Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Story Time: Reflections from the South Regional Conference

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Call it beginner’s luck:  my first year in law school and the first-ever Law Students for Reproductive Justice South Regional conference just so happen to coincide, and for one fruitful day, my activist, academic, and professional worlds were temporarily united.  The conference started with presentations by two women near and dear to my RJ-heart:  Heidi Williamson of Sistersong and Tonya Williams of SPARK Reproductive Justice Now.

Anyone wondering about whether the RJ movement is alive and kicking in the south had their fears alleviated by the time these remarkable women finished speaking.  Both Ms. Williamson and Dr. Williams did a fantastic job of explaining the concept of reproductive justice, and they did an even better job of explaining the significance the term has in the South, where reproductive justice work faces particular challenges. (more…)

Sexual Violence against Native American Women and the Denial of Reproductive Healthcare Services

Wednesday, March 10th, 2010

As I sat in the audience at Friday’s symposium on “Law, Gender & Citizenship: Contemporary Issues for American Indians and American Immigrants,” I was shocked by what I learned about the endemic sexual violence perpetrated against Native American women in the United States.  Data indicates that a minimum of one out of three Native American women has been the victim of sexual violence.  One of the speakers shared that in conducting her research she had yet to talk with a Native American woman who had not been the victim of sexual violence.  Research further shows that 80% of perpetrators of these crimes are non-Native American persons.  High rates of women being violently sexually assaulted by men not of her ethnic or racial group, like this, are the type of statistics I have come to associate with war zones rather than common life experiences. 

The violence perpetrated against Native American women, however, is only one of the many offenses carried out against them.  The U.S. government under the responsibilities assigned to Indian Health Services (HIS) is responsible for providing all health care services Native American Indians.  However, the U.S. government and IHS have failed to meet this mandate.  Native American Indians must often travel long distances to reach health facilities whose services are limited.  (more…)

Getting Inspired in Atlanta

Tuesday, March 9th, 2010

 

Last weekend I went to the posh city of Atlanta, GA and was greeted by the wonderful ladies of Georgia State University College of Law’s LSRJ chapter. I want send a special thank you to my host Sarah Scott…she WAS AWESOME!!!

 

The South Regional Conference discussed issues about human trafficking, Reproductive Justice Asylum cases and LGBT issues within Immigration Law.

 

I thank you for the wonderful panel of speakers from SisterSong, Alia El Sawi, Dazon Dixon Diallo, our very own Jill Adams just to name a few. These ladies brought knowledge and showed commitment to the LSRJ struggle.

 

I am truly excited about the work that needs to be done in the southern region! It is most comforting to know that there are committed men and women gaining a legal education and equipping ourselves with tools to adequately combat these issues.

 

Law school as we all know is hard, but it’s encouraging to know we share a common goal.  I wish everyone a safe spring break and thank you for taking the time out to read this blog.

 

 

Jennifer Ngoie

Building a Stronger Movement: Lessons from the Northeast Regional Conference

Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010

 

I was delighted to attend the Northeast Regional LSRJ Conference at New York Law School on February 13, 2010. Leigh Campbell and Courtney Patterson did an excellent job organizing.  The theme was “The New War on Reproductive Justice: The Changing Tactics of the Anti-Choice Movement.”  The following are the primary pieces of information I took away from each informative panel.

 

Jordan Goldberg from the Center for Reproductive Rights and Alexa Kolbi-Molinas from the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project discussed the importance of acting on a state and local level, rather than focusing only on Supreme Court decisions. The state representatives are much more likely to listen to individual members of their constituencies, meaning that time spent contacting legislators is certainly not wasted.  Currently, there is legislation in many states throughout the country aimed at redefining life and personhood.  If this legislation is passed it could effectively outlaw abortion, many forms of contraception and emergency contraception in that state. Additionally, it would open the doors to criminal charges on behalf of the fetus.  Needless to say, the implications are staggering and those developments are worth following.

 

Sabrina Shulman, the Political Director at NARAL Pro-Choice New York, talked about the latest strategies of the anti-choice movement.  Ms. Shulman described the movement as being an “under-the-radar campaign of fear and intimidation.”  The most startling aspect to me (more…)

From Page to Practice: Join the Conversation!

Friday, February 5th, 2010

 

While most legal symposia consist of academics speaking at length about their current research intended for publication in an upcoming journal symposium issue, the NYU Review of Law & Social Change is seeking to do something different in its February 12th symposium, From Page to Practice: Broadening the Lens for Sexual & Reproductive Rights. As part of the Page to Practice model, we are integrating practitioner voices into the discussion. Through the conversations that develop, the symposium planners hope to bring an on-the-ground critical lens to academic work and encourage collaborations around strategy that extend beyond traditional silos.

As part of this collaborative model, we are posting some of the academic presenters’ abstracts here. Given that this is a one-day symposium, the organizers hope to begin the conversations early through comments and ideas posted here on RepoRepro and on the Reproductive Rights Prof blog.

