thesis on women's reproductive rights

10 Essential Essays About Women’s Reproductive Rights

“Reproductive rights” let a person decide whether they want to have children, use contraception, or terminate a pregnancy. Reproductive rights also include access to sex education and reproductive health services. Throughout history, the reproductive rights of women in particular have been restricted. Girls and women today still face significant challenges. In places that have seen reproductive rights expand, protections are rolling back. Here are ten essential essays about reproductive rights:

“Our Bodies, Ourselves: Reproductive Rights”

bell hooks Published in Feminism Is For Everyone (2014)

This essay opens strong: when the modern feminism movement started, the most important issues were the ones linked to highly-educated and privileged white women. The sexual revolution led the way, with “free love” as shorthand for having as much sex as someone wanted with whoever they wanted. This naturally led to the issue of unwanted pregnancies. Birth control and abortions were needed.

Sexual freedom isn’t possible without access to safe, effective birth control and the right to safe, legal abortion. However, other reproductive rights like prenatal care and sex education were not as promoted due to class bias. Including these other rights more prominently might have, in hooks’ words, “galvanized the masses.” The right to abortion in particular drew the focus of mass media. Including other reproductive issues would mean a full reckoning about gender and women’s bodies. The media wasn’t (and arguably still isn’t) ready for that.

“Racism, Birth Control, and Reproductive Rights”

Angela Davis Published in Women, Race, & Class (1981)

Davis’ essay covers the birth control movement in detail, including its race-based history. Davis argues that birth control always included racism due to the belief that poor women (specifically poor Black and immigrant women) had a “moral obligation” to birth fewer children. Race was also part of the movement from the beginning because only wealthy white women could achieve the goals (like more economic and political freedom) driving access to birth control.

In light of this history, Davis emphasizes that the fight for reproductive freedom hasn’t led to equal victories. In fact, the movements driving the gains women achieved actively neglected racial inequality. One clear example is how reproductive rights groups ignored forced sterilization within communities of color. Davis ends her essay with a call to end sterilization abuse.

“Reproductive Justice, Not Just Rights”

Dorothy Roberts Published in Dissent Magazine (2015)

Dorothy Roberts, author of Killing the Black Body and Fatal Invention , describes attending the March for Women’s Lives. She was especially happy to be there because co-sponsor SisterSong (a collective founded by 16 organizations led by women of color) shifted the focus from “choice” to “social justice.” Why does this matter? Roberts argues that the rhetoric of “choice” favors women who have options that aren’t available to low-income women, especially women of color. Conservatives face criticism for their stance on reproductive rights, but liberals also cause harm when they frame birth control as the solution to global “overpopulation” or lean on fetal anomalies as an argument for abortion choice.

Instead of “the right to choose,” a reproductive justice framework is necessary. This requires a living wage, universal healthcare, and prison abolition. Reproductive justice goes beyond the current pro-choice/anti-choice rhetoric that still favors the privileged.

“The Color of Choice: White Supremacy and Reproductive Justice”

Loretta J. Ross, SisterSong Published in Color of Violence: The INCITE! Anthology (2016)

White supremacy in the United States has always created different outcomes for its ethnic populations. The method? Population control. Ross points out that even a glance at reproductive politics in the headlines makes it clear that some women are encouraged to have more children while others are discouraged. Ross defines “reproductive justice,” which goes beyond the concept of “rights.” Reproductive justice is when reproductive rights are “embedded in a human rights and social justice framework.”

In the essay, Ross explores topics like white supremacy and population control on both the right and left sides of politics. She acknowledges that while the right is often blunter in restricting women of color and their fertility, white supremacy is embedded in both political aisles. The essay closes with a section on mobilizing for reproductive justice, describing SisterSong (where Ross is a founding member) and the March for Women’s Lives in 2004.

“Abortion Care Is Not Just For Cis Women”

Sachiko Ragosta Published in Ms. Magazine (2021)

Cisgender women are the focus of abortion and reproductive health services even though nonbinary and trans people access these services all the time. In their essay, Ragosta describes the criticism Ibis Reproductive Health received when it used the term “pregnant people.” The term alienates women, the critics said, but acting as if only cis women need reproductive care is simply inaccurate. As Ragosta writes, no one is denying that cis women experience pregnancy. The reaction to more inclusive language around pregnancy and abortion reveals a clear bias against trans people.

Normalizing terms like “pregnant people” help spaces become more inclusive, whether it’s in research, medical offices, or in day-to-day life. Inclusiveness leads to better health outcomes, which is essential considering the barriers nonbinary and gender-expansive people face in general and sexual/reproductive care.

“We Cannot Leave Black Women, Trans People, and Gender Expansive People Behind: Why We Need Reproductive Justice”

Karla Mendez Published in Black Women Radicals

Mendez, a freelance writer and (and the time of the essay’s publication) a student studying Interdisciplinary Studies, Political Science, and Women’s and Gender Studies, responds to the Texas abortion ban. Terms like “reproductive rights” and “abortion rights” are part of the mainstream white feminist movement, but the benefits of birth control and abortions are not equal. Also, as the Texas ban shows, these benefits are not secure. In the face of this reality, it’s essential to center Black people of all genders.

In her essay, Mendez describes recent restrictive legislation and the failure of the reproductive rights movement to address anti-Blackness, transphobia, food insecurity, and more. Groups like SisterSong have led the way on reproductive justice. As reproductive rights are eroded in the United States, the reproductive rights movement needs to focus on justice.

“Gee’s Bend: A Reproductive Justice Quilt Story From the South”

Mary Lee Bendolph Published in Radical Reproductive Justice (2017)

One of Mary Lee Bendolph’s quilt designs appears as the cover of Radical Reproductive Justice. She was one of the most important strip quilters associated with Gee’s Bend, Alabama. During the Civil Rights era, the 700 residents of Gee’s Bend were isolated and found it hard to vote or gain educational and economic power outside the village. Bendolph’s work didn’t become well-known outside her town until the mid-1990s.

Through an interview by the Souls Grown Foundation, we learn that Bendolph didn’t receive any sex education as a girl. When she became pregnant in sixth grade, she had to stop attending school. “They say it was against the law for a lady to go to school and be pregnant,” she said, because it would influence the other kids. “Soon as you have a baby, you couldn’t never go to school again.”

