Thoughts on the Anniversary of Roe V. Wade (& Why Rick Santorum Is the Worst)

Thirty-nine years ago, on January 22nd, the Supreme Court ruled to protect a woman's right to access an abortion in Roe v. Wade. And since then, the government has minded its own business, respecting a woman's ability to make her own health decisions, and no one has ever argued about it.

Oh, wait… that's not what happened at all.

Despite a scary amount of attacks on a woman's right to choose in the last year (check out this handy infographic for details), President Obama recently announced a new health benefit that defends women's access to birth control, and to mark the date of the Roe v. Wade anniversary, he pledged to stay committed “to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right," stating:

As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.

While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue -- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.

Feministing points out a not-so-fun reality about abortion access that still needs to be addressed, if only we could all agree to keep Roe v. Wade intact in the first place:

When abortion was legalized in 1973, virtually all women had the ability to obtain an abortion. The Medicaid program, which covers health care for low-income people in the U.S., covered abortion just as it did other medical procedures.

But in 1977, Congress passed the Hyde Amendment, which banned Medicaid coverage of abortion. Abortion is the only medical procedure that has ever been banned from Medicaid. Most private insurance plans cover abortion. So it’s people who rely on Medicaid (and also: people who are federal employees or get their health care through a federal employee, people who get their health care through Indian Health Services and people serving in the military and those who get their health care through the military) are the ones who have health insurance that does not cover abortion. 

This means that they must pay out-of-pocket for a procedure ranging from several hundred to several thousand dollars. This means that they often are in the position of forgoing food, or paying bills or childcare in order to get their abortion procedure. 

So if you are fortunate enough to have health insurance in the US, you are likely to be covered for the full range of medical care should you have an unplanned pregnancy (for now anyway). If you happen to be a low-income person, and/or you depend on the US government for your health care, you’re on your own.

Now, anti-choicers like to try to make us all think that over at Planned Parenthood, for example, it's just one big abortion party, where women run over and gleefully get abortions, but that's simply not the case. I challenge people who are so quick to judge PP, and the countless young and older women who rely on PP for its vital healthcare services, such as cervical cancer screenings, to talk to an employee or patient at one of its clinics. We all have stories, and not all of them are even about abortion. And if they are, I think it would do the women of this country a huge service to be in a society where they're not shamed into keeping their mouths shut about those stories for fear of judgement.

To make things even scarier and insane, GOP Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum thinks that even women who have been raped should simply "make the best out of a bad situation" and "accept this horribly created pregnancy" as a gift from God. This disgusts me on so many levels. Namely because, as Tanya Somanader writes at Think Progress:

The problem with Santorum’s sense of humanity is that it doesn’t seem to extend to the victim. The emotional and physical trauma endured during and after a sexual assault often leaves a woman feeling robbed of any control over her own body and welfare. Robbing a woman of the choice to decide what to do with such “horribly created” consequences only contributes to the victim’s trauma. 

What’s more, Santorum’s argument forces a woman in these circumstances to share his religious beliefs and “accept what God has given to [her.]” A woman may very well share his belief and decide to carry the pregnancy to the term, but the fundamental point is that that should be her choice — not the government’s, and certainly not Santorum’s.

Maybe you agree with Santorum. Fine. Let's agree not to be friends. But mostly, can't we just agree that ultimately, and especially in cases of rape, that a woman should be able to choose what she decides to do with her body, and her life? And maybe we can't even agree about that. Fine. But here's the thing: Women will seek abortions whether everyone agrees about it or not. And when this choice is not protected, if we don't continue to fight for the rights we gained through Roe v. Wade, we'll go back to the horror stories of women dying from botched abortions and subsequent infections and hemorrhaging. Not only do I find Santorum's stance appalling and offensive, I believe he is an incredibly naive man to even consider that he has the power to control the women of this country's decisions about our bodies, and that, in the case of teen pregnancy, fathers should encourage their daughters to "make the right decision." The "right" decision is not always so simple, and it's not always going to be the same conclusion.

This afternoon I read a powerful article by Eleanor Cooney that was originally published in Mother Jones' September/October 2004 issue. I urge you to read it, particularly if you feel I'm exaggerating about the consequences of making abortions illegal or inaccessible. At the end of the piece, she writes:

Women of all kinds seek and have always sought abortion: married, single, in their twenties, thirties, and forties, teenagers. Some have no children, some have several already. Some never want children, some want children later. They are churchgoers, atheists, agnostics. They are morally upright pillars of the community, they are prostitutes. They're promiscuous, they're monogamous, they're recent virgins. They get pregnant under all kinds of circumstances: consensual sex, nonconsensual sex, sex that falls somewhere between consensual and nonconsensual. Some are drunk or using drugs, some never even touch an aspirin. Some use no birth control, some use birth control that fails.