 

For more information about the symposium, please see the invitation below: (more…)

From Page to Practice: Abortion Liberalization: Transnational Legal Advocacy across a Procedure-Substance Divide

Friday, February 5th, 2010

 

Procedure and substance are well-acknowledged to be elusive categories in law. Procedure shades off into substance, such that their divide is not discoverable by mere logic or reason. It is a divide drawn to carry out a purpose.[1] This acknowledgement does not deprive the divide of meaning. It redirects the inquiry. Rather than ask on what side a set of facts falls, we ask: why categorize as procedure or substance? What is both the purpose and effect of drawing the divide?

 

A procedure-substance divide in abortion liberalization can be traced to the 1994 U.N. International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) and its Programme of Action.[2] The ICPD was an intergovernmental meeting under the auspices of the United Nations, where abortion was first recognized as a matter of concern for the transnational collective. To be particular, unsafe abortion was the subject of concern. Following much controversy and prolonged debate, governments and other participants agreed to address “the health impact of unsafe abortion as a major public health concern.”[3] Unsafe abortion is pregnancy termination undertaken by persons without necessary skills or in an environment that fails minimum medical standards, or both.[4] Unsafe abortion is a major cause of maternal mortality and morbidity in developing countries. Every year an estimated seventy thousand women die and millions more suffer with complications from unsafe abortion.[5] Controversy stemmed from the legality of abortion. Regardless of modifier, safe or unsafe, abortion is a criminal offence under penal code or other statute in the vast majority of the world. (more…)

From Page to Practice: Where’s My Bump? Just Responses to Working Women’s Infertility Crisis

Friday, February 5th, 2010

 

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…)

From Page to Practice: Theorizing Lesbians and Abortion

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

 

For my comments on Panel One, Reproductive Justice: Expanding the Vision to “Collateral” Fields, I would like to “expand” by focusing more specifically on the interrelationships of lesbians and abortions.

 

Lesbians are by definition “reproductive outsiders,” as Jenni Millbank has rightly theorized.  This outsiderness, in theory and in practice, is most obvious in several categories:  as the protection of legal parenthood status from challenges by non-lesbians, including the state in its child protective powers;  as the conflict between lesbians who have legal parenthood status and lesbians who do not have legal parenthood status (often, although not always, following biological status); and as the legal ability to access “reproductive technology,” including very basic and rather non-technological technology such as insemination.

 

Thus there is an important argument to be made that lesbians and other sexual minorities do not inhabit a “collateral” field to be integrated into the house of reproductive rights.  Additionally, it is also true that reproductive rights have an essential place in the LGBT legal reform movements.   The symbiotic relationship between reproductive rights and sexual rights is not unproblematic, but it is an experience that is lived, litigated, and theorized.   The experience occurs across various societies and states, with diverse economic, racial, ethnic, and disability hierarchies.  

           

Here I’d like to highlight the specific relationship between lesbians and abortion. (more…)

From Page to Practice: Morality and the LGBT Rights Movement

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

 

There are at least three different questions we can ask about the role that morality can or should play in issues related to the contemporary LGBT rights movement: First, can the government legitimately account for questions of morality when it legislates in LGBT-related matters? Second, should the LGBT rights movement rely on moral arguments when it seeks reform through the political and legislative processes? And third, should the LGBT rights movement rely on moral arguments when it litigates?

 

The quick answer to the first question is “it depends.” The quick answers to the second and third questions are “yes” and “no” respectively. I elaborate briefly below on each of these.

 

The Supreme Court held in Bowers v. Hardwick that moral judgments, as codified into law, provided a sufficient basis upon which to withstand a due process challenge to a statute that prohibits a certain conduct or practice. This “morality is enough” holding was renounced by the Court in Lawrence v. Texas, at least when it comes to a conduct or practice that implicates a liberty interest (such as the choice of sexual partners).

 

It is clear, then, that moral judgments or reasons are not enough to justify the criminal sanction of consensual same-sex sexual conduct engaged in by adults. But what role can morality play in other types of LGBT-related legislation? Can morality, for example, constitute a sufficient basis upon which to justify the denial of marital or adoption rights to LGBT people? (more…)

From Page to Practice: Health Excepted, Health Accepted

Thursday, February 4th, 2010

                                                                       

What is the relationship of health and abortion in law? How do the responses to this question change as one moves through various historical periods, from states to the national level in federations, or from the domestic to the international arena? Does conceiving (pun intended) of abortion as tethered to women’s health result in more authority, autonomy, equality, or safety for women — or less?When contraception and abortion were legal in England and the United States, the banner of health provided arguments for their criminalization. Once contraception and abortion were criminalized, health became one of the justifications for regimes of partial decriminalization that allowed conditional access to methods of controlling fertility. For example, doctors and midwives who could demonstrate a patient’s health-based need for a “therapeutic” abortion sometimes had defenses to criminal prosecution. “Health” similarly justified immunities for those who sold condoms to men.

Roe v. Wade reflects both these traditions: in Roe, “health” offers reasons for regulation as well as for exemption from regulation. Roe recognizes, in the second trimester of a pregnancy, the state’s interest in regulating abortion to protect maternal health, and in the third trimester, the state’s interest in regulating abortion to protect potential life — so long as government allows women access to abortions necessary to protect their lives or health. (more…)