Abortion rights are under attack: We have a responsibility to talk about it
MELODY STAINBROOK: Activists have been fighting for the right to choose for centuries, with constant threats from legislation and restrictions on abortion access. Once again, abortion rights are under attack, placing decades of activism, progress and women’s rights in jeopardy. The history of abortion is highly contested, rooted in women's health, rights and autonomy. Roe v. Wade, a landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling to protect abortion rights, has been widely disputed, with constant attempts to undermine or overturn the decision. On the state level, Republican legislators are passing more legislation to criminalize abortion. In response, congressional Democrats are attempting to pass federal legislation to provide further protection to abortion rights.
Women in the United States have been receiving abortions for centuries, with abortion procedures predating the country's founding in 1776. However, moral and safety objections to abortion were not raised until the mid-1800s, resulting in the quick and extreme criminalization of abortion. By the 1900s, abortion was classified as a felony in every state, with a handful of states outlining exceptions for rape and medical emergency. Women's rights activists have steadily pushed back on the outlawing of abortion, a movement that has steadily gained momentum throughout the 20th century. A monumental decision came from a 1973 Supreme Court ruling, Roe v. Wade, that protected abortions in the pregnancy’s first and second trimester. Ever since the decision, conservative lawmakers have been passing legislation to undermine the protections established by Roe v Wade and restore the criminalization of abortion.
The most recent and controversial of these state laws is the restrictive Texas abortion law. The Texas law, enacted early this September, bans all abortions after six weeks, granting no exceptions in cases of rape or incest. The law does grant some exceptions for medical emergencies, but these exceptions are narrowly defined and are criticized by many doctors and public health experts. In addition, the law creates a system that criminalizes abortion: turning abortion funds, rape counselors and even family members with knowledge of abortion into criminals who can be sued for up to $10,000.
Other conservative states have passed similar legislation to the Texas law. For example, in 2018, Mississippi legislators passed a law restricting abortion after 15 weeks, with no exception for incest or rape. However, two federal courts blocked the law and it has not yet gone into effect. The Supreme Court will hear the law on December 1, 2021.
There has been much speculation over whether the Supreme Court will block these laws and uphold Roe v. Wade. The Texas law is unique compared to earlier abortion bans that have failed because it allows individuals to enforce the law through civil lawsuits rather than law enforcement. As a result, conservative lawmakers hope this law will be more difficult for federal courts to overturn. On Friday, October 22, the Supreme Court announced it would not block the Texas law but expedite its review to November 1. If the Supreme Court allows the new law to stand, legal experts predict legislatures in other conservative states will pass similar laws. The effects could be detrimental to abortion rights and reproductive health for millions of Americans.
The reactions to the recent attacks on abortion rights have been polarizing and intense. Anti-abortion rights groups have applauded the Texas law as a massive victory and hope that the Supreme Court upholds it. On the other hand, abortion providers believe the law is harmful and dangerous, adding that many women do not know their pregnant by the six-week deadline the law sets.
Further criticism has come from medical professionals who have been critical of the Texas bill and its implications for public health. They argue that the law creates an unsafe situation for disadvantaged women in need of abortions; many of these women do not have the time or money to travel out of state to receive these procedures. Moreover, some medical professionals have even deemed the law "misleading" as it sets the deadline for abortions at six weeks due to "fetal heartbeat" even though the embryo does not possess a heart at six weeks. Instead, this "heartbeat" is electrical impulses from the embryo.
The most poignant reactions have come from the women affected by this legislation: women in Texas who require abortions, women who were raped, women who can not financially or physically support childbirth. These women are scared and panicked. One woman started to cry during her ultrasound when the monitor picked up electrical impulses (what conservative lawmakers refer to as a "fetal heartbeat"). She could not receive an abortion— the law was just implemented that same morning.
Federal lawmakers have also had intense reactions to the law— with congressional Democrats condemning the law as unconstitutional and an attack on women's rights. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi commented, "This is about freedom. About freedom of women to have choice about the size and timing of their families, not the business of people on the [Supreme] Court or members of Congress."
In an attempt to protect abortion rights from restrictive state laws and a possible failure by the Supreme Court to overturn these laws, congressional Democrats introduced The Women's Health Protection Act. This bill, an apparent response to the restrictive Texas law, is sponsored by Democratic Rep. Judy Chu of California, with 215 Democratic cosponsors and zero Republican cosponsors. The bill passed the House on September 24, 2021, with a vote of 218-211, and now awaits consideration in the Senate.