Yes, I hope that we can find a way to reduce the number of abortions performed in this country. But I hope that happens because we are supporting safe sex education; encouraging our daughters and sons to not be scared to ask questions about sex and pregnancy; recognizing the value of organizations such as Planned Parenthood; and most importantly, by providing good health care to all women and men, no matter what their income.

Thoughts after my tour of North Milwaukee Avenue.

I left work at The Media Consortium this afternoon (Yes, work, not interning. Don’t use that dirty word in my presence) and braced myself for the headache that would ensue.

I was about to brave traffic at 3:30 on a Monday afternoon. Why would I embark on this silly adventure, you might ask.

Two crucial reasons:

1. Ran out of birth control pills.
2. Needed to exchange shoes at the Gap outlet.

Before you start complaining to your computer screen that I’ve now crossed the line to talking about my contraceptives, slow your roll for a second. Or maybe you’re appalled that I’m not only shopping at the Gap, but mentioning it on my blog.

Either way: Bear with me. For one thing, I like the Gap. I can’t help it. Their sweaters are comfy and brightly colored! Hooray!

Second, and more importantly: the birth control pills. Because I no longer have the luxury of IU health insurance and my fabulous ob-gyn in Bloomington, once my prescription ran out earlier this year, I had to resort to what I did in my poor college days—becoming a patient at Planned Parenthood (PP).

In order to get the sliding-scale cost, I had had to go to the only location in Chicago that still has the funding necessary to make these services possible. (Note that I said the only location. In all of Chicago.) And how lucky for the women of Chicago, this location is in a pretty bad neighborhood that made my K-town bred self a little frightened in broad daylight. Seriously. I felt like a police officer should have escorted me into the building.

Although when I was there, the receptionist took one look at me and argued that I wasn’t eligible for the reduced rate—maybe I was wearing an especially brightly colored Gap sweater day?—after I showed her my miserable paycheck, my situation improved. I was able to get my annual exam, STD testing, an HIV test, three months of pills, and more condoms than anyone could possibly need in a lifetime, all for free. Yes. FREE.

How dare you speak of Judy Blume this way!

Yesterday I was innocently going about my day—and then I got the email from Jay with a link to this trash from the National Review Online. Read it. I dare you. Then try not to kill someone.

Kathryn Jean Lopez, who penned this ridiculous rant about Judy Blume—the beloved author of Are You There God? It’s Me Margaret, Superfudge, Just as Long as We’re Together, and many more FANTASTIC books—needs her computer taken away. She refers to Blume as an “unnecessary presence in children’s lives, as a substitute parent and cheerleader of that sex-ed-crazed culture that she served as a trailblazer of”—and is angry that in honor of Mother’s Day, Blume wrote a fundraising letter for Planned Parenthood (PP). Lopez calls this “insulting.” You know what I find insulting? A woman who hates on Judy Blume!

An excerpt from Lopez’s article, starting with a quote from Blume’s PP letter:

"Blume continues: ‘I’m a mom, and I’m also a writer and an activist. Nothing has made me prouder than seeing my own children — and really, all young people — grow up to be healthy, educated, and in charge of their bodies and their lives. That’s where Planned Parenthood comes in. There is no organization that I know of that supports motherhood and all that it means more than Planned Parenthood. That’s why I’m honoring moms everywhere with my gift to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund today.’

Richards [president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America] accuses critics of a lack of ‘compassion.’ But a Mother’s Day fundraiser for the single biggest abortion provider in the United States (subsidized by your tax dollars) is insulting, most especially to the women who are suffering because they rejected motherhood and know they ended a life in the process…

I’m grateful for the Blume fundraising letter, though, because it highlights something busy parents and teachers all too often don’t realize: That book your child is reading is imparting values, and they might not be your own. ‘I first heard about sex from Judy Blume,’ a fortysomething mother of six told me immediately after I mentioned Blume’s name to her. Today, perhaps, that’s not the situation — Blume’s not the first time — our culture being as oversexualized as it is. But Blume remains an unnecessary presence in children’s lives, as a substitute parent and cheerleader of that sex-ed-crazed culture that she served as a trailblazer of. And a presence trusted adults put in children’s lives, as if issuing an Imprimatur, a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Though frequently thought of as the harmless author of Superfudge, that description fudges the reality of Judy Blume. Her books are hormone cheerleaders — as if adolescents’ bodies needed the help. In Forever, Blume is right where she was in her fundraising letter, praising a progressive grandmother whose only fault seems to be that she is so devoted to Planned Parenthood rallies that she doesn’t have time to help her granddaughter get contraception from that organization. Planned Parenthood does provide young Katherine the Pill, making a graphic first-time scene possible.

Next time you’re just happy your daughter or son is reading, consider that your child may be reading, “Can you spread your legs some more . . . and maybe raise them a little?” That’s in Forever, which is clearly a pre-teen or teen book (if that makes it better — I’m not so sure). Deenie, however, is for children on a fourth-grade reading level. Would you knowingly hand your third or fourth grader a guide to self-arousal? You are when you hand him Deenie."

ARE. YOU. KIDDING. ME. First of all, I am so sick and tired of people misconstruing PP’s mission. Yes, it is an abortion provider, but if you think that’s entirely what PP is about, it’s time to educate yourself. PP’s mission:

"Planned Parenthood believes in the fundamental right of each individual, throughout the world, to manage his or her fertility, regardless of the individual's income, marital status, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or residence. We believe that respect and value for diversity in all aspects of our organization are essential to our well-being. We believe that reproductive self-determination must be voluntary and preserve the individual's right to privacy. We further believe that such self-determination will contribute to an enhancement of the quality of life and strong family relationships.

Based on these beliefs, and reflecting the diverse communities within which we operate, the mission of Planned Parenthood is:
* to provide comprehensive reproductive and complementary health care services in settings which preserve and protect the essential privacy and rights of each individual
* to advocate public policies which guarantee these rights and ensure access to such services
* to provide educational programs which enhance understanding of individual and societal implications of human sexuality
* to promote research and the advancement of technology in reproductive health care and encourage understanding of their inherent bioethical, behavioral, and social implications."

Has Lopez ever been to a PP clinic, I wonder? I highly doubt it. I went to PP for several years, and my wonderful mother, the same one who put fantastic books such as Deenie, Are You There God?, and Just as Long as We’re Together in my hands, was the one who brought me there for my first visit. And thank God she did, because there I was able to ask the questions about my sexual health that I was too embarrassed to discuss with her, learn about proper uses of birth control, and get good, important health care—without any judgment, ever.

PP also cares about women’s emotional health and physical well-being, and provides patients with information about abusive relationships and phone numbers for counseling centers and crisis lines if they suspect a patient is having problems. I know this from my personal experiences at PP—something Lopez clearly has no knowledge of, since she reduces the organization to simply an abortion provider. She writes, “But a Mother’s Day fundraiser for the single biggest abortion provider in the United States (subsidized by your tax dollars) is insulting, most especially to the women who are suffering because they rejected motherhood and know they ended a life in the process.”

She really doesn’t get it. PP celebrates motherhood—and a young woman’s ability to have the knowledge needed to plan being a mother, safely, intelligently, and when she is ready.

It’s because of PP and books like Judy Blume’s that countless young women have learned to be comfortable with their bodies, that their feelings are normal, and that they have every right to access health care and education about their sexuality—no matter if they are poor, rich, white, black, 16-years-old or 45-years-old.

To call Blume’s books “hormone cheerleaders” is the insult, not Blume’s support of an important organization such as PP. And how dare you call Deenie merely a “guide to self-arousal,” Ms. Lopez? HAVE YOU EVEN READ IT? Well, I have, multiple times, and what I took from that book had nothing to do with self-arousal. Deenie is the story of a beautiful 13-year-old girl whose mother is pushing her toward a modeling career—until she is diagnosed with scoliosis, and has to wear a back brace for the next four years. Deenie reinforced the values that my parents had already instilled in me—that there was more to a person than his or her outward appearance, and that the right kind of people would like me for my brain and my personality, not for my looks. THAT is what stuck with me from Deenie.

So back off, Lopez. And while you’re at it, why don’t you actually do some research and visit PP’s website? You’ll see that the home page features a link to information about Teen Pregnancy Prevention Month, which includes information about safe sex, birth control, masturbation, and, yes, abstinence. It’s not a giant cheer for abortion. I think you need to read this, since you obviously are as misinformed as the teenagers who have been taught abstinence-only sexual education and that masturbating is dirty.

Better yet: Go to the library. Check out Judy Blume’s books. Read them.