“Underground Activists in Brazil Fight for Women’s Reproductive Rights”

Alejandra Marks Published in The North American Congress on Latin America (2021)

While short, this essay provides a good introduction to abortion activism in Brazil, where abortion is legal only in the case of rape, fetal anencephaly, or when a woman’s life is at risk. The reader meets “Taís,” a single mother faced with an unwanted pregnancy. With no legal options, she researched methods online, including teas and pills. She eventually connected with a lawyer and activist who walked her through using Cytotec, a medication she got online. The activist stayed on the phone while Taís completed her abortion at home.

For decades, Latin American activists have helped pregnant people get abortion medications while wealthy Brazilians enter private clinics or travel to other countries. Government intimidation makes activism risky, but the stakes are high. Hundreds of Brazilians die each year from dangerous abortion methods. In the past decade, religious conservatives in Congress have blocked even mild reform. Even if a new president is elected, Brazil’s abortion rights movement will fight an uphill battle.

“The Ambivalent Activist”

Lauren Groff Published in Fight of the Century: Writers Reflect on 100 years of Landmark ACLU Cases (2020)

Before Roe v. Wade, abortion regulation around the country was spotty. 37 states still had near-bans on the procedure while only four states had repealed anti-abortion laws completely. In her essay, Groff summarizes the case in accessible, engaging prose. The “Jane Roe” of the case was Norma McCorvey. When she got pregnant, she’d already had two children, one of whom she’d given up for adoption. McCorvey couldn’t access an abortion provider because the pregnancy didn’t endanger her life. She eventually connected with two attorneys: Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee. In 1973 on January 2, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that abortion was a fundamental right.

Norma McCorvey was a complicated woman. She later became an anti-choice activist (in an interview released after her death, she said Evangelical anti-choice groups paid her to switch her position), but as Groff writes, McCorvey had once been proud that it was her case that gave women bodily autonomy.

“The Abortion I Didn’t Want”

Caitlin McDonnell Published in Salon (2015) and Choice Words: Writers on Abortion (2020)

While talking about abortion is less demonized than in the past, it’s still fairly unusual to hear directly from people who’ve experienced it. It’s certainly unusual to hear more complicated stories. Caitlin McDonnell, a poet and teacher from Brooklyn, shares her experience. In clear, raw prose, this piece brings home what can be an abstract “issue” for people who haven’t experienced it or been close to someone who has.

In debates about abortion rights, those who carry the physical and emotional effects are often neglected. Their complicated feelings are weaponized to serve agendas or make judgments about others. It’s important to read essays like McDonnell’s and hear stories as nuanced and multi-faceted as humans themselves.

You may also like

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

15 Trusted Charities Supporting Trans People

15 Political Issues We Must Address

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Healthc Sci Humanit
• v.9(1); Summer 2019

Reproductive Rights, Reproductive Justice: Redefining Challenges to Create Optimal Health for All Women

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines reproductive health as the state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. Reproductive Justice is the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social, and economic wellbeing of women and girls, based on the full achievement and protection of women’s human rights. While these concepts are similar, the latter was an approach that grew out of the need to better articulate the language and realities of women of color as it related to sexual and reproductive health issues. The current U.S. reproductive health agenda is polarized to a choice or abortion issue without any alignment to other issues that predominantly impact women of color within the reproductive health framework. This article acknowledges the history and challenges of reproductive health and rights, while offering a non-polarized, more inclusive ethical course of action, using an optimal health approach with new alliances for the reproductive justice movement today.

Introduction

The 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (lCPD) in Cairo and the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing (FWCW) debated and redefined focus within the reproductive health arena. The Platform for Action and the Beijing Declaration (documents) from the conferences created an enabling national and international political environment for reproductive health. They altered the language about population and family planning issues to include human rights and intensified the interest and participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governments and institutions worldwide in reproductive health issues ( The First World Conference on Women, 1995 ).

Including NGOs made certain that strategies were derived from consistently “listening to the voices of those closest to the ground and most importantly ensuring that programming was relevant and sensitive to community conditions and cultural norms” ( Seibert, Stridh-Igo, & Zimmerman, 2002 ).

Before attending the ICPD, a group of black women in Chicago coined the term reproductive justice, defined as the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social and economic wellbeing of women and girls, based on the full achievement and protection of women’s human rights ( Ross, 2007 ). This was done out of the need to better articulate the language and realities of women of color as it related to sexual and reproductive health issues and rights. Following this, in the late 90s, the Ford Foundation funded a collective of women of color –led NGOs, called SisterSong, the cornerstone for reproductive justice programming. Twenty years later, this concept or broad lens is still limited in its use to guide programming and advocacy efforts within the reproductive health arena.

Today, the U.S. reproductive health agenda is polarized around choice on abortion issue without any alignment to other issues within the reproductive health framework. This paper highlights a brief history of reproductive rights and the challenges faced as these rights evolved into the reproductive justice movement. It goes on to encourage the reproductive justice movement to adopt an even broader framework of optimal health steeped in theories that advocate for women to embrace their feminine power, a more inclusive and ethical fit for women’s health. This new framework will generate a new movement that will create fresh language, identify new allies, foster nontraditional partnerships and strengthen the capacity of the reproductive justice/optimal health movement so it fully reflects the voices of all women.

Reproductive Justice Context and History

During the 1950s and 60s, philanthropic and international development organizations focused mainly on population and reproduction. Efforts were made to better understand the causes, characteristics and consequences of the population growth trends facing developing countries. Demography was developed as an independent discipline (establishing centers for graduate study) and research was supported in reproductive and contraceptive development. Broad discussions on population policies and assistance were held to better define the design and delivery of family planning programs overseas.

The 1980s involved funding model projects to provide education and facilitate safe, affordable and effective contraceptive use and abortion services if necessary. The focus was on disadvantaged women who chose to have children safely and ensure the safe and healthy development of all children (maternal and child health programs). There was also an increased emphasis on factors influencing the demand for family planning with regard to women’s development, cultural references in developing effective population policies and increased efforts on migration/refugee issues.

