregnancy and the decision to save her own life.

Jessica Valenti summed it up best when she wrote, “The next time you hear a Republican talking about late-term abortion, remember what they’re really arguing: that women are not to be trusted, that we should ignore how their laws make early abortion near-impossible, and that faux outrage should trump the health of women and families.”

So, why would the Register publish something arguing that Harris supports infanticide? Well, I used to write op-eds for Iowa newspapers. I now write op-eds for places like the Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC. I know that it is pretty standard practice to ask contributors to offer significant context and to cite sources to bolster their arguments. (Editor’s note: This is indeed the norm at most reputable publications.)

Truth matters just as much in the opinion section as it does in the news section. It matters when lies are printed in newspapers. It hurts real people who might need to seek care. It also hurts faith in the media — an issue that has only been getting worse.

In 2020, I was fired from my Iowa newspaper job in part because I objected to the publication of an op-ed that I believed made false claims...