The Women's Health Protection Act would establish the right of patients to receive abortion care and the right of medical providers to provide this care, free of extreme restrictions. Furthermore, the bill aims to eliminate the unnecessary and required pre-requisites to receive an abortion— most of which were passed by conservative legislators to limit access to abortion. If passed, the Women's Health Protection Act would grant widespread protection of abortion rights and eliminate overbearing and extreme restrictions.
Our Duty to Discuss
Abortion has been discussed on the national stage and has been a topic of recent discussion and contention here at Georgetown. Evidence of this contention is spelled out clearly across the bricks at Red Square— a debate entirely in chalk between Hoyas for Choice and Hoyas for Life, arguing over whether abortion is a right or a crime. In the center of Red Square were two large, competing quotes. One written by Hoyas for Choice: "My choice to have an abortion does not inhibit your choice not to." The other written by Hoyas for Life: "You get an abortion! And you get an abortion!" This quote references Oprah's famous line when she hands out presents to her audience members and implies that abortions are being handed out like free gifts to women.
On-campus, the abortion debate extends past Hoyas for Choice and Hoyas for Life. On Saturday, October 23, the Georgetown University College Democrats held a 24-hour protest outside the Supreme Court in opposition to the Texas abortion law. The topic also came up at the upperclassmen Georgetown Democrats and Republican debate, which I participated in. The recent attacks on abortion were brought up in the form of an audience question. I was surprised when the debate moderators, the Georgetown Bipartisan Coalition, did not formally ask the question. I was disappointed when a member of the Bipartisan Coalition told me that the topic was purposefully ignored because it is "too touchy."
When an audience member finally posed the question about abortion, my opposition from the Georgetown Republicans sighed and expressed that he was hoping, and was told, that the topic would not come up. Abortion rights were not supposed to come up at the debate; they were intended to be ignored and left unaddressed by the most political clubs on campus. The millions of women in Texas who are threatened by this law, the health implications of abortion criminalization, the blatant violation of women's rights were all supposed to be ignored.
We can not ignore the current attack on abortion. In my opinion, it is not a viable option to turn a blind eye to issues because they are "too touchy." Abortion restrictions not only touch, but fiercely grip the lives of millions of American women. Members of Georgetown political organizations must discuss how abortion laws impact the health, well-being and rights of women across the United States. The conversation may be uncomfortable or touchy, but it is necessary because of its implications. Here are some facts about how abortion criminalization fiercely grips women:
Abortion rates stay relatively constant regardless of whether abortion is legal or not. What changes is how safe these procedures are for women.
An estimated 25 million unsafe abortions occur every year, most of them in places where women do not have adequate access to reproductive health care.
The World Health Organization estimates that almost every death and injury from abortion is avoidable if abortion is made legal and safe.
91% of abortions take place in the first trimester, which ends at 13 weeks. Roe v. Wade grants complete protection to these abortions.
After the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973, the percentage of abortions performed after the first trimester decreased because of access to safe and affordable abortion and reproductive healthcare.
Around 79% of Americans do not want Roe v. Wade to be overturned.
Studies show that outlawing abortion specifically hurts low-income women, who are more likely to resort to dangerous, self-inflicted procedures.
Take Action
The Texas law, and others like it, demand discussion, debate and pushback. We must consider the ramifications of these laws for women's rights and health. We must also question the morality of the laws themselves: should any woman be forced to undergo childbirth? Are we, as a country, okay with denying women autonomy and control over their choices and their bodies? These questions must be asked and grappled with, especially by those of us who are part of political organizations here on campus. To ignore the issue, to purposefully suppress the question, is reprehensible.
For those of you who are motivated and impassioned by the facts above and the current attacks on a woman's right to choose, I encourage you to get involved. Attend the protests, voice your opposition, discuss your opinions, ask the questions that need to be asked. To get involved, you can call your state legislators as well as your federal representatives and senators. If you are on campus, you can talk to Hoyas for Choice or the Georgetown Democrats on how to get involved— they have club members that sit in Red Square every week and answer questions. There are also many online petitions and forums to show your opposition to the attack on abortion rights. Here are some links:
The Planned Parenthood Texas Law Petition and Fund
Change. Org Texas Law Petition
Change. Org New Hampshire Abortion Restriction Petition
Melody Stainbrook is a sophomore in Georgetown College studying government and environmental studies.