The 1990s saw a conceptual shift from family planning to reproductive health and a women-centered, rights-based focus. Within this decade organizations helped emphasize the cultural and economic factors affecting reproductive health (high fertility, poor maternal health and STD/AIDS spread). They also paid special attention to disadvantaged women in developing countries through their reproductive life cycle, supported efforts against STDs/AIDS, and addressed the special needs of adolescents. The main feature of this new focus was to strengthen social science research and training to expand knowledge about the socioeconomic factors affecting reproductive health.

Funding was provided for projects that helped women articulate and act on their reproductive health needs both within the family and at the community and policy levels. This support also promoted public discussion aimed at developing ethical and legal frameworks for reproductive health appropriate to the culture and traditions of different societies. The late 1990s saw the inclusion of sexuality as integral to reproductive health.

The 1994 ICPD in Cairo shifted the emphasis from governmental aims to limit population growth to individual decision-making in reproductive health. The narrow definitions and scope of family planning programming (pregnancy and contraceptives) were expanded holistically to include an individual’s comprehensive needs (reproductive intent, contraceptive availability, client choice and satisfaction). Along these lines the inherent holistic concept of choice was reaffirmed to include freedom to decide when and whether to have children. A woman’s reproductive health was now placed within the structure of reproductive rights and empowerment i.e. accounting for power imbalances and the degree to which women’s choices are constrained. Women played a vital role in national development and had the right to control their fertility. They had the right to participate in providing direction in the formulation of policies that impacted the political, social and economic realms of their health and therefore their existence ( United Nations Population Fund (UNPF), 1994 ).

This conference and the FWCW the following year, expounded on principles that redefined sexual and reproductive health and rights programming for all women around the globe. New principles of thought, along with altering the language around population and family planning issues to include rights, helped to intensify the interest and participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), governments and institutions worldwide in reproductive health issues ( The First World Conference on Women, 1995 ).

Unfortunately, in the United States the globally endorsed action plan did not frame sexual and reproductive health and rights programming. Instead, efforts remained fragmented and unidirectional, i.e. pro-choice.

The subsequent meetings, ICPD (1999) and Beijing Plus Five (2000) discussed progress and obstacles to implementation of the initial action plans. Both conferences highlighted that action was still needed to guarantee women their human rights. Steps were required to implement much of what was written. There was still limited demonstration of the understanding of a women’s reproductive health and its link to other issues that affected her health, rights and empowerment.

The important advances resulting from the Plus Five experiences included more female activists as members of government delegations than ever before. Another was the agreement that all forms of violence against women would be treated as a criminal offense, including marital rape. Governments re-affirmed the indicators and time-bound targets on sexual and reproductive health and stated that adolescents especially girls should also have access to sexual and reproductive health services including sexuality and life skills education.

In 1997 the Ford Foundation funded an initiative on reproductive health. Sixteen (four African American, four Asian American/Pacific Islander, four Latina and four Native American) U.S. community based organizations (CBOs) led by women of color were supported in an attempt to promote research and advocacy on reproductive tract infections (RTIs) faced by women of color ( SisterSong, 1997 ).

RTIs were chosen because of their contribution to the major health problems of women. Often undiagnosed until more severe complications arise, these preventable and treatable infections are responsible for the mortality of thousands of women each year through their association with cervical cancer, unsafe deliveries and septic abortions. The high rates of RTIs are also associated with interrelated socio-cultural, biological, and economic factors including poverty, low social status, low levels of education, racism, rapid urbanization, etc. The synergistic effects of these factors are known to reduce women’s decision-making power over their own sexuality and constrain their ability to seek quality reproductive care, thus contributing to poor reproductive health.

The initiative called The Women of Color Reproductive Health Collective or SisterSong (Loretta Ross, Dazon Dixon Diallo leading grantees) was a three-year effort to support these organizations to identify common concerns and needs and develop a plan of action for prevention and early treatment of RTIs within their communities. It also focused on identity and ethnicity and its intersections/linkages as to how women approach health and reproductive issues. The 16 organizations represented the different facets of reproductive health programming (prevention, HIV/AIDS services, midwifery, substance abuse, human/health rights advocacy, self-help care, and reproductive rights). The Collective through shared learning served as an enhanced voice to bring awareness and action to improve the reproductive health of women of color.

The Collective highlighted the need to recognize health and reproductive health as human rights issues impacted by social, political, cultural and economic factors. This broad definition of reproductive rights was revealed at the ICPD and FWCW and had been repeatedly voiced by women of color in the U.S and globally.

This broader concept now called reproductive justice was not an opposing one to the present day pro-choice/reproductive rights movement. In fact, it was inclusive. This renewed definition served to repeatedly highlight that the health and rights of women could never be analyzed without taking into consideration the «holistic» reality of a woman’s existence.

Reproductive justice is defined as the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social and economic wellbeing of women and girls, based on the full achievement and protection of women’s human rights ( Ross, 2007 ; Ross, Solinger, 2017 ).

The Women of African Descent for Reproductive Justice in Chicago coined this definition in June of 1994, before the ICPD in Cairo (Loretta Ross and Toni M. Bond organizers). Recognizing that the current reproductive rights movement led by middle class white women was not inclusive of minority, low income, and other marginalized women, this group of African American women started the movement of Reproductive Justice. Reproductive Justice began when the group published a statement with over 800 signatures in the Washington Post and Roll Call. Thus, acting as a catalysis for Sister Song ( SisterSong, 1997 ).

To date, SisterSong is the only national coalition in the U.S. consisting of women of color organizations working to ensure reproductive justice for communities of color” ( SisterSong, 1997 ). SisterSong believes that they have the right and responsibility to represent themselves and their communities, and the equally compelling need to advance the perspectives of women of color. They know that they can do more collectively than they can do individually. Headquartered in Atlanta, they are a blend of both young and experienced activists, academic and community scholars, grassroots and national organizations ( SisterSong, 1997 ).

Recently, two additional movements that have brought attention to women’s reproductive issues are the #MeToo movement, and the Women’s March. The #MeToo movement was founded in 2006 by Tarana Burke to help survivors of sexual violence find healing, particularly black women and girls and other young women of color from low economic communities. What began as a hashtag to spread awareness became popularized when several celebrities began to use the hashtag and spread word about the movement via their social media pages. An important turning point of the #MeToo movement came when men, and members of the LGBTQ+ communities shared their experiences. The goal of the #MeToo movement is to reframe and expand the global conversation around sexual violence to speak to the needs of a broader spectrum of survivors ( MeToo, 2006 ).

