Celebrate the Anniversary of Roe v. Wade on January 22nd

January 22, 2010 marks the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that guaranteed American women the right to a safe and legal elective abortion. Our fore-feminists dedicated their lives to obtaining this integral human right and it is not free from threats, even today. To commemorate the fight for the right to abortion and to stand up against current attacks on that right, take action on January 22nd!

History
Abortion has been performed in every culture and society for thousands of years. It wasn't until the mid to late 1800's that abortion was criminalized in the U.S. Of course, making abortion illegal didn’t stop it from happening, or even reduce the number of women who sought abortion.

It is estimated that as many as 1.2 million abortions happened each year in the late 1960s and early 1970s. These “back-alley” abortions by untrained practitioners, in addition to self-induced abortions often cost women their lives – in fact, many thousands of women died or suffered serious medical problems during the time that abortion was illegal (accurate records could not be kept).

Thankfully, in 1973, Jane Roe, a Texas woman seeking to terminate her pregnancy, brought a class action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Texas law prohibiting her from doing so and the Supreme Court sided with her, 7-2. Delivering the opinion of the Court, Justice Blackmum stated:

“The right to privacy…is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice is altogether apparent.”

Abortion rights proponents rejoiced.

Right v. Access
Unfortunately, the Roe v. Wade decision was not perfect, by any means. The wording of the decision left doors open for states to regulate abortion through restrictions on third-trimester abortions, parental consent and notification laws, “informed consent” laws, waiting periods, refusal or so-called “conscience” clauses, and even spousal consent laws (which were later made illegal with the Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling in 1992).

Additionally, Roe v. Wade sent anti-abortion forces into a tizzy (just as its anniversary does every year), and in 1977 we saw the passing of the Hyde Amendment, which, to this day, prohibits Medicaid funding of abortions.

What’s the significance of all these various types of restrictions? Well, abortion may be legal, but it is not necessarily accessible or affordable. This distinction persists today, varying state by state. If you are under age 18, don’t have a provider near you, don’t have transportation, are a victim of incest or rape and don’t want to come forward, don’t have health insurance or don’t have the means to pay for an abortion, we’re sorry – the right to abortion doesn’t apply to you.

Furthermore, for several decades, anti-abortion forces have mounted escalating attacks on reproductive health clinics and health care providers throughout the nation, making access to the very clinics that provide reproductive health services even more difficult.

Continued Threats
While abortion remains legal, there are constantly rising threats jeopardizing access.

Currently, abortion has become a major divisive issue in Congress’ Health Care Reform efforts. By using women’s health and lives as a pawn to stop health care reform from happening, opponents of both reform and reproductive rights have managed to introduce some very restrictive abortion language – the Nelson amendment. By requiring separate payment systems for abortion coverage in the new health insurance exchange, the Nelson amendment will effectively eliminate abortion coverage for all women participating in the exchange – forcing millions of women who currently enjoy abortion coverage to pay out of pocket in the future.

Year after year, voters in referendum states are faced with anti-abortion ballot initiatives and state legislatures consider and often pass bills that limit abortion access. We see these bills and ballot initiatives in the form of: abortion bans (that are placed on the books in order to challenge Roe v. Wade), biased counseling requirements, mandatory delays, gag rules, refusal clauses, restrictions on low-income women’s access, restrictions on young women’s access, personhood initiatives and targeted regulation of abortion providers. In the fall 2010 mid-term election, don’t be surprised to see plenty of the above-mentioned threats present on your ballot!

And lastly, anti-abortion organizations such as Operation Rescue, Army of God and many others are creating a rising tide of extremism and violence against women’s health care clinics and providers. You may be familiar with the “Justice for All” or “Genocide Awareness Project” displays that often set up shop on college campuses. You also may have seen anti-abortion protesters outside of your local clinic. In addition to spreading lies and misinformation and making access to clinics difficult and intimidating, anti-abortion efforts often go far beyond protests and demonstrations and begin to threaten the safety and lives of women’s health care providers and clinic staff. Sometimes these threats escalate into real violence, as with the murder of Dr. George Tiller in his church in May, 2009.

What You Can Do on Jan. 22
On January 22nd, TAKE ACTION! Educate your campus, show support for abortion rights and the feminists who fought for that right, and fight the current threats we face. Let 'em know that we will never go back! Here are some ideas:

- Oppose the Nelson Amendment and show your support for woman-friendly health care reform. Find out how your Senators voted and let them know how you feel. Table with information on this issue and encourage other students to contact their Senators as well.

- Start gearing up for the onslaught of anti-choice ballot initiatives we are likely to see in this fall’s mid-term elections. Parental notification and personhood initiatives will likely be prevalent. Find out what’s likely to happen in your state, and begin educating your campus about why they should vote NO!

- Find out if there will be any anti-choice protests, demonstrations or events happening on campus and organize a counter-protest. Pass out medically accurate information about abortion, as well as information about the local reproductive health clinic.

- Adopt-a-Clinic. Call your local reproductive health clinic and find out how you can help them. They may be faced with protesters and need your help escorting patients into the clinic safely, showing your support through a rally or counter-protest, or just need your volunteer time in the clinic.

This article was featured in our January 2010 monthly Choices eZine. Sign up for our alerts to stay up-to-date with the latest feminist news and to receive the monthly eZine.

Feminist movie review: Vera Drake

Sunday was a drizzly, gray sort of day, so I stopped by DC indie video store Potomac Video for a pick me up.

After much indecision, due to my insistence on finding movies with strong female leads, I settled on Vera Drake and Hitchcock's Notorious. If you haven't already seen it, I highly recommend Vera Drake as a solid feminist drama.

The film, starring Imelda Staunton, came out in 2004, but is still timely for its themes of illegal abortion and women in the criminal justice system. The film is set in London in 1950, and the title character is a woman who works as a domestic servant while serving as the glue of her close-knit family.

Vera also "helps young girls out" in secret when they need to end unwanted pregnancies. Her warm personality leads her to gently assist harried mothers, sanguine partygirls, foreign workers, rape survivors, and other young women.

My boyfriend remarked that the film normalized abortion, which was precisely what appealed to me. See also: largely positive review from Christianity Today, despite inaccuracies on the sanitation procedures Drake uses in the movie.



***Spoiler alert***



When one of her patients falls ill, local police identify Vera and arrest her. Although the detectives are sympathetic, including Woman Police Constable Best, you watch Vera's life crumble as she descends into the British justice system.

There is a constant tension between rich and working class, between men and women, and between the medical establishment and Vera's informal, unpaid services. There's lots I could write about, but two components of the movie interested me in particular:

1. The word abortion is not mentioned on the DVD case, and is not mentioned until the British police interrogate Vera. When they ask whether she performs abortions, Vera says, "That's your word for it." Only when they ask whether she has helped girls out does she respond in the affirmative.

Today, of course, we have "choice" as a euphemism for abortion, which has advantages and disadvantages.

2. The film highlights the importance of women in policing and the judicial system. WPC Best accompanies the detectives and gently reassures Vera and her friend Lillian Clark throughout questioning. Although she cannot help Vera, WPC Best guides Vera through the system and puts thought into Vera's comfort to the extent she can.

Vera's trial is heard by a male judge, who decides to make an example of her through a harsh sentence, despite her motivations and lack of a criminal record. It is clear a prison term could break the elderly Vera, but he is unsympathetic.

FMF's National Center for Women and Policing works with women in local and federal law enforcement to promote gender-responsive policing and work environments. But we still need more feminists in high levels of the criminal justice system.

Feminist judges understand that women need protections against abusive partners, that girls may need abortions without parental consent, that anti-abortion laws hurt women.

Vera Drake's reality is not far from our own - it is still the reality for billions of women around the world. Conservatives in the US are waging an all-out war on abortion rights, and we need you to keep working to protect women's lives.

Have you seen this movie? Comment and let us know what you think! Or arrange a film screening on your campus. Drop us a line at campusteam@feminist.org if you want ideas for the screening, and keep up the great work!

