General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Restore Roe!" Is a Bad Rallying Cry
https://newrepublic.com/article/179961/abortion-ballot-restore-roe-bidenIn at least 13 states, abortion rights are headed toward the November ballot, and the prevailing hope is that voters mobilized by the end of Roe will show up for reproductive freedom. Through ballot initiatives, voters will decide if their states constitution should be updated to guarantee a right to personal reproductive autonomy, as one initiative in Maine is formulated. Most, though, would limit this right just as Roe did: by permitting laws that prohibit abortion at the point of fetal viability, a line that is not as bright as legislators tend to believe. Similarly, it is almost taken for granted that the way to regain abortion rights is by restoring Roe.
Restoring Roe is what President Biden has promised to do, should he be reelected. Democrats further down the ballot are repeating this simple story of abortion rightsyou lose Roe, you get another Roeas they too hope to harness voters motivated by the ballot measures. Equating abortion rights with Roe is, in fact, a contested strategy in the broader movement for reproductive rights and justicethough you might not know that from the narrative falling into place about putting abortion on the ballot. You might come away thinking that the success of these ballot initiatives is measured by how successfully they get out the vote for Democrats, not how the measures would restore or protect the right to abortion.
The problem with the restore Roe! rallying cry is that, as activists have succinctly put it, Roe is the floor, not the ceiling. Roe protected the right to abortion only up to the point of fetal viability. But this boundary is disputed: How viability is defined, how viability should be used to set limits on abortion, and whether it should be used at all, are all complicated questions medically, morally, and politically. But when it comes to the law, viability is too arbitrary a standard to set, some advocates argue, and one that excludes later abortions, which are already difficult to obtain. Now state ballot initiatives meant to restore Roe could be enshrining this viability standard in state constitutions.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is blunt about the issue: The primary professional association for these doctors strongly discourages the inclusion of viability in legislation or regulation. Some presume that placing a viability limit on abortion is necessary to persuade voters. But political consultants are now testing that principle: One 2023 survey saw that a viability limit may actually dampen strong support for constitutional amendments. Poll respondents said they worried that politicians could outlaw most abortions by redefining viability, that the language around viability was vague, that the state should not be involved.
jimfields33
(15,808 posts)Im thinking at least for 13 states, it may be too late to make changes.
Grins
(7,217 posts)Politicians do this all the time. Something happens and they dont stop to think. They knee-jerk some response they think addresses the issue only for it to create a new one.
This is my solution; instead of abortion rights make it broader (because it is more than abortion):
Doctor-patient confidentiality.
A sacred responsibility recognized not only in every state, but around the world.
Let no government or entity (government, insurance companies, individuals, religions, pharmacies, etc.) come between a doctor and patient in recognized standards of care.
State medical certifying boards already have it in their professional codes of etc. And enforce them.
And there goes not just abortion, but a world of other issues.
Be fun to see a Republican vote against it, too!
Hekate
(90,704 posts)Dobbs was a gut-punch. But the speed with which the Talibangelicals have moved to define every single thing coming out of a uterus as an abortion unless it is a breathing baby is nothing short of staggering.
Having been both lucky and able to have access to good contraception, I had my 2 babies and was done.
Not so my mother before me. Mom had 4 living children, one full-term stillbirth, a miscarriage that bled slowly for God knows how long, putting her at risk for septic infection until she finally had a D&C, and a miscarriage that hemorrhaged so badly she ended up nearly bleeding out in the OR.
So the second gut-punch from Dobbs was that my own mothers very rough medical history was redefined as including 2 abortions and a suspicious stillbirth.
Shit happens. For the love of all that is holy, if this country is abandoning the standard of care from the 1940s thru the 1950s and criminalizing all women, what have we become?
So these *holes want to call every accident of Nature an abortion? They can kiss my ass. But also: Dont Call Our Healthcare an Abortion.
UTUSN
(70,696 posts)Ping Tung
(563 posts)In Washington abortion rights have been legal and in effect available to anyone who wants to have an abortion since 1970.
In 2023 a Shield Law was passed that protected women from other states that ban abortion after Roe V Wade was abolished from any criminal actions, inquiries, or cooperation with those states.
https://www.axios.com/2023/04/27/abortion-shield-law-washington
B.See
(1,242 posts)CIVIL rights, and in a broader sense, the right to self determination.
The MAGA GOP even now are going beyond attacking abortion rights. They are making moves on CONTRAception as well.
Arizona Republicans Refuse To Even Consider Basic Birth Control Protections - Huffpost
Solly Mack
(90,767 posts)Kid Berwyn
(14,907 posts)Women's Rights are Human Rights.