Nobody likes abortions. Nobody wants an abortion. Pro-choice people don’t wake up every morning craving the blood of the innocent. It’s a sad fact that safe and legal abortions have always been and will continue to be necessary. But that’s what you get when impoverished and working class women (the majority of abortion-seekers) have little or no health care, no guaranteed parental leave or childcare, and no living wage to support a child. Many of the women who could not exercise their constitutionally protected right, because of 17 restrictions to abortion access enacted by Governor John Kasich since 2011, are mothers of those in the oft-lamented infant mortality statistic (PDF).
What can be expected when, at every turn, a woman’s right to choose is questioned and threatened by a legislature of men? Their most recent attack comes in the form of two bills: one meant only to further stigmatize women who seek the procedure and another aimed at the most vulnerable of pregnant women.
SB 254 would require a woman to choose whether to bury or cremate the fetal remains, and SB 127 prohibits the one percent of abortions that happen after 20 weeks, in the middle of the second trimester.
Often perceived as a callous change-of-mind, the decision to end a pregnancy after five months is a medical one. It usually follows a diagnosis: the mother or child has a complication that will limit or end the life of one or both. It’s at this point that all options should be considered and available to the woman and her doctor.
No one asked, yet a number of women have shared their stories of reluctantly and heartbreakingly seeking an abortion in their second trimester. They do so in hopes of raising awareness and education on what should have never been a political debate.
Just after the Roe v. Wade decision was made in 1973 is when the right to choose became a point of political divide. Evangelist voters and lobbyists pressured Republicans to take a stand against women’s right to an abortion, claiming that denying access “protects family values.” Considering the majority of women getting abortions are already mothers, perhaps it would be more useful for these groups to focus on supporting families that exist rather than fighting an endless moral battle.
Restricting abortion access does not decrease the need and does not stop a woman from choosing to terminate her pregnancy; it just makes it more difficult and more dangerous. Policies need to focus more on preventing the pregnancy in the first place with insurance coverage of birth control or supporting the pregnancy, the birth, and the life after by implementing policies that uplift families, not stigmatize them.
Aside from being invasive and cruel, asking families to choose cremation or burial is costly and medically irrelevant. There is no reason to change the current process of contracting with an outside agency that handles the disposal. This bill was introduced with one purpose: to shame women who seek an abortion. One of the largest barriers to abortion access is familial pressure and alienation. Pregnancy is not supposed to be a punishment, but thanks to those 17 restrictions on abortion access (and two more, when these pass), it frequently is.
Of the 20,000 Ohio abortions last year, 75 percent were for low income women. Those are women who, because of those restrictions, likely had to travel (nine clinics have shut down under Kasich) and pay for an overnight stay (24-hour mandatory waiting period). That’s if they could find and pay someone to watch their children, since 60 percent of abortion-seeking women are already moms. For those who couldn’t hurdle the obstacles, they get to be punished with a child they knew they couldn’t support (if the baby survives, because, oh yeah, still no adequate healthcare). But no worries, just add them in to the 400,000 children already in foster care in the United States.
Attacking abortion access is coming at the problem from the wrong angle. Women need more choices, not fewer. Families need support in the form of paid maternity leave (guaranteed in every other industrialized country), paid sick leave, and a living wage. They don’t need to be bound by policies that exist only to make hard times harder.
Every Ohioan should sign NARAL’s petition against SB 127. Considering these bills is a waste of time that could be spent implementing helpful policies for working class Ohioans. Both have already passed through the House and only await approval by the Senate. If families are important to Ohio’s legislators, maybe they should have done something with House Bill 511, introduced in April of this year, which would make Ohioans eligible for paid medical and family leave.
To sign the petition against SB 127, visit http://bit.ly/no20weekban.