Wombs & War

“I’ll never forget the sheer amount of blood that came out of my body,” a close friend of mine tells me with grieved eyes. She’s describing the night she miscarried, two months into her pregnancy, already in the midst of one of the most mentally and emotionally challenging seasons she’s ever been in. Her voice is strained as she recalls this memory, reflective of the panic and confusion she felt at the time. “I already had a hundred people breathing down my neck, offering their opinion of what I should do with the baby; whether I should get an abortion or give it up for adoption or commit to being a mother at twenty-one. Then I’m sitting on the toilet, cramping and bleeding and crying, confronting the fact that the decision was being made for me.” I listen to her describe this experience and can’t help but envision a murder scene, the reporters, journalists, and angry mobs already at the front door. The incessant, violent, stabbing cramps, the blood, the barrage of voices demanding entrance to her body while it expelled the only source of their concerns. Maybe there wasn’t a real audience standing outside, but everyone who had had a perspective on her pregnancy had certainly made themselves heard. Enough that when she was sitting in the bathroom at 3 a.m. in literal gut-wrenching pain, all she could think about was the fact that she didn’t have to sift through their voices anymore. She didn’t have to decide whether she would carry out the pregnancy, or get an abortion. She didn’t have to endure conversations with people trying to influence her in one direction or another. And she definitely didn’t have to yell at the top of her lungs if she was going to make herself heard, amidst the cacophony of outside opinions.
As I listened to her talk, something within me hardened. Maybe it was my maternal instincts, or my capacity for empathy, but whatever it was firmly rooted itself at the center of my being. I suddenly had this innate understanding that the people who tried to dictate what a pregnant woman would do with her baby, or more generally, her own body, were clearly out of line. That for outsiders to demand, restrict, or monitor the decision that a woman navigating a pregnancy has to make for herself, is wrong. So when a leaked draft from the U.S. Supreme Court indicated that the court could potentially revoke the right to abortion, I remembered the conversation I had with my friend. I felt as if yet another voice was trying to worm its way into her head as she recalled her experience that night, trauma I could read on her body as she spoke. The Supreme Court, in this case, seemed to represent the angry mob, the journalists and the reporters that I had imagined shouting at my friend’s front door. She had become someone I felt responsible to protect and intrinsically changed by, her story a vessel for all of the women who have felt overwhelmed and disoriented by voices outside of their own. It made me wonder how her environment might have been different if she hadn’t had access to an abortion to begin with. Though she ultimately never made the decision herself, she had been given options. If one of them was no longer available, she may have felt even more helpless, or further suffocated by other people trying to make her decision for her. With her story at the forefront of my mind, I feel it’s crucial to protect women’s rights to abortion.
Roe v. Wade, the case that solidified this right in 1973, is currently being called into question. This means that the U.S. Supreme Court could, in the near future, overturn the ruling that allows pregnant women the liberty to have an abortion without excessive government regulation. However, we’ve seen how this plays out already. Texas’s Senate Bill 8, which went into effect September of last year, prohibits abortions once the baby’s heartbeat is detected. Although this is typically first heard around 5 ½ to 6 weeks, which is barely enough time for a pregnant woman to find out that she’s pregnant in the first place, much less for her to decide whether she wants to have an abortion or not. According to the American Pregnancy Association, “weeks four through seven are when most women discover they’re pregnant.” Which means Texas’s Senate Bill 8 makes abortion illegal right around the time most women are just learning about their pregnancy. Essentially, it puts a ball and chain on women’s rights to abortion, forcing women to take precarious avenues if they need to undergo the procedure. As stated in an article by Planned Parenthood, “since the Supreme Court allowed S.B. 8 to go into effect on Sept. 1, stories of heartbreak, chaos, and crisis have come out of Texas. People who have the resources are forced to either travel long distances to get an abortion or remain pregnant.” This plainly says that by restricting women’s access to an abortion, Texas’s Senate Bill 8 forces women to take the matter into their own hands. This could mean enduring the pregnancy despite serious environmental or medical risks, traveling to another state for the procedure, or conducting a self-induced abortion at home. All of which put living women in unnecessary danger for the sake of an unborn baby. Gloria Steinem said it deftly in a recent instagram post, “banning abortions does not stop the need for them, it just bans their safety.”
Though all sides of this argument have a different, slightly nuanced perspective, it’s indisputable that women have rights. However, a common dispute within the abortion argument is whether an unborn fetus has rights, too. In the case of Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun decided that the word ‘person,’ as referenced in the 14th amendment, does not include unborn children. There are three instances in the amendment where the word required further interpretation by the court–

“1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.2. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; 3. nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” 

