Different Takes: Sanctuary Laws Needed To Protect Abortion Care; Without Roe, IVF Is At Risk
Opinion writers examine abortion and the impact of overturning Roe.
The Washington Post:
How D.C. Is Protecting Women’s Access To Health Care
Last month, I watched with horror as we received a glimpse into the Supreme Court’s draft opinion in Dobbs. v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The draft revealed that the court is poised to eliminate the constitutional right to abortion, which was enshrined by Roe v. Wade in 1973. (Brianne K. Nadeau, 6/22)
USA Today:
Overturning Roe V Wade May Put More Than Your Abortion Rights At Risk
Thanks to Roe v. Wade, when my wife and I built our family together, we were able to conceive via in vitro fertilization (IVF). That’s right: Roe v. Wade protects the right of people to conceive babies, too. If the U.S. Supreme Court does indeed overturn 50 years of precedent in its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, fertility services like IVF could be outlawed in states that legislatively declare that life begins at conception. The impact of such a reversal would be immense and immediate, not only for people seeking access to abortion, but also for all of us who have relied on rights that flow from that ruling to help us make decisions about when and how to become parents. (Cathryn Oakley, 6/23)
Los Angeles Times:
States Must Stop Deceptive 'Crisis Pregnancy Centers'
As we face the imminent overturn of Roe vs. Wade, clinicians, legislators and activists are preparing for dramatic shifts in the lives of pregnant people and their families. One trend that’s already troubling is the proliferation of crisis pregnancy centers, or CPCs, in California and nationwide. These antiabortion organizations target low-income people facing unintended pregnancies. Their goal is not to provide care, but to prevent people from accessing abortion and contraception. The centers advance their mission “by using deceptive and coercive tactics and medical disinformation, and misleadingly presenting themselves as medical facilities,” according to a recent report from the Alliance: State Advocates for Women’s Rights and Gender Equality. As abortion providers in California, we have witnessed the consequences of this deception and coercion. (Jessica Hamilton and Christine Henneberg, 6/22)
Los Angeles Times:
My Wife’s Abortion Was A Painful Choice. Now As A Father, I Worry My Daughter Won’t Get To Choose
In 1997, my wife Janie and I welcomed our first child, a healthy daughter born after an uncomplicated pregnancy. The baby thrived and became the light of our lives. A year later, we tried for another child, but Janie suffered a first-trimester miscarriage. Two more first-trimester miscarriages followed. We wanted more children but wondered whether trying yet again was worth risking more physical and emotional trauma. (John Caragozian, 6/22)
