Candace Gibson, University of Utah College of Law

As many of you know, October is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month.  For the past couple of years, the Women Lawyers of Utah and other Utah bar organizations have planned the Walk Against Violence as a way to fundraise for our local YWCA.  Because of this, the University of Utah Law Students for Reproductive Justice Chapter (UULSRJ) began its public relations efforts at our law school by tabling on various reproductive justice issues.  In this manner, we hope to educate people about reproductive justice in all its intersectional, multi issue glory.  So last week we tabled on domestic violence and in the coming weeks, we will table on infant and maternal mortality, global reproductive rights, and health disparities.

As we talked to students about our chapter, I noticed that we had some problems communicating what reproductive justice is as a concept and as a way of organizing.  I think there are two reasons for this.  First, we need to get better at our basic thirty second elevator spiel.  Second, I think when some people of my generation hear “reproductive” they automatically think of abortion and contraceptives.  In fact, as I was discussing the national LSRJ office and our multi-issue work to a classmate, she told me that she thought that the term “reproductive justice” wasn’t useful for our mission.  She thought we should use another phrase because to her, “reproductive justice” automatically links to “reproductive rights” and makes her think of only abortion and contraceptives.  As I talked to another peer, he said the same thing, and then I talked to a first year, and he had no clue what I was discussing.

So this begs three questions.  Can reproductive justice ever be explained in a sound bite like the “Pro-Choice” or “Pro-Life” communities describe themselves (and thus be easily digested) and, more importantly, do we even want that?  As a movement, do we need to better articulate what reproductive justice is and better publicize the work that we do on multiple issues?  This is tougher than it appears to be, as I think that because we constantly have to defeat onslaughts of anti-women and anti-family legislation, individuals outside our movement think that we only work on abortion and contraceptive issues.

While some of you ponder these questions, send your 30 second RJ soundbites my way!

Susy Prochazka, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

Thomas Jefferson LSRJ regularly hosts a “Dinner and a Movie” night once a month, where we indulge in pizza, nachos, and popcorn, watch RJ-related films, and have a faculty-led discussion where we delve into the issues raised in the film.  In the past, we have watched such heavy films as “If These Walls Could Talk,” “Losing Isaiah,” and “Vera Drake.”  In the spirit of Halloween, we are planning to show a “scary” RJ movie, showing the dire social consequences of the lack of access to education about contraceptives and STIs.

Last week, ten of us watched “Citizen Ruth,” a 1996 film that satirizes the conflict between the Pro-Choice and the Pro-Life camps. The film opens with Ruth getting arrested for huffing spray-paint in an alley.  Ruth is an addict, makes regular appearances in jail, and has been declared an unfit mother by the state four times over. Upon her arrest, Ruth learns that she is pregnant again; the judge threatens to charge Ruth with “felony fetal endangerment” unless Ruth obtains an abortion.  Ruth is unsure of what decision to make when faced with this puzzling offer – she is portrayed as a hapless drug addict, uneducated about the politics of the abortion debate, yet very quickly she gets thrust right in the middle. Ruth encounters Pro-Choice and Pro-Life individuals, inadvertently becoming the symbolic center of the struggle between the two groups, as they both vie for Ruth to act according to their particular beliefs.  Both sides attempt to sway Ruth with monetary incentives, both offering $15,000 to secure Ruth’s promise to either continue or terminate the pregnancy.

Ruth is learning about her right to freely govern her body, but she is simultaneously tempted by the money, which is more than she has ever seen. However, before a decision can be made, Ruth suffers a miscarriage. The movie ends shortly after, with Ruth securing $15,000 and sneaking away from oblivious protestors of both camps, who do not even notice that the subject of their vehement shouting has absconded the scene.

Following the movie, our faculty advisor started off a great discussion, asking us to think about what it means to truly believe in an individual’s right to parent, a central tenet to the RJ movement. In the film, the State has declared Ruth to be an unfit mother, thereby intervening in a woman’s right to raise her children. This presents a “slippery-slope” dilemma: at what point may the State intervene and tell a woman she may not have any more children? May the State order a woman to terminate her pregnancy when she has proven to be incapable of raising the children she already has? When has a woman reached such a point – what standards must be met?

We also discussed the paradox presented by the judge’s threat to charge Ruth with felony fetal endangerment, which he later offered to retract if Ruth obtained an abortion: why is endangering a fetus illegal when the potential harm is caused by illegal acts such as drug use, but is legal when the woman is exercising her right to have an abortion? Should there even be a legal or noticeable difference?

And what about the politics of it all? What are the moral implications of Pro-Choice and Anti-Choice members actively attempting to buy Ruth’s choice? Does Ruth lose her freedom to choose when money enters the picture? What does Ruth’s lack of education about the politics of the abortion debate and her right to choose say about the struggle between the two camps? What are the ramifications of this depiction of lack of education say about the movement? Is the debate limited only to the socially elite who can afford to participate? Do the uneducated and the poor have any say in the debate – or is it restricted to the stereotypical rich, white woman?

While we were not able to reach any clear, defining answers to these questions raised by the film, it was a great discussion that allowed everyone to express their opinions on relevant RJ issues. I highly recommend other chapters do such an event, as new and old members can comfortably debate and express themselves in a casual environment. It’s a fun and low-key event that is great for education, building cohesion and friendships between chapter members, and of course, there are nachos!

Nikola Nable-Juris & Meredith Leeson, University of Maryland School of Law

After our first year of law school, we knew a lot about the law–elements of a negligence claim, reasons a contract may be unenforceable, and the mens rea needed for different criminal charges.  However, for those of us looking to relate these principles to real life, the core courses of our education failed to reflect our personal and political realities.  Torts class neglected to mention tort claims for forced sterilization or medical complications resulting from being shackled during delivery, and Contracts class kept silent on contracts between same-sex couples creating families.  We entirely missed the range of criminal charges for pregnant women who struggle with addiction in Criminal Law, and Roe v. Wade made only a brief appearance in second year Constitutional Law.  Even electives like health law or family law that touch on some of these issues often lack a comprehensive intersectional analysis.  Instead of being frustrated by what we weren’t being taught, University of Maryland’s LSRJ chapter channeled its energy into proposing the course we wanted to take—a Reproductive Justice (RJ) course.

In early September 2010, with a small executive board and a designated Course Campaign Coordinator, we launched a course campaign on Maryland’s campus.  The Coordinator researched which other law schools had existing RJ courses (only 39 schools offer a reproductive rights law or justice course), examined their curriculums, and gathered over 300 student signatures of support by tabling in the hallway and giving short presentations in classes. The Coordinator compiled all of this information into a comprehensive proposal, including a list of eleven other student organizations in support of the course, an alumni letter of support, and the 2010 LSRJ Course Survey (updated 2011 LSRJ Course Survey here).  We presented this proposal to the Law School’s Associate Dean for Academic Programs with arguments for why this course was necessary.  We are proud to announce that the University of Maryland will be offering “Reproductive Justice and the Law” in Spring 2012, taught by Professor Leslie Meltzer Henry.  For those of us who recognize the RJ framework to be a valuable viewpoint, this course will be critical to our education as informed social justice advocates. Even for those who are new to reproductive rights, the RJ course will provide an important foundation for understanding some of the most important and contentious political and social issues of our times.

In law school, we are taught to be advocates, whether as litigators, policy makers, or impartial decision makers. As students, we must begin our advocacy careers by taking charge of shaping our own legal education. In addition to resulting in a fantastic course, a course campaign allows students to build networks of like-minded students and faculty, interact with school administrators, and spread the word about RJ to diverse audiences on campus. By campaigning for the RJ courses at our own school, we learned the fundamentals of being advocates even before setting foot in the courtroom.

Burke Bindbeutel, University of Missouri School of Law

Last Sunday night I felt an urge to see Ben Roethlisberger of the Pittsburgh Steelers crushed by opposing linebackers. This was not because I am an Indianapolis Colts fan (I am not). No, I wanted the beefy quarterback to be Theismannized because his off-the-field conduct has earned him two accusations of sexual assault. Roethlisberger continues to receive the adulation of the Pittsburgh faithful despite behavior that puts less talented men behind bars.

