Sunday, January 27, 2008

Read this interview

H/T Feministing

Dr. Wicklund says it better than I ever could.

I don't use the word lightly, but today's abortion providers: physicians, nurses, clinic coordinators and volunteers, are heroes. They certainly aren't in it for the money. Corrected for inflation, the cost of an abortion today is about half of what it was in 1973; in other words, the cost really hasn't changed (but is still is high enough to keep the procedure out of reach for many women, especially as the Hyde Amendment continues to prohibit the use of federal funds for abortion services unless the women's life is in danger).

And their numbers are dwindling; according to the National Abortion Federation 87% of US counties lack abortion providers, and that number jumps to 97% in non-metropolitan counties. Three US states also lack providers. The providers that do still practice often have to split their time between clinics, sometimes traveling hundreds of miles to provide the most common surgical procedure in the US.

Why so few clinics? Clinics face opposition from the moment they attempt to move into a town; even construction workers face intimidation, even though these clinics provide essential primary reproductive health care to both men and women.

Dr. Wicklund makes a point that is both compelling and courageous when she asserts that ob-gyns and family practice physicians have an obligation to provide abortion services as part of their services rather than referring them to a system of clinics that is overburdened, underfunded and so sparsely located that few women even have access to them.

While the work clinics do, both the clinical services they provide and their advocacy for womens' health, is necessary and important, placing the whole burden provision of abortion services squarely on their shoulders is undue. It increases their workload and makes them an easy target for anti-choice protesters.

So read the interview, then read the book (I plan to). Then, if you know an abortion provider, thank them for me.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Blogging for Choice: A Day Late










I've always been better able to write when presented with a topic. As such, blog for choice day provided an excellent opportunity to get my new feminist blog up and running.

But I'm a procrastinator. So here goes, a day late, but better late than never, eh?

A little background: I'm white, middle class, with a bachelor's degree, so yeah, I write from a position of privilege, but I try to maintain awareness of said privilege.

With that in mind, I am pro-choice.

I am pro-choice because:

I recognize that reproductive choice means so much more than just the freedom to choose abortion. In it's purest form, reproductive choice is the freedom of women's bodies from state control: Freedom from forced pregnancy and forced sterilization, and everything in between.

I, like a couple of my favorite feminist bloggers believe that access to safe, legal abortion, is a moral good, just like access to life saving heart surgery. It places trust to manage reproductive capability in the hands of women, i.e. those who reproduce, which is where it should be.

Rape victims should not have to suffer to obtain medical care. Anti-choicers commonly claim to support exceptions to rape and incest in anti-abortion legislation. So, even with those exceptions, what do rape victims have to do to obtain abortion services? Do they have to go before a judge and relive the nightmare they've already experienced? Does their rape kit become evidence? Would judges be able to exercise "conscience clauses" similar to the ones exercised by physicians and pharmacists used to deny women contraception?

It is up to women and their doctors to decide which treatment or procedure is most appropriate on a case by case basis. The state has no business telling doctors they can't perform certain procedures when they are less invasive, and therefore, less risky than others.

When the rights of a fetus supersede the rights of a mother (in the biological sense), there are dangerous consequences.

When the rights of the state supersede the right of a mother (in a biological sense), there are dangerous consequences.

I don't want to be forced to conceive, forced to give birth, forced to undergo any medical or surgical procedures "for my own good" or for the good of my children.

I am pro-choice because my body is mine.