The Women’s March began on social media. Teresa Shook stated that a pro-woman march was necessary in reaction to Trump’s presidential win. In 2017, the first full day of President Donald Trump’s presidency hundreds of thousands of people gathered in the nation’s capital for the Women’s March on Washington. On the same day, many other women and supporters of the march gathered in other cities and states. The Women’s March centered around eight principles–ending violence, ensuring reproductive rights, LGBTQIA rights, workers’ rights, civil rights, disability rights, immigrant rights, and environmental justice ( Women’s March, 2017 ).

While these movements have brought awareness to those who identify as women and those effected by women’s issues, they do not address that comprehensive reproductive health care and sexual and reproductive rights are «vital human and social assets within a broader developmental agenda to reduce poverty and injustice» ( Ford Foundation, 2001 ). The agenda, defined by SisterSong highlighting the importance of the reproductive justice movement, is often overlooked in the mainstream media. Unfortunately, the agenda and access to these assets still are impacted by the inter-relationship of race, culture, gender, class and political factors thus the continuous neglect of women of color and others from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Reproductive health and rights have become a well-established field both domestically and internationally. Key national and international organizations (i.e., International Planned Parenthood Association, NARAL-Pro Choice America, Center for Reproductive Rights, National Abortion Federation) help to form a widespread network of activism that has contributed to the visibility and progress of women’s health by engaging in political advocacy, advocating for funding appropriations and demanding increased and improved reproductive health programming. Despite these well-established networks and programming efforts there are still challenges to overcome.

Leading reproductive health organizations in the U.S. have minimally or not at all incorporated reproductive justice into their programming. They have continued to not effectively engage women of color in representation, leadership development or promotion, programmatic design, implementation or evaluation. Many of these organizations believed and argued that women of color were complacent on issues related to their reproductive health and rights. These fail to recognize that although organizing around reproductive health issues have been difficult for these women there has been long standing activism in communities of color on these issues even within the abortion rights movement. Even when women of color become involved with these organizations, they invariably fail to have a significant influence on the organizations’ agenda because it speaks to mainstream needs ( Bond, 2001 ).

There remains institutional limitations within well-established reproductive health organizations around cultural or racial/ethnic diversity. While many of these organizations have been funded over the years to diversify and have women of color in leadership roles, there has been limited success in this effort. Many have placed their focus on board representation. This does not guarantee the adequate level of diversity on the professional staff level where programmatic focus, strategic planning, evaluation and networks are concentrated.

In order to counter the adversity of the challenges, strategies need to be derived from consistently “listening to the voices of those closest to the ground, enabling self-defined needs to guide decisions, and most importantly ensuring that programming is relevant and sensitive to community conditions and cultural norms” ( Seibert, Stridh-Igo, & Zimmerman, 2002 ). The reasons are obvious. Those closest to the issues have the solutions and must advocate for those solutions thus creating social change. However social change can only occur through strong ethical leadership supported by strong organizations with visions, missions, capacity, strategic partnerships and alliances that reflect all members of the community.

In 2013 GuideStar (the largest source of up-to-date information on nonprofits) presented an article entitled “New Rankings Announced: Top 25 National Reproductive Health, Rights and Justice Nonprofits.” These were organizations identified as having an impact on multiple levels. Of the 25, four were using a reproductive justice lens to influence their work and four were led by a woman of color (SisterSong, National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, National Network of Abortion Funds, and Forward Together) ( Morrow, 2013 ).

This report also offers insights from experts on issues within the nonprofits (i.e. impact, other organizational strengths,) and how to improve them. SisterSong received favorable comments for leadership, innovativeness, networking, justice and equity. But under organizational areas of improvements, the comments included: “needs technical assistance, not stable in finances and staffing/operations.” All too familiar repeated statements made about CBOs’ capacity especially those led by women of color.

Today when using GuideStar to search for “reproductive rights” nonprofits the yield is 3,387 organizations. If the search uses the words “reproductive justice” 1,234 organizations are identified. If the exclusion criteria, “only organizations that have provided data on diversity, equity and inclusion”, is applied the results yield, 42 organizations for reproductive rights and only 12 for reproductive justice.

Today, the U.S. reproductive health agenda both nationally and locally, largely because of the efforts to overturn Roe versus Wade, remains polarized to a choice or abortion issue without any alignment to other issues within the reproductive health framework. Women of color have often voiced that the mainstream reproductive rights framework, which addresses legal issues, is mainly one-dimensional with no consideration for the broader issues within their communities (e.g. limited or no access to health services especially prenatal care, Medicaid expansion, hysterectomies, pregnancy-related deaths, poverty, interpersonal violence, STDs/AIDS, environmental injustices, mental health issues, etc.) which impact their reproductive health and rights on a daily basis.

A more recent display of extreme infringement on women’s reproductive rights and justice are the impending abortion laws adopted in multiple states such as Alabama, Georgia, Ohio, Missouri and Mississippi. Each passed abortion bans for nearly all-reproductive scenarios with limited exceptions (if the pregnant person’s life is at risk, or if the abortion is before six weeks of pregnancy (“heartbeat bills”)). While these bans are fundamentally unsound, unsafe and unethical, this extreme agenda pushed by ill-informed and buffoonery politicians disregards the entire paradigm of why women seek abortions in the first place (i.e., rape, incest, emergency life threatening conditions, etc.).

Unfortunately, many of these efforts are initially generated in states within the existing Bible Belt and extremely conservative religion theology undermines the bans. These states, and others considering adopting similar policies, have large powerful conservative religious populations and politicians. This is another clear example of how religion has been used repeatedly as a means of controlling, disempowering, and dominating women and girls for centuries.

Health is the physical, mental, spiritual and social wellbeing of an individual and access to it is a human right. Thus, services such as abortion, the method by which one can choose not to reproduce is embedded within a woman’s right to access health services and is a fundamental human right However, for it to have become the central and only theme of reproductive health represents an extremely myopic view of a woman’s human right to comprehensive reproductive health care. This approach although targeting power imbalances does not consider the degree to which women of color choices are constrained.

