A Question of Values: The Real Abortion Debate
Thursday, 04/8/2010 - 9:21 am by June Carbone and Naomi Cahn | 4 Comments
June Carbone and Naomi Cahn champion contraceptives and challenge the frame of the “abortion” debate.
Politicians do not like to talk about sex (especially when they are caught cheating with their wives). They most emphatically do not like talking about women’s reproductive needs. Indeed, they dislike talking about contraception so much that every time the issue arises, a determined group in Congress changes the subject to abortion. Abortion, as we know from the health care debate, is about having the right values. Contraception is about women’s real needs. It is time we change the subject back.
Over 90% of sexually active women will use contraception at some point in their lives, even if they have sex only with their husbands. In our book, Red Families v. Blue Families, we wrote that the time has come to refocus attention on the relationship between birth control and family values. Impressive research shows that college educated women remade their lives in the sixties and seventies with the advent of the pill, posting marriage, garnering graduate and professional degrees, and dramatically increasing their family income. Other research demonstrates that the women who embraced the new family ethic today have more stable relationships - they are the only group in society whose marriage rates have increased and whose divorce rates have fallen back to the era before no-fault divorce.
For the rest of the country, the disparities in our reproductive lives have grown, and the politicians who talk most frequently about abortion are a major part of the reason.
In the meantime, we all pay for the consequences. The Medicaid program, which is limited to women at or near the poverty line, pays for 40% of all births in the United States. Think about that - 40% of all births in the United States are to women who will have difficulty finding the resources to care for their children. The U.S. has the highest unintended pregnancy rate in the developed world and the rate for the poorest women is four times that of the middle class.
When President Obama proposed a minor measure to address the issue - the extension of contraceptive services to women in the hospital giving birth at government expense - the Republicans objected, and the Administration yanked the proposal from last year’s stimulus package without further discussion. Why? The Republicans succeeded in using the term “family planning” to send coded messages to their base. Family planning for them isn’t about the needs of 90% of women. No, they want to be seen as opposing anything that might even suggest abortion, or — for that matter — approving of the fact that poor women have sex.
It is time to stop the codes. It is time to face the truth. Contraception is not abortion. Supposedly “pro-life” policies that make it harder for women to get effective birth control cause more abortions. Nor is pregnancy an appropriate punishment for sex — with or without marriage.
We propose a new strategy to make sure women’s issues are taken seriously. Every time a member of Congress says the word “abortion,” we say, “Where do you stand on preventing unwanted pregnancies?” Every time a politician says he is pro-life, we ask, “Are you for allowing women to exercise responsibility in childbearing?” Every time politicians try to change the subject, we should change it back: we should make members of Congress vote as often on provisions that would help women’s lives as they vote on pointless abortion measures that will not the change the outcome of a single pregnancy. Let them either vote for effective birth control or explain, clearly and loudly, that what they really want is pregnancy as the price of intercourse. It is time to talk honestly about sex.
June Carbone is the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair of Law, the Constitution and Society at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Naomi Cahn is the John Theodore Fey Research Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School. She is the author of numerous books and law review articles on gender and family law. She and Professor June Carbone are the co-authors of Red Families v. Blue Families (Oxford University Press, 2010).
“Are you for allowing women to exercise responsibility in childbearing?”
“Allowing” sent chills down my spine. The debate of pro-abortion/anti-abortion is a symptom of the true war. Who is the primary owner of a woman’s body, organs, cell reproduction and functions? Is it the state, the federal government, or perhaps a woman’s body belong to its’ sole occupant. This is the only debate. Unless the government financially supports gestation, birth, and caretaking for the next 21yrs, I’d say that a woman is the sole owner of her body and accepts responsibility in her decisions of whether certain cell reproduction shall continue or not. Cell reproduction cannot exist without its’ host. Why should reproduction hold women’s bodies prisoner and the lifelong childrearing of single mothers are economically improverished. US economics is unbalanced and unfairly punishes women and children.
Why are Denmark and Sweden welfare/economic models successful for women and children? Their social/economic policies provide a balance of home, work, childcare, and financial safety nets if women choose to have children. Whereas the US model punishes women and children at all socioeconomic levels. The truth is in the USA women are second class citizens and children are the burden they must bear for having sex.
The debate must be altered. Women need to drop the politically correct lingo and command the debate with directness. To demand an equally worthy socioeconomic model such as Denmark and Sweden that simply accepts men, women, and children as equals in a Partnership Society.
Posted by Mary Dohm | April 8th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
Thank you to the authors for making it clear that ‘family values’ really means. I’m tired of abortion being used as a political tool. We seem to have made progress as a country on understanding that people of different races have the same rights, but we lag far behind on respecting the rights of women.
Posted by Nellie | April 9th, 2010 at 9:58 am
We are delighted that the phrase “allowing women to exercise responsibility in childbearing” is sending chills down someone’s spine and we hope the sentiment spreads.
The phrase is designed to unmask the true agenda of the right — bringing back pregnancy and childbirth as the punishment for women having having sex. Just this week, a district attorney in Wisconsin sent a letter to area school districts warning that health teachers who tell students how to put on a condom or take birth-control pills could face criminal charges. Anti-abortion forces cheered.
An abstract discussion of the beginning of life followed by an abstract discussion of women’s autonomy plays into conservative hands. We would like to underscore the point that women take the decision to bring a child into the world too seriously to let it simply be the result of a contraceptive accidents. We applaud the call for linking childbirth to provision for children, and we agree that we need to make visible the fact that existing policies have simply brought back a class and race-based system of reproduction.
Posted by June Carbone | April 9th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
“…..an abstract discussion of women’s autonomy plays into conservative hands.”
How is women’s autonomy an “abstract” discussion? Is a man’s autonomy abstract? The discussion is valid. Perhaps the underlying unmentionable anger within the conservative movement is that women choose whether to “allow” or “end” male lineage. Women control this process and are not reproductively subservient to male dominance.
“the true agenda of the right — bringing back pregnancy and childbirth as the punishment for women having having sex.”
I’d say the true agenda of the right - is bringing back the patriarchal model. The patriarchal societal structures of church, government, and family have been abject failures for over half of humanity. Women have been successfully dismantling this ancient tribal model. However, the conservatives want to shift backwards and reinstate the patriarchal model. Their anger has captured the entertainment industry and their fantasies of hatred, violence, destruction, rape, and murder of women and children inundate our daily lives. We are spoon fed fear, anxiety, and panic from Hollywood. Insidious attacks upon our well being as we are terrorized by violent acts against women if they don’t conform to the dictates of the patriarchal model. With the added bonus of death and destruction of women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, and the streets of the United States. Why is it we live in a world that embraces fear and violence directed at women? What’s that old saying, control the head, you control the body….endoctrination. Hollywood’s obssessive hatred of the other half of humanity must end.
the key is to focus on the Denmark and Sweden model, and create a sustainable partnership society for women, men, and children. The implosion of our lopsided financial system wasn’t working for over half of humanity. This is an opportunity, a moment in time to build an equitable system. Remove from our vocabulary ” rich or poor.” To end extremisms and incorporate moderation and sustainability for humanity.
Posted by Mary Dohm | April 9th, 2010 at 9:53 pm