Last year, right in my hometown, the Missouri Tigers suspended their team captain indefinitely due to a sex crime allegation. He was eventually convicted. Could it be that there is a necessary link between football and sexual violence? (more…)

Mallory Carlberg, University of Oklahoma Law School

Anyone who follows reproductive justice news knows that Oklahoma is often the testing ground for new anti-abortion legislation. State legislators pass bills through the House and Senate with ease. Even when a Governor vetoes a bill, both bodies often have the two-thirds majority needed to override the veto. Since the 2010 midterm election, the situation has only worsened. Our new Governor will not veto any anti-abortion measures, and our new Attorney General endorses redefining “persons” under the Fourteenth Amendment to include fetuses. Oklahoma politicians also routinely undermine other reproductive justice concerns, such as access to comprehensive sex education, family planning services, and social programs assisting struggling families.

The University of Oklahoma (OU) law school produces an excellent class of lawyers every year, most of whom will work in Oklahoma and Texas. A sizable amount will be the next generation of legislatures and judges. In classes, constitutionally protected rights are often discussed in a vacuum as if race, class, gender, sexuality and ability do not affect a person’s experience of their rights. One major goal in starting OU Law Students for Reproductive Justice (LSRJ) is to engage future Oklahoma lawmakers with reproductive rights in a deeper way. The RJ movement’s refusal to be a single-issue movement makes it ideal for building coalitions in a red state. Even if a student’s personal views are against abortion, we can often find common ground on other RJ issues like domestic violence, maternal health, and sex education.

At meetings we want to educate law students on issues they may not have considered and re-complicate the already complicated issue of abortion. This process will start with our upcoming event RJ 101. OU LSRJ members are also helping with “Take Root: Red State Perspectives on Reproductive Justice.” OU, RJ non-profits and RJ community groups have come together to bring a conference to OU next semester, which will focus on red-state specific issues. The conference will showcase national and local leaders and provide young, RJ activists with a space to meet and exchange ideas.

Though our state may have further to go than others to achieve RJ for all, the willingness of OU law students to discuss these issues and the support OU LSRJ has received from faculty inspires me. There is a small, but growing group of Oklahomans who are dedicated to bringing these issues to light. I am excited for OU LSRJ members to bring that conversation to the law school.

Candace Gibson, University of Utah College of Law

I was very hesitant to start a Law Students for Reproductive Justice chapter at the University of Utah for three reasons:  1) I’m starting my last year-I’m already exhausted and I don’t want to do any more work, 2) it’s Utah, enough said, and 3) the most terrifying reason-how about if no one wants to join the group and it’s just me and my two friends who do claim a feminist identity (I will just be preaching to the choir).  Luckily, my experiences have brought me back to the lessons I learned as a community organizer which have significantly reduced my stress and my hesitancy.

The first couple of weeks of September I was scrambling to get an executive board together (though I am proud to say that the U of U LSRJ has an awesome one that is composed of all three class years!) and at first no one was really chomping at the bit.  Can I blame my 3L friends for saying that they already have too much on their plates? No, I can’t.  Although at desperate moments I thought I was going to be doing all the work and had the recurring thought late at night, “what did I get myself into?” LSRJ made me tap into the lessons that I learned during my community organizing days in college.  These two basic lessons were:  One, there can be no movement without starting a conversation.  Two, people aren’t going to jump on board unless you meet them where they are.  Of course, my peers weren’t going to volunteer for every task and position because all of us were getting barely comfortable with the concept that we were starting an organization at a school that never had an organization like LSRJ, one that was so revolutionary in nature about a subject that is taboo in Utah.  Hell, I was still getting comfortable with the idea.  How can I ask someone to give their precious time when I’m not completely sold on it? As I become more enamored of U of U LSRJ and its potential, I’m not afraid to ask individuals for their time, money, and support.  As these conversations occur, my friends and my peers are willing to volunteer their time or serve on the executive board, and I appreciate every contribution.  Without them, there would be no way that U of U LSRJ can grow.  I also fully know as a community organizer that there may be days where everyone’s personal lives need to be attended to and I will just have to step up to the plate.  As organizers, we often forget that our personal lives will not stop for our professional and public lives.

My experiences have also reminded me of the sheer joy that is part of community organizing.  During the introductory meeting, a future member of the executive board understood the principles of Reproductive Justice so much that she had this enormous smile on her face.  We had made a connection.  These connections and small moments of spontaneity and laughter are going to sustain the group whenever we have our frustrations with each other, with the campus, or with people who just don’t want to understand Reproductive Justice.