IL Parental Notification Law Challenged

A lawsuit was filed yesterday challenging a parental notification law set to go into effect in Illinois on November 3rd. The complaint (see PDF), filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois on the behalf of the Hope Clinic for Women and Dr. Allison Cowett, challenges the law's constitutionality and states that "the Act severely restricts minors' access to abortion by requiring a physician to notify a parent, grandparent, step-parent living in the household, or legal guardian of a minor's intention to terminate her pregnancy and wait at least 48 hours before performing the abortion."

The law in question mandates that physicians notify a young woman's parents at least 48 hours before performing abortions on women 17 or younger. Illinois law does not require that parents consent regarding the abortion, only their notification prior to the procedure.

The law originally passed in 1984 and was updated in 1995, but has been held up for years by legal challenges. A Chicago federal appeals court ruled in July that the law is constitutional. In its decision, the court described the law as "a permissible attempt to help a young woman make an informed choice about whether to have an abortion". The anti-choice Thomas More Society filed a lawsuit in September with the Illinois Supreme Court that seeks immediate enforcement of a parental notification law in the state.

Source: Feminist News

Image couresty of: NARAL Pro-Choice America

Parental Notification Could be on the Ballot in CA

Noooooo!!! Not again!

Feminist Daily News reports today that, "A proposed ballot initiative seeking a California constitutional amendment requiring parental notification and a 48-hour waiting period before a minor can obtain an abortion was filed yesterday at the California Attorney General's Office."

This will be the fourth effort to pass a parental notification law in California in recent years. In 2005, voters struck down Parental Notification initiative, Prop 73; in 2006, Prop 85 was soundly defeated; and most recently, in 2008, voters showed their unwavering support for young women, by voting NO on Prop 4.

Yet somehow, anti-abortion forces haven't gotten the message. How much clearer can we make it? Californians do not want young women under age 18 to be forced to notify a parent and wait 48 hours before obtaining an abortion.

Parental notification and consent laws put the health and lives of young women in danger. In other states with parental notification laws, young women have put their lives at risk by seeking illegal, back-alley abortions.

Parental notification laws are often promoted as efforts to "protect teen safety" or "stop child predators", but these laws are nothing short of attacks on a woman's right to choose. The proponents of parental involvement laws are the same folks who are opposed to comprehensive sex ed - which reduces unintended pregnancy among young people, and thus, the need for abortion. Clearly, any attempts to act concerned about the health and lives of young women are just for show.

As someone who has been heavily involved in working to defeat the last two parental notification initiatives in California, I must say, I am not excited at the prospect of devoting our valuable time and resources to a 2010 ballot initiative, when we could be doing things to positively affect the health and lives of women.

On the bright side, the proposed amendment must undergo review by the Attorney General, and still must obtain 700,000 signatures before it can become an official ballot initiative in 2010.

Love from Perez! No on 4 & 8!

Now, I like to consider myself a somewhat "serious" feminist at times but every once and a while I do divulge in a little frivolity. Case in point: Perez Hilton. I was probably the last person to even know of the existence of his world of celebrity gossip and, like so many of you, visit more than I care to admit.

But shame no more! Why you ask? Because Perez just posted our video for "No on 8!" If passed, Proposition 8 would amend California's constitution to eliminate the right for same-sex couples to marry -- a fundamental human right that we all should have.

And that's not the only attack on the ballot this year. Californians must also vote on Proposition 4, an additional amendment to the constitution to ban abortions for women under the age of 18 without parental notification. Heard this one before? That's because California voters have already voted against two similar laws in the past.

But this year's amendment is even more deceptive and dangerous than those in the past. Requiring a 48-hour waiting period, involving the courts to prove your "maturity," making it a crime if you falsify documents, and require victims of rape or incest to officially report a crime or report your family before seeking an abortion.

It's imperative that California voters say "NO on 4" and "NO on 8" this election! Want to learn more? Visit our website to find out just how dangerous both of these amendments would be if passed. Share your knowledge with your friends and family -- especially those who live in CA -- so we can all be aware of the attacks on equality and choice this November.