Pregnancy = Less Rights in the U.S.
Abortion has long been a contested issue across the United States and with major elections approaching this year, lawmakers are making moves to further define where life begins so that they may decide where rights begin. One of the major critiques of the pro-life movement is how contradictory it can be and further how it is a slippery slope to give a fetus, or even an embryo, unalienable rights at the expense of the life of the woman. This brief looks at two recent developments in the U.S. where the question of terminating is only a problem when it is done by a woman and where frozen embryos are suddenly considered to be children. The U.S. is swiftly showing that if a woman even chooses to be pregnant, then she is essentially sacrificing many of her rights to make choices for her body.
In early February a Texas attorney, Mason Herring, took a plea deal after being accused of slipping abortion pills into his pregnant wife’s water in order to terminate the pregnancy without her knowing. It is worth noting that Texas is one the states in the U.S. with a near total ban on abortion and it is the largest state to do so. This includes abortions performed in clinics or hospitals as well as abortions through the use of medication, such as mifepristone, and bans mailing or dispensing these pills. Making it nearly impossible to obtain an abortion without facing legal trouble, Texas is extremely cut and dry in their approach of abortion in the aftermath of the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Even with these near Draconian laws, Herring's plea reveals that there seems to be a clear difference in the perception of when abortion is wrong and it’s simple: it is wrong when a woman does it, but if someone else does it, it’s all but permissible.
Herring was accused by his [now separated] wife, Catherine, of slipping abortion pills into her water nearly seven times. She brought video and text evidence of him doing such. After feeling severely sick, she sought medical care and ended up giving birth ten weeks early and had to be placed on a feeding tube. Herring was sentenced to 180 days in jail (roughly six months) for attempting to terminate Catherine’s pregnancy, putting her and the unborn baby’s life at risk, without her knowledge. This blatant attack on autonomy and consent that wields a relatively mild punishment in a state that has been very clear in their viewing of abortion reveals what really lies behind the curtain of what it means to be ‘pro-life.’ There has been limited outcry from anti-abortion groups condemning this man for what he did. All of this shows that it is not about protecting the life of an unborn child but controlling the life of the living woman.
Women in Texas have had to risk their freedom and livelihood to obtain an abortion, either by going out of state, attempting to induce one at home without medical advice, or sneaking to buy abortion pills. What might not be as risky is just having a man try and do it for them and all he risks is a slap on the wrist. That is essentially the message Texas courts are sending. Men are protected even in their attempt to control a woman’s choice. In the current climate within the U.S., women have the smallest amount of rights when it comes to planning parenthood.
In another part of the U.S., a state court has ruled that embryos used in vitro fertilization (IVF) are considered children. This case in Alabama comes as a result of a lawsuit by three families. The families accused a fertility clinic of improperly storing their frozen embryos, resulting in the destruction of the embryos. The highest court in Alabama ruled that the precedent of unborn children being considered children is plausible in a wrongful death suit. The court reportedly found that there is no “unwritten exception” for embryos outside of a “woman’s uterus.” What this ruling means for fertility clinics is unclear. Many clinics create multiple embryos in order to increase the chance of a successful pregnancy. Once a pregnancy is confirmed, the resulting e embryos are unused and eventually destroyed. This ruling essentially brings in the question of whether destroying a frozen embryo is considered a criminal offense, mainly homicide.
IVF is used by women who have struggled with getting or staying pregnant. It is one of the most successful fertility treatments. The University of Pennsylvania released a report stating that 1 million babies have been born through the use of IVF between 1987 and 2015. The dangerous precedent that Alabama courts have now set by classifying embryos as children can greatly impact fertility treatment. Women who are purposely aiming to become pregnant now have to take into account if they could possibly face charges for doing so in disposing of the unused embryos. The pro-life movement has hardly been about the life of a child but about the control of the woman. The women who are being impacted are not women who are seeking to terminate a pregnancy but rather become pregnant. Criminal charges for women involved with pregnancy now can include those who terminate it and those who receive treatment to stay pregnant.
What these two cases starkly illustrate is the necessity for courts to dictate every thought regarding human life, and not the life of an unborn baby, but the life of the woman in her decision to have children. Abortion is illegal if a woman exercises her autonomy and chooses to terminate, but it’s a simple slap on the wrist if a man slips abortion medication to his pregnant wife without her knowledge simply because he does not want to have another child. The pro-life movement is so pro-child that even for women who take additional measures to create life are now at risk because they might not use all of their frozen embryos to get pregnant. None of this is about the sanctity of life. It is about the ultimate control of women in all their reproductive choices. It is specifically about the woman’s choice and no one else’s. A man can tell her what to do with her body. The courts can tell her what to do. Where can she exercise her choice? More of these cases will continue to happen until reproductive protections are enshrined in U.S. law. We urge the U.S. government to perhaps follow in the footsteps of France and enshrine abortion in the constitution to prevent any further attacks on the choices that women make for their bodies. The choice belongs to the woman and the woman alone. Her body, her choice.