Susy Prochazka, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

San Diego has a reputation as a socially and political conservative city, especially with the large military presence of the Navy and a large population of veterans. Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego is no exception to this conservative atmosphere (on the part of both the students and administration). The school’s chapters of the Federalist Society, the Republican Students Association, and the Christian Legal Society have a large and vocal membership base. Throughout our LSRJ chapter’s relatively short span on campus, we have faced both explicit and subtle opposition from students and administration.

This opposition has ranged from certain members of the Student Bar Association stating that they do not wish to work with the “abortion club” to blatant theft of our chapter’s documents and materials.  Recently, we have faced the issue of censorship of an event flyer by the school’s administration and faculty. At our new fancy campus, student orgs have a lot of problems advertising events because no one is allowed to post flyers anywhere in the building. To advertize, a student organization must send a PDF file to the administration to get our flyers put on the 6 electronic touch-screens throughout the building.

For our first event, we had planned our Sex-Ed Trivia Night at a local happy hour. It is one of our most popular events, and we timed it to take place right after the student org fair to rake in 1Ls and other prospective members. To advertise the event, our co-chair, Thomas, produced an absolutely amazing poster, guaranteed to catch attention and bring in attendees. Our flyer had a black and purple background, with a pair of woman’s legs in heels, and with the event details underneath the simple high heels. Nothing lewd, nothing sexually-explicit, nothing to suggest that this was a portrayal of a stripper. It was simply a poster to generate interest and gain attention through a little flair of suggestiveness.

But after submitting our flyer, we immediately received a response from our administration letting us know that the school has been working over the years to improve its reputation in the community, and that our flyer posed a threat to the school’s image of professionalism. (more…)

Joanne Caceres, Harvard Law School

Amidst the utter chaos that is the first week back at Harvard Law School, I feel a certain calm returning to the classroom where HLSRJ has taken to holding its board meetings. By calm, I partially mean the happiness of seeing familiar faces, but it goes beyond that. It’s the feeling I get being in a room of capable, passionate, and brilliant women and men who are committed to engaging in the same issues as I am. It is moments like these that I reflect on my personal mantra: dripping water carves a stone.

High on our list this year is increasing our visibility on campus in order to create a campus wide conversation on Reproductive Justice. Our first focus is recruiting new 1Ls and building relationships with other progressive campus groups. We are hitting it off next week with the ever-important Reproductive Justice 101 event. I fondly remember the first time I learned about Ms. T, a case study that illustrated the intersectional nature of reproductive justice. It was during that presentation that I knew that RJ would become a major part of my law school career. If we are lucky, we will meet some of our new rising stars at this year’s event!

As we seek to build our core, however, we also are considering opportunities for engaging the entire campus. Through our relationships with other organization leaders, we became aware of a point/counterpoint event that will be looking at the recent anti-abortion bills that have been spreading out throughout many state legislatures, including South Dakota. Many of these bills are slated as being pro-women, because they require providing women with “more information” and more time to make a decision through mandatory wait periods. In reality, these laws are little more than attempts to further limit and prevent abortions, often making what is already a difficult process more difficult. Although we are not officially involved as an organization at this event, our members will be attending and we hope to use this as an opportunity to bring people together to reflect on the conversation. We want to do more this year than talk at people, we want to engage people and allow them to process what is an all too often not openly and intellectually discussed on our law school campus. And hopefully, if we can’t change some minds, at least have our views listened to and understood. It’s shaping up to be quite an active year, drip drip drip.

Shandanette Molnar, George Washington University Law School

Before considering law school, I contemplated becoming a traditional midwife. After learning of the legal challenges that families and midwives face when attempting a more empowered birth experience, I decided that there was important legal work to be done and part of that work was my responsibility. In the meantime, I resolved to become a birth & postpartum doula and lactation educator and counselor so as to maintain my sense of self during law school.

As a maternal care, birth, and breastfeeding advocate, there are certainly times when I feel a disconnect between law school and the birth and reproductive justice movements. This is where LSRJ comes into the picture and precisely why campus-based reproductive justice work is so important. LSRJ bridges the gap between my outside and law school lives and repairs that schism I feel. With an LSRJ framework, I oftentimes engage with fellow classmates and raise awareness of reproductive justice issues. Through these conversations, our chapter highlights that reproductive justice is about much more than abortion. It is about the shackling of incarcerated pregnant women, mandatory Cesarean births, bans on vaginal births after Cesareans (VBACs), domestic violence, and access to information and quality healthcare across the full spectrum of a person’s reproductive life. When possible, I highlight the metarights because they are just so powerful – the right to have children, the right not to have children, and the right to parent the children we have with dignity.

Next week, our chapter will be co-hosting a feminist networking event for students. In an effort to give back to the law school community, I am hoping that I will be able to connect with a new chapter member or schoolmate – perhaps a 1L – and assure them that if they are interested in the work, reproductive justice and LSRJ provide many intersections to pursue meaningful work, both on and off campus.

Though I have often doubted my decision to attend law school, I feel confident in the decision I made now that I have 1L year behind me. Additionally, I think it will be easier to be a lawyer in midwifery school than it would have been to be a midwife in law school. Sure, I still desire to become midwife, but that’s how I’ll spend my fifties+ life. In the meantime, I am going to dedicate myself to combining my legal advocacy skills with a commitment to better birth, breastfeeding, and maternal care practices, as well as birth and reproductive justice. I hope a few of my amazingly talented law school comrades will join me as well.

We are thrilled to introduce our six dynamic and dazzling resident bloggers, coming at you from law schools across the country throughout the 2011-2012 school year!

They come from long-standing chapters, from brand-new chapters, from the South, Midwest, Northeast, DC, and the West, and they will be sharing their chapters successes, discussing challenging conversations they’ve had with colleagues and friends, and inviting us to think critically about a wide range of RJ issues.

Burke Bindbeutel, 2L, University of Missouri

Burke is just beginning an internship at the Missouri Commission for Human Rights. In the summer of 2011, he worked for the Missouri State Public Defender, in the Trial Division. A Missouri native, he has rediscovered his roots through the study of history as a research assistant for the War & Reconciliation project. Burke serves on the screening committee of the True/False Film Festival. In high school, he portrayed Benedick in a stage production of “Much Ado About Nothing.”

Joanne Caceres, 2L, Harvard Law School

Joanne’s interests in reproductive justice include community organizing and progressive advocacy. She is her chapter’s Community Liaison Chair and hopes in this capacity to encourage stronger and broader coalitions on campus. As a a first-generation Hispanic American, Joanne is particularly worried about how lower income and language barriers affect women’s access to adequate healthcare and education.

Mallory Carlberg, 2L, University of Oklahoma

Mallory is currently enjoying the newly regained freedom to choose her own schedule as a 2L at the University of Oklahoma. Despite it being at eight a.m., Health Law is her favorite class. She is interested in issues related to birth justice, comprehensive sex education, and abortion access. She is an editor for the blog at Oklahomans for Reproductive Justice (OK4RJ), a grassroots organization dedicated to caring and advocating for Oklahomans. Additionally she volunteers at a program assisting survivors of domestic violence in obtaining victim protective orders. This year she is co-founding an LSRJ chapter, and is excited to bring a red state perspective to RepoRepro.

Candace Gibson, 3L, University of Utah

Candace is starting an LSRJ chapter as a 3L at the University of Utah. Candace hails from Los Angeles, was raised in Utah, and as a young feminist fled to Smith College.  Before going to law school, she worked with refugee and ethnic communities on a wide range of issues at a small non-profit in Utah.  When her friends and she aren’t talking about politics, they like to analyze pop culture, especially Mad Men.

Shandanette Molnar, 2L, George Washington University Law School

Shandanette is a 2L and Master of Public Health candidate in Maternal & Child Health at George Washington University in Washington, DC. Additionally, she is a birth and postpartum doula and Certificated Lactation Educator & Counselor who volunteers at a local birth center and with a childcare collective. She hopes to blend her legal advocacy skills and public health scholarship with her commitment to reproductive justice, informed choices, and better birth and breastfeeding practices.

Susy Prochazka, 2L, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

Susy is originally from both Prague, Czech Republic and Boulder, Colorado. In her sparse spare time, she enjoys reading sci-fi novels on the beach and surfing.  Before law school, Susy interned at several human rights organizations in D.C. to follow her passion while slinging coffee as a barista to pay the bills. As the co-president of her LSRJ chapter, Susy is working to introduce the concept of reproductive justice and all it entails to the broader community to encourage free expression of body, gender, and sexuality.