In this context, how the Supreme Court interpreted the word ‘person’ was the difference between guaranteeing access to abortions, and making them illegal altogether. If Justice Harry Blackmun would have concluded that the word ‘person’ here does include unborn babies, then under the Constitution, these unborn babies would be protected. In my belief, however, there’s a distinct difference between a human organism, and a human person. It frankly feels absurd to still be wrestling with how we define this word, deciding who it shields, while making living, breathing women with warm flesh dangerously vulnerable. I would argue that it’s not a matter of deciding whether an unborn baby has rights or not, but of deciding which one comes first, which should be prioritized. And it is my firm belief that the women who are already walking this earth should be the priority.
By keeping abortion legal, women will have a safeguard from the consequences of a pregnancy. Some of the most common scenarios in which women seek out the procedure include, but are not limited to: having a baby would interfere with their work or education, they’re unable to afford a baby, they would be a single parent, or there are complications with the pregnancy that pose a serious threat to the baby’s or their own life. Women who find themselves in one of these positions then need a safety net, which access to abortion provides. Otherwise, they risk being in a situation where they can’t provide for themselves, provide for their child after it’s born, or guarantee the health of the baby or themselves. All of these scenarios are entirely avoidable if abortions remain legal. Without access to the procedure, it’s inevitable that women will find alternative pathways to terminate their pregnancy, through much riskier methods. As Gloria Steinem said in her instagram post, making abortion illegal doesn’t cease the need for them, it just makes getting one that much more precarious. And in order to preserve the integrity of our nation, I believe it’s vital that women’s health is prioritized in this way. Abortion access shields women from the unforeseen consequences of a pregnancy, and the risks involved in alternative abortion methods.
In addition, restricting abortions doesn’t only put women in danger, but their children as well. An article by Diana Greene Foster, a leader in the nationwide Turnaway Study at the University of California, San Francisco, investigates the impact of denied abortions on the mother’s exisiting children, and the child that results from the unwanted pregnancy. According to her research, “Consistent with mothers’ concerns that raising a new child would limit their ability to care for their existing children, we found significantly worse socioeconomic outcomes for children whose mothers were denied abortions than those who received them: a greater chance of living below the poverty level (72 percent compared to 55 percent) or living in a household without enough money to cover food, housing, and transportation (87 percent compared to 70 percent).” This study indicates that the majority of children whose mother’s sought out an abortion, but couldn’t receive one, end up living in scarcity; either below the poverty line or in an environment lacking basic amenities. This begs the question, then, is it worth it to heavily regulate women’s access to abortions, if the mother’s existing children and the children born unwillingly from this decision will end up living under financial strain? I imagine kids living on the fringes, never fully comfortable, and wonder how that may affect their developing brain. If a mother is unable to give her children the proper support to encourage their growth, or ensure their health and safety, then my belief is that she shouldn’t be having a child at all.
Although I believe abortions should be readily available to any women who may need one, I do recognize that it’s not always a painless procedure. Physically, there are some side effects, like abdominal cramps, bleeding, nausea, sore breasts and extreme fatigue, but mentally and emotionally, abortions can also prove to be a real challenge. According to Medical News Today, a web-based outlet for developments in medicine and health, a woman’s emotional response to having an abortion can vary. Some women may experience immense sadness, grief, or a sense of loss and regret; and occasionally if these feelings persist, they snowball into depression. These side effects aren’t universal, but they feel worth noting in order to really put abortion under a magnifying glass. Similar to the details my friend had shared about her miscarriage, terminating a pregnancy isn’t always clean and straightforward. Abortion offers women protection from a pregnancy they’re ill-equipped for, which makes it necessary, but it doesn’t shy away from the reality of the matter; removing a baby from a living, breathing, warm-blooded body requires varying degrees of physical, mental, and emotional exertion.
Acknowledging the potential side effects of the procedure is one place to start on the opposite side of this argument. The reality is, abortions aren’t always seamless. However, if The Supreme Court insists on making an effort to abolish this right, then women would be forced to find alternative, often dangerous methods to get the same job done. I, however, think there are better solutions. Not for the sake of further oppressing women’s bodies, because ultimately, they have the choice, but heeding the potential side effects of this procedure that’s inherently invasive.  For one, making birth control free would allow it to be accessed by all women, and in turn, would lessen the need for abortions. As of now, there are 12 birth control methods available, and none of them are free without insurance. The pill can cost up to $50, an arm implant nearly $300, and for an IUD, around $1,300. Tearing off the price tag would make birth control available to all women, and would hopefully lessen the number of unexpected pregnancies. In addition, providing both boys and girls with sex education that thoroughly discusses the female reproductive system and different types of contraceptives, may also be a way to temper the volume of abortions in the United States. By reassessing and modifying sex education to emphasize these topics, the next generation will presumably be better informed, conducting themselves with this knowledge in mind, decreasing the number of unexpected pregnancies and subsequent abortions.
After I had listened to my friend spill over, every detail of her miscarriage rivering out of her mouth and onto the dinner table between us, I suddenly knew that women deserve to have a choice. That for anyone, or anything external of a pregnant woman’s body, to demand, restrict, or monitor the decision that she has to make for herself in that position, is wrong. “I’ll never forget the sheer amount of blood that came out of my body,” my friend’s quavering voice reminds me, that the battle over abortion law isn’t just occurring on the surface, in courtrooms and news channels all across the nation, but inside of women’s bodies. Abortion legislation is inextreicably connected to living, breathing, warm-blooded women, and so it’s imperative that we allow them the freedom to make decisions for their own health and well-being. Keeping abortion legal, in this way, is also a conscious effort to keep women empowered.