Bell Hooks, a black feminist, expounded on this when she wrote in 1999: “highlighting abortion rather than reproductive rights as a whole reflected the class biases of the women who were at the front of the movement.” ‘While the issue of abortion was and remains relevant to all women, there were other reproductive issues that were just as vital which needed attention and might have served to galvanize the masses.” ... “Ongoing discussion about the wide range of issues that come under the heading of reproductive rights is needed if females of all ages and our male allies in the struggle are to understand why these rights are important. This understanding is the basis of our commitment to keeping reproductive rights a reality for all females” (Hooks, 1999).

Today the approach termed “reproductive rights” or “reproductive justice” continues to conjure up preconceived thoughts and beliefs that have become even more polarized. Unfortunately, due to this polarization, individuals instantly take a stance for (choice) or against (prolife) this vital health issue with limited knowledge and understanding.

A New Ethical Course of Action

The few women-led organizations that have adopted a reproductive justice framework for their programming efforts are laudable. They are more likely to develop the interventions or strategies needed to shift the continuous burden of poor health outcomes among women and girls especially those of color. Unfortunately, due to limited complete data and escalating poor health outcomes, it is obvious that they cannot keep doing the same thing nor do it alone. Women’s health and wellness is an overpowering issue.

Therefore, to minimize the effects of losing any more ground and capitalizing on the opportunities, a new course of action or promising next steps would be to broaden the reproductive justice framework and embrace and advocate for “optimal health” for all women and girls regardless of socio-cultural or economic limitations.

Optimal health defined by the late John T. Chissell, MD is the “best possible emotional, intellectual, physical, spiritual and socio-economic aliveness that one can attain” (Chissell, 1998). It is a continuous journey versus a destination. In his work, Dr Chissell offers an Afrocentric approach or playbook to achieving optimal health that is relevant today. Dr Chissell’s definition of optimal health is similar to that for reproductive justice and offers an expanded focus with steps. This expanded focus can enhance the existing reproductive justice framework, amplify the language and shift the paradigm to one of total wellness while offering steps for action.

Focusing on optimal health as the next level of the women’s reproductive justice movement would eliminate polarized language, silos, unidirectional programming, selective funding efforts and the myopic focus of mainstream organizations that still haunts the reproductive justice movement. A new broadened framework will produce new dialogue, engender innovative solutions, foster new partnerships and strengthen existing ones. This new agenda termed “optimal health justice” or simply “heath justice” advocates for complete wellness.

This framework will be grounded in two major theories. The first is Womanism. Created by Alice Walker, Womanism is defined as – “... the opposite of frivolous, the cultivation of community, the demand of love- ...a woman who LOVES herself unconditionally or a form of feminism that emphasizes women’s natural contribution to society” ( Walker, 1983 ).

The second is the theory of the “divine feminine.” The divine feminine is defined as – “one’s powerful inner energy that represents the feminine side of self or consciousness. It is energy that is- present, loving, nurturing, creative, intuitive, kind, empathic, community focused, collaborative, flexible, sensual (in touch with feelings versus thinking or intellect)” ( Cromwell, 2017 ).

Both schools of thought offer an innovative and even broader framework for action. Together with all women and their allies these theories will aid and sustain a movement that will target the social, political, economic, spiritual and cultural factors that perpetuate poor health outcomes among all women and girls living in the U.S.

New thoughts and frameworks nurture new partnerships. Possible new allies and nontraditional partners for sustained action of this optimal health framework is the religion and spirituality domains. Noted earlier, religion is and has been closely aligned with conservative political ideology that is often anti-choice, lacks understanding of and is non-supportive of comprehensive reproductive health care. But this new framework must consider religion and spirituality as necessary allies. Women and girls operate within these arenas and they too have poor health outcomes.

Spiritual wellbeing is an integral component of an optimal health model. The faith community, both traditional (e.g. Black Churches), and non-denominational (e.g. Buddhist, Interdenominational entities) can clearly speak in support of this new approach and not sanction opposing rhetoric or unprecedented extreme bans on essential health care (i.e. abortions). Progressive and conservative religion/spiritual voices must be encouraged and welcomed thus ensuring inclusivity, sustainability and success ( Goodstein, 2007 ).

Visibly calling for and collaborating with males or partners in a movement targeting women and their optimal health is delicate but essential. The role of men and partners must be defined and welcomed. They may highlight missing keys to multiple insights, solutions and interventions. Women do not exist in isolation. They thrive in healthy relationships with others in communities. Having strategic input and involvement from those they are in relationships with would be innovative. Also partnering with male dominated institutions (e.g. Teamsters Union, 100 Black Men, etc.) would be even more innovative ( Funk, 2007 ).

Other strong nontraditional partners to foster new relationships with could include 1199 Hospital Workers, Teacher Union, Social Workers, Nurses, American Medical Association (AMA), National Medical Association (NMA), Black Lives Matter, etc. Each could contribute to strengthening the movement and ensuring it is sustained and successful.

This broader framework will need a new paradigm of research involving researchers and community practitioners working in concert with the community (a Communiversity) to evaluate and support capacity building assistance within cultural contexts. Reinforcing the sustainability and institutional capacity of community-based organizations involved in this new movement will entail offering capacity building assistance that includes relationship building, board development, program implementation, linking local strategies to national efforts, evaluation, training, organizational growth/development/adaptability and funding.

Due to the threats to women’s health and rights under the current conservative political climate there could not be a more pertinent time to support reproductive justice efforts by broadening the focus and engaging in optimal health justice advocacy. Forging a new paradigm by embracing an optimal health approach and partnering with new and nontraditional allies (i.e., religion, spirituality, men, others) can only build and reinforce the capacity for a stronger, more inclusive and effective optimal health justice movement for all women and girls. Inclusive involvement is essential to nourish this new ethical framework, propel relevant advocacy efforts, reinforce its capacity and sustain it to ensure its success on the local, state and national levels.

Authors’ Note

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors alone. They do not reflect the official opinion of any institutions that the authors serve. The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

• Bond TM. Barriers Between Black Women and the Reproductive Rights Movement. Political Environment. 2001. Retrieved from https://www.law.berkeley.edu/php-programs/centers/crrj/zotero/loadfile.php?entity_key=E266XDC7 .
• Chissell JT. Pyramids of Power! An Ancient African Centered Approach to Optimal Health. Baltimore: Positive Perceptions Publications; 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cromwell M. Goddess Rising: Awakening the Divine Feminine. (B. Alexander, Interviewer) Spirituality and Health. 2017. May 12, Retrieved from Spirituality and Health: https://spiritualityhealth.com/blogs/conscious-living/2017/05/12/bianca-alexander-goddess-rising-awakening-divine-feminine .
• Ford Foundation. Sexuality and Reproductive Health: Strategies for Programming. New York: Ford Foundation; 2001. p. 46. [ Google Scholar ]
• Funk RE. Men and Reproductive Justice. Reproductive Justice Briefing Book: A Primer On Reproductive Justice And Social Change. 2007. pp. 52–53. Retrieved from https://www.protectchoice.org/downloads/Reproductive%20Justice%20Briefing%20Book.pdf .
• Goodstein EP. Spiritual Youth for Reproductive Freedom. Reproductive Justice Briefing Book: A Primer On Reproductive Justice and Social Change. 2007. pp. 64–65. Retrieved from https://www.protectchoice.org/downloads/Reproductive%20Justice%20Briefing%20Book.pdf .
• Hooks B. In: Feminism Is For Everybody: Passionate Politics. Watkins G, editor. London: Pluto Press; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• metoo. History & Vision. 2006. Retrieved May 2019, from metoomvmt: https://metoomvmt.org/about/#history .
• Morrow J. New Rankings Announced: Top 25 National Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice Nonprofits. 2013. Oct 02, Retrieved 2019, from GuideStar: https://trust.guidestar.org/blog/2013/10/02/new-rankings-announced-top-25-national-reproductive-health-rights-and-justice-nonprofits/
• Ross L. What Is Reproductive Justice? Reproductive Justice Briefing Book: A Primer On Reproductive Justice and Social Change. 2007; 4 Retrieved from https://www.protectchoice.org/downloads/Reproductive%20Justice%20Briefing%20Book.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross L, Solinger R. Reproductive Justice An Introduction. Oakland: UC Press; 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seibert P, Stridh-Igo P, Zimmerman C. A checklist to facilitate cultural awareness and sensitivity. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2002 June 1; 28 (3):143 LP–146. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.3.143. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• SisterSong. 1997. Retrieved May 2019, from SisterSong: Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective: https://www.sistersong.net/reproductive-justice/
• The First World Conference on Women. Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. 1995. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/pdf/BDPfAE.pdf .
• United Nations Population Fund (UNPF) Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development. 1994. Retrieved from https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/event-pdf/PoA_en.pdf .
• Walker A. In Search of Our Mothers’ Gardens: Womanist Prose. San Diego: Harcourt; 1983. [ Google Scholar ]
• Women’s March. Mission & Principles. 2017. Retrieved May 2019, from Women’s March: https://womensmarch.com/mission-and-principles .

Reproductive Rights of Women: A Way to Gender Justice

37 Pages Posted: 16 Oct 2015

Hina Iliyas

Jamia Millia Islamia

Date Written: October 15, 2015

Women have been fighting the struggle for reproductive rights for centuries. Historically, these rights are an especially controversial subject due to the moral, ethical, and religious considerations. Do reproductive rights merely mean the right to reproduce? Or is the issue inextricably linked to the numerous questions that surround women’s reproductive freedom? The ability to reproduce seems to be what sets women apart from men. But do women have control over their own reproduction? Do women have the freedom to choose whether, when, and how many children to have? Do women have access to safe birth control methods? Do women have the right to safe abortion? Can sexuality be separated from reproduction? A big ‘NO’ in answer to many such questions led to the emergence of the women’s health movement in different parts of the world in the early 1970’s. It started as small ‘consciousness raising’ groups, which began by spreading awareness among women about the functioning of their bodies and gradually evolved into multi-faceted campaigns that have significantly influenced health policies in many countries. Human Rights are those rights, which should be available to every individual without any discrimination of any kind. Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom. The most important right of a Human is the Right to Life. It is the supreme human right from which no derogation is permitted. It is inalienable. The Article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibit the arbitrary deprivation of life. But there are some controversial issues related to this supreme right. One such issue is the question of Right to abortion. Among other rights of women, it is believed that every mother has a right to abortion, it is a universal right. But the rights of the mother are to be balanced with the rights of the unborn. Earlier the right to abortion was not permitted and it was strongly opposed the society. The termination of pregnancy was termed to be a murder of the foetus. But due to the change in time and technology, nowadays this right has been legally sanctioned by most of the nations after the famous decision of Roe v. Wade by the US Supreme Court. But the oppositions are still present and people do believe that it should be legally prohibited. The question which is the reason for this discussion is -- whether a mother has a right to abortion vis-à-vis the right to life of the unborn. What are the International Instruments which sanction the right to abortion. What is the stand of India on this.

Keywords: reproduction, women, freedom, control, body, abortion

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Hina Iliyas (Contact Author)

Jamia millia islamia ( email ).

Centre for Management Studies OKHLA New Delhi, ID New Delhi India

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, women, gender & the law ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Family & Children's Law eJournal

Social & political philosophy ejournal.

Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic

Public Health Law & Policy eJournal

Law & society: family law, relations & dispute resolution ejournal, human rights & the corporation ejournal, sexuality & the law ejournal, reproductive justice, law & policy ejournal, human rights ejournal.

Marginalized and Monitored: Analyzing Reproductive Health and Digital Surveillance in the United States

Journal Title

Journal issn, volume title, repository usage stats.

This thesis delves into the complex and intersectional issues surrounding women’s reproductive rights in the United States, with a specific focus on the impact of restrictive abortion legislation after the overturning of Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court decision. The research highlights the disproportionate effects of such restrictions on marginalized communities and exposes the systemic racism and classism embedded in abortion legislation.

Furthermore, this thesis examines the intersection of data privacy and reproductive rights, exploring how recent changes in abortion laws have impacted the privacy of women seeking abortion-related services. The study focuses on the potential impact of post-Roe legislation on data privacy, specifically on the surveillance and targeting of women seeking reproductive health resources. The research was conducted using an online survey that targeted women, aged 18 to 40, in Florida, Texas, and Georgia, examining their attitudes towards data privacy, awareness of existing abortion legislation, and access to various reproductive health services. The survey results indicate a disconnect between participants’ expressed concern about data privacy and their actual behavior, which is particularly alarming given the risks women face with changing restrictive abortion laws. Furthermore, the study highlights the lack of awareness and understanding of abortion laws in their respective states. Ultimately, the research stresses the urgent need to address data privacy concerns and provides recommendations for policymakers and technology companies to safeguard the privacy and autonomy of women seeking abortion-related services. To address these findings, I recommend increased education and awareness campaigns to empower women with knowledge about their legal rights and resources for reproductive healthcare services, ensuring that they can make informed decisions about their bodies and their data.

Description

Proudman, Rachel (2023). Marginalized and Monitored: Analyzing Reproductive Health and Digital Surveillance in the United States . Honors thesis, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/29287 .

Collections

Dukes student scholarship is made available to the public using a Creative Commons Attribution / Non-commercial / No derivative (CC-BY-NC-ND) license .

Statement: Reproductive rights are women’s rights and human rights

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to E-mail

Reproductive rights are integral to women’s rights, a fact that is upheld by international agreements and reflected in law in different parts of the world.

To be able to exercise their human rights and make essential decisions, women need to be able to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to information, education, and services.

When safe and legal access to abortion is restricted, women are forced to resort to less-safe methods, too often with damaging or disastrous results—especially for women who are affected by poverty or marginalization, including minority women.

The ability of women to control what happens to their own bodies is also associated with the roles women are able to play in society, whether as a member of the family, the workforce, or government.

UN Women remains steadfast in our determination to ensure that the rights of women and girls are fully observed and enjoyed worldwide, and we look forward to continued evidence-based engagement with our partners everywhere in support of rapid progress towards universal enjoyment of universal rights.

• Sexual and reproductive health and rights
• Women’s rights
• Human rights

Related content

UN Women deeply concerned by new Afghanistan morality law

Press briefing at the United Nations Headquarters by UN Women Country Representative in Afghanistan, Alison Davidian, on the three-year mark of the Taliban takeover

Statement: The Gambia’s decision to uphold ban on FGM critical win for girls’ and women’s rights

• Videos & Photos
• Take Action

Reproductive Rights and Abortion

Reproductive rights are essential for women to enjoy their human rights. These rights are centered on women’s ability to make the best choices for their lives, including around the number of children they have, if any, and the spacing between their children’s births. Reproductive rights include prenatal services, safe childbirth, and access to contraception. They also include access to legal and safe abortion. Abortion bans violate the rights to be free from violence, to privacy, to family, to health, and even the right to life. And bans are most devastating for people of color, young people, and marginalized communities, who already have trouble accessing health care and other needed services. Governments should trust women to know what is best for their bodies, their physical and mental health, and their lives.

August 30, 2024

August 13, 2024

July 31, 2024

Reproductive Rights in the US Wildfire Crisis

Insights From Health Workers in Oregon State

Navigating Obstacles

Abortion Access in the State of Mexico

Poland: Abortion Witch Hunt Targets Women, Doctors

Criminalization, Pursuit of Alleged Offenders Violates Rights

Access Denied

How Florida Judges Obstruct Young People’s Ability to Obtain Abortion Care

Dominican Republic’s Senate Doubles Down on Abortion Ban in Criminal Code

Bill Reduces Penalties for Sexual Violence, Excludes LGBT People from Protection

Two Years of Outrage: US Abortion Restrictions since Dobbs

State Bans Violate Rights of Millions to Privacy, Health, Nondiscrimination

Human Rights Watch Amicus Curiae in Case Beatriz and others V. El Salvador

South korea still blocking abortion.

Government’s Refusal to Update Laws Part of Wider Gender Discrimination

Groups call for action to address South Korea’s unmet commitment to abortion rights

Justa libertad: a movement to decriminalize abortion in ecuador.

The Green Wave Continues to Make Strides in Latin America

Chinese Women from the Countryside: Views on Marriage

Interview: How Michigan Law Blocks Youth’s Abortion Access

The “Judicial Bypass” Process Assumes Parents Are the Only Adults to Support, Guide Youth

Mozambique: Pregnant Students, Adolescent Mothers Leave School

Instruct Educators on Obligations, Improve Reproductive Health Services

Human Rights Watch Submission to the UN Human Rights Committee Review of the United Kingdom

February 2024

Daily Brief

Sep 2, 2024

Fugitive Putin to Visit ICC Member Mongolia?; Quick Takes: Bangladesh/EU; Türkiye; North Korea; Readers’ Recommendations; Videos: Sudan; Afghanistan; Kazakhstan; Gaza; Climate; What Is EWIPA?

Get updates on human rights issues from around the globe. Join our movement today.

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Women's Reproductive Rights: A literary perspective

Valentina Adami holds a PhD in English Studies from the University of Verona. She is Adjunct Professor of English language at the University of Verona and at the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, and member of AIDEL (Associazione Italiana di Diritto e Letteratura), AIA (Associazione Italiana di Anglistica) and ESSE (European Society for the Study of English). Her fields of research are trauma studies; law, language and literature; bioethics, medicine and literature; ecolinguistics and ecocriticism. She has published various essays and two monographs: Trauma Studies and Literature: Martin Amis’s Time’s Arrow as Trauma Fiction (Peter Lang, 2008) and Bioethics Through Literature: Margaret Atwood’s Cautionary Tales (Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 2011).

This paper examines the development of the concept of women’s reproductive rights in human rights treaties and conventions since the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights , revealing how traditional human rights formulations are often male-centered and lack a gender-sensitive approach. Since feminist speculative fiction has anticipated many of the reproductive rights issues that we are facing today, the author claims that literary texts such as Ursula Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness (1969), Marge Piercy’s Woman on the Edge of Time (1976), Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale (1985), P. D. James’s The Children of Men (1992) and Sarah Hall’s The Carhullan Army (2007) can enlighten contemporary debates on reproductive rights and contribute to the development of a universal ethics of human rights that takes into account the specificity of women’s rights.

About the author

©[2012] by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

• Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
• Biostatistics
• Environmental Health and Engineering
• Epidemiology
• Health Policy and Management
• Health, Behavior and Society
• International Health
• Mental Health
• Molecular Microbiology and Immunology
• Population, Family and Reproductive Health
• Program Finder
• Admissions Services
• Course Directory
• Academic Calendar
• Hybrid Campus
• Lecture Series
• Convocation
• Strategy and Development
• Implementation and Impact
• Integrity and Oversight
• In the School
• In the Field
• In Baltimore
• Resources for Practitioners
• Articles & News Releases
• In The News
• Statements & Announcements
• At a Glance
• Student Life
• Strategic Priorities
• Inclusion, Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Equity (IDARE)
• What is Public Health?

Public Health in the Field: The Public Health Case for Abortion Rights

Annalies Winny

Lindsay Smith Rogers

This article is adapted from a special episode of the Public Health On Call Podcast called Public Health in the Field. You can hear the full episode here .

Please note: Throughout this article, the gendered terms “woman” and “women” are used as that’s how the CDC and other sources record related data. 

More coverage:

• Overturning Roe v. Wade and Public Health
• What We Know—and Don't Yet Know—About The Leaked Supreme Court Draft Opinion That Could Overturn Roe v. Wade

A single case before the Supreme Court will likely decide the future of Roe v. Wade.

In 2018, the Mississippi legislature passed and the governor signed House Bill 1510, known as the  Gestational Age Act , which bans abortions after 15 weeks. There are exceptions if the life of the fetus or parent is at risk—but not in cases of rape or incest. The law violated Roe v. Wade, a Supreme Court decision that protects the right to abortion prior to “viability” of the fetus, which is at around 24 weeks. The bill was quickly blocked by lower federal courts but now the law’s fate is up to the Supreme Court.

The outcome of this case— Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization —has implications for abortion rights far beyond Mississippi: A decision that previability bans are not unconstitutional could upend longstanding protections established by Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark case that legalized abortion nationwide. 

The conversation about abortion rights in the U.S. is a noisy one involving politics, precedents, and personal beliefs. What often gets short shrift, however, is the public health reality that restricting access to abortion results in erosion of the health of women, especially low-income and women of color. This is why abortion is so much more than a legal battle. 

The Public Health Case for Abortion Rights

Many women who were denied wanted abortions had higher levels of household poverty, debt, evictions, and other economic hardships and instabilities, according to Joanne Rosen , JD , associate director of the  Johns Hopkins Center for Law and the Public’s Health .

The findings come from a 10-year study,  The Turnaway Study , which followed nearly 1,000 women who either had or were denied abortions and tracked their mental and physical health and financial impacts. 

“The study also found that women who were seeking but unable to obtain abortions endured higher levels of physical violence from the men who had fathered these children,” Rosen says. “And people who were turned away when seeking abortions endured more health problems than women who were able to obtain [them], as well as more serious health problems.

“That gives you a sense of the ways in which being unable to obtain abortions had really long lasting impacts on these peoples’ lives.”

A 2020 study in the  American Journal of Preventive Medicine found that women living in states with less restrictive reproductive health policies were less likely to give birth to low-weight babies. Other research  published in The Lancet found that restrictive abortion laws actually mean a higher rate of abortion-related maternal deaths.

Restrictive abortion laws affect more than just the health of individuals and families—they affect the economy, too. Research from The Lancet found that “ensuring women’s access to safe abortion services does lower medical costs for health systems.”  

The  Institute for Women’s Policy Research has a host of data around how reproductive health restrictions impact women’s earning potential, including an interactive map tool, Total Economic Losses Due to State-level Abortion Restrictions. In Mississippi , for example, the data indicate that an absence of abortion restrictions would translate to a 1.8% increase of Black women in the labor force, over 2% for Hispanic women, and a leap of more than 2.6% for women who identify as Asian-Pacific Islander. This same tool calculates that removing abortion restrictions would translate to an estimated $13.4 million in increased earnings at the state level for Black women alone. 

Abortion restrictions disproportionately affect people of color and those with low-incomes. According to  data from the CDC , Black women are five times more likely to have an abortion than white women, and Latinx women are two times as likely as whites. Seventy-five percent of people who have abortions are low-income or poor. 

Mississippi, Texas, and The Supreme Court   

On December 1, the Supreme Court will hear Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and Joanne Rosen thinks it’s unlikely the Court would agree to hear the case if they were just going to affirm the status quo. 

The case isn’t the only one on the docket, however. Texas’ Senate Bill 8, which bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, made headlines earlier this month and may impact SCOTUS’ ultimate decision on the Mississippi case. The high-profile law came before the Supreme Court in November 2021 and Rosen said the important thing to note is that the Court didn’t actually address whether the six-week ban is constitutional. Rather, they examined the unusual enforcement scheme of the law—where, when, and by whom the Texas law could be challenged.

Rosen says that the justices may compare the Texas law with the Mississippi law and, when considering a six-week abortion ban, a 15-week ban may seem less extreme. In this way, the Texas case could give the Court some cover to uphold Mississippi’s 15-week ban.

It’s likely to be months before an opinion is released; Rosen says the Court typically releases its decisions on high-stakes or controversial cases in June. And high stakes this is: for the future of abortion, for reproductive health rights, and for public health. 

Annalies Winny is an associate editor for  Global Health NOW . 

Alissa Zhu is a journalist and current  MSPH student at the Bloomberg School.

Lindsay Smith Rogers, MA, is the producer of the  Public Health On Call podcast and the associate director of content strategy for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

RELATED CONTENT:

• Public Health Law Experts Discuss the Supreme Court Vacancy and Barrett Nomination

Public Health On Call

This article is adapted from a special episode of the  Public Health On Call Podcast  called Public Health in the Field.

Subscribe to Podcast

Related Content

Xylazine: The Emerging Threat in the U.S. Drug Supply and Policy Responses

Understanding the Impact of Economic and Social Conditions on Health

Study Reveals Significant Barriers for TGNC Adults Accessing Healthcare in the U.S.

Coca-Cola’s Ongoing Olympic Sