Disclaimer: Sara Taylor is not a constitutional lawyer or scholar. She is a third-year law student who did reasonably well in her First Amendment class. If you seek a non-biased expert assessment of constitutional claims and arguments surrounding this issue, this blog is incapable of providing one to you.

New York City just passed a law requiring crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) and their ilk to post disclaimers regarding what services they do and do not provide. Makes sense, right? You can go to the check-cashing place and it posts its insane interest rates. You can go to a bar and see that, as a minor, you will not be served. You can watch a political campaign ad and see who paid for the spot. In these cases, you can’t necessarily see the potential bias or agenda the state is seeking to protect you from, but you can at least guess at it. Similarly, in the CPC case, you can see that it doesn’t offer certain things. If you are interested in those things, you won’t get them. There’s no judgment about why you won’t get them, the city is just worried that you might think you’ll get it, because that’s the advertiser’s goal. But, believe it or not, the constitutionality of requiring CPCs to post disclaimers is sort of under review. (more…)

This blog is cross-posted from ChoiceUSA’s blog.
Hannah Geyer, George Washington University Law School

So lately I’ve noticed that a lot of people categorize reproductive rights as Not Real Rights. Reproductive rights aren’t like voting, or free speech, or the right to access public accommodations. Reproductive rights are special rights, according to some – including Above the Law’s (snarky lawyer blog whose commentariat aren’t super into social justice or, um… just not being a terrible person when commenting) Ami Cholia.

Law Students for Reproductive Justice (bias alert: I’m the President of GW Law’s chapter) recently released a study that revealed that out of the 177 responding law schools, only 32 of them offered a course in reproductive rights. ATL’s Cholia wrote a post asking if lawyers-in-training really need these classes:

“Academic classes rarely give one a true representation of how the concepts we study play out in real life (think back to your middle school sex-ed class for a minute). That is usually learned on the job. You are trained to ask the right questions and argue your point effectively — a rounded understanding of law, then, should prepare you to take on a reproductive case, regardless.

Should we interpret the dearth of repro-rights courses as representative of gender-imbalance at schools and within the profession at large? Again, I don’t think so. It’s not about man v. woman or even life v. abortion. It’s about rights. And as a trained lawyer, you are taught about those rights. Reproductive rights aren’t special rights, are they?”

Call me a crazed feminist, but it seems that the “special rights” question was asked sarcastically, implying that all of us humorless wenches complaining about a lack of reproductive rights courses are being hypocritical, since men and women are equal, aren’t they? Marginalizing reproductive rights as “special” rights or “women’s” rights misses the whole point. (more…)

I have a dozen obstetricians to choose from, but going to the clinic means I am not guaranteed to get the one I pick. I take the bus to my prenatal appointments; it takes around 45 minutes round trip. I have to schedule them around classes, but they always run late and I’ve missed two lectures. I have to approve all screening appointments with my insurance carrier, which is such a hassle. When I have any odd cramps, I have to wait on hold for almost half an hour to talk to the nurses. Pregnancy books and magazines are so patronizing. I suddenly hate cheese, have to eat more potassium, and I have no idea how I’ll make it through finals with this backache.

And, in case you couldn’t tell, I can’t stop smiling! This girl has got. it. all!!!

I have an obstetrician at one of the best hospitals in the country. Transportation to and from this hospital is available hourly right outside my apartment building. I have the freedom and privilege to finish my degree. I have health insurance (theoretically . I have a highly skilled nurse waiting to answer all my questions. I am informed about how to take care of myself, and the means with which to do it. I am going to live. I am going to have a healthy baby.

I’d like to encourage everyone to heart safe motherhood with me. Around the world, right now, one woman dies every 90 seconds from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth. (more…)

When most conversations involve birthing choices, people tend to polarize. A brief look at the history of midwifery explains why. Until the early 1800s in the United States of America, midwives were the primary maternal caregivers. Then medical school and trained doctors entered the playing field and the competition for patients spurred the purposeful disrepute of midwives everywhere. This has started a trend of antagonism between midwives and their cohorts and OB-GYNs and their allies. The antagonism has even infiltrated the midwifery community itself, pitting nurse-midwives against direct-entry midwives. (more…)

Film actress and television host Ricki Lake, twice pregnant (in real life and also in the movie Mrs. Winterbourne, alongside his royal hotness, Brendan Fraser), brings one of her birth experiences to the silver screen in The Business of Being Born.  Upset with the hospital birth experience the first time, Ms. Lake opts for a home birth the second time (Go Ricki! Go Ricki! Go Ricki!).  Her second son, Owen Sussman (now 9 years old), greets the world in gooey glory about 45 minutes into the movie, so you know it’s good.  The only thing that might have made it better is, as is the case for all movies, Brendan Fraser.

Somewhere between Frontline and Fahrenheit 911, this documentary presents a fact-based albeit slightly sanctimonious (and one-sided) examination of midwifery (mid-whiff-er-ee) and birthing options in America.  The statistics are frequently sobering – the one that really stuck with me was that, in 1900, 95% of all U.S. births took place at home, which was down to 50% by 1938 and <1% by 1955 (where it is today).  The movie partially credits hippy communes with the “rebirth” of midwifery in the U.S., noting necessity and the empowerment aspects of home birth.  (more…)

When a friend of mine got married a few years ago, we joked that she and her new husband should take every opportunity available to consummate their new marriage.  Our goal?  For her not to have to be deployed to Iraq.  As a member of the armed forces, we knew that if she got pregnant, she wouldn’t have to go and wouldn’t be placed in harm’s way.  What we didn’t consider was what getting pregnant would have cost her in advancing her military career.

Getting pregnant in the military is a difficult situation for our servicewomen for a multitude of reasons.  First, her pregnancy could get her court-marshaled and possibly discharged, depending on her commander’s policy, as evidenced by Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo’s policy in northern Iraq.  At the very least, she risks her ability to move up the ranks in a military system that is already difficult for women to ascend.  One of the options not currently available to a servicewoman is the ability to safely terminate her pregnancy while she is on a military base, either within the US borders, where abortions are legal, or in other countries, where access to abortion may be restricted by that country’s laws.  Because of restrictions in U.S. law, servicewomen are unable to go to military hospitals and have an abortion performed safely, even if it’s with their own money.  Until recently, these women even had difficulty with getting consistent access to emergency contraception, which had not been previously considered a medication important enough to be carried at all military facilities.  In essence, the very citizens protecting our freedoms against those who oppose the freedoms enjoyed by Americans, are unable to exercise a right they risk their lives to protect.

While there is currently new legislation being proposed that would allow for privately-funded abortions at military facilities, this situation is a reminder that access to abortion is only part of a larger framework of reproductive justice.

(more…)

I am not a worthless piece of trash, but rather a valuable asset to people, families, the community—and the world. I hope that my story will help to alleviate the disgraceful practice of shackling women during labor, which in turn will help alleviate the negative behaviors of prison guards and hospital staff toward women who give birth while incarcerated.—Kimberly Mays

As of this spring, thanks to women like Kimberly Mays and fellow reproductive justice advocates across the state, Washington state can boast two large victories against the practice of shackling pregnant incarcerated women. On March 23, 2010, the Governor signed into law HB 2747 which bans the use of restraints on female inmates in labor or post-partum recovery, making Washington only the 7^th state in the nation to pass anti-shackling legislation. Just a couple of weeks ago, Legal Voice, a women’s rights organization based out a of Seattle, sent a press-release confirming that on May 3, 2010, the federal district court agreed that shackling laboring women violates the Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. The Department of Corrections also agreed to pay plaintiff, Casandra Brawley, $125,000 to settle her lawsuit. But, nationwide, jails and prisons and immigration detention centers continue to put non-violent women in restraints such as leg irons and wrist shackles during childbirth. Pregnant women are shackled on the way to the hospital, while they are giving birth, and during recovery.

(more…)

Having just returned from the 2010 CLPP conference, From Abortion to Rights to Social Justice:  Building the Movement for Reproductive Freedom, at Hampshire College this past weekend, my head is buzzing with new ideas, inspiring words, and the sense of being part of something much larger…a movement with an important history and a hopeful future—at least judging by the number of engaged young people attending and leading this major convening of reproductive justice activists.  Workshops, trainings, and plenary panels spread across three days covered a wide range of issues—including economic justice, racial equality, freedom from violence, immigrant rights, climate justice, health care reform, and LGBTQ rights—all of which inform our understandings of what true reproductive justice will look like.

One of the most powerful aspects of the experience for me was connecting with people who do RJ work in many different capacities—as grassroots organizers and educators, as medical professionals and professional activists, as college students and as parents.  Spending much of my time working with law students and lawyers, it’s all too easy to get used to speaking in certain ways and hearing the same kinds of voices in my daily conversations.  (more…)

I founded National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) in order to do cross–issue work. Having had the privilege of working in many of the main-stream pro-choice organizations and having worked extensively with the founders and leaders of the Reproductive Justice Movement, I came to the conclusion that women’s reproductive rights and health would never be secure if the focus of our legal work remained on the defense of abortion rather than on the women who have them. Women’s lives are not just influenced by whether or not they can end a pregnancy, but also by all of the political, economic, and social conditions that enhance or limit their ability to be full and equal participants in society. I also became clear to me that the mainstream pro-choice movement was missing an extraordinary number of opportunities to build alliances and strength across issues.

As a result, NAPW has worked to build bridges between reproductive rights and drug policy reform advocates, identifying shared interests and the strong relationship between the war on abortion and the war on drugs. NAPW has also taken the lead in building bridges between those who defend the right to choose abortion and those who defend the rights of pregnant women at all stages of pregnancy, including during labor and delivery. NAPW believes that “Birth Justice” must be fully part of the definition and agenda of the Reproductive Justice Movement.  In this post, however, I want to focus on one case and one example of how failure to do cross-issue, multi-strategy work undermines the effort to defend Roe v. Wade, and more importantly, the women who become pregnant and sometimes have abortions. (more…)

Introduction

While stereotyped as hyper-fertile African American women are affected by the opposite characteristic: we are more likely studies say, than white counterparts between the ages of 25 and 44 to be and remain infertile.

If you did not know this, do not be ashamed.  Most physicians don’t know it either.  A recent Centers for Disease Control report says 6.1 million U.S. women between the ages 15 and 44 had trouble conceiving; 2.1 million married couples experienced infertility, and 9.2 million women had made use of infertility services.

In a study of  US physicians’ perceptions of fertility, only 16% of the responding physicians correctly identified African Americans as the racial group most at risk for fertility, 82% thought white women were most at risk. While stereotyped as hyper-fertile most studies say that African American women are more likely than white counterparts between the ages of 25 and 44 to be and remain infertile.

The Research

Most fertility research involves wealthier white women, because they are the biggest consumers of fertility clinics whose patients or patients’ data are available for research studies. The story of African American women’s fertility, emerging from the most recent empirical research available seems to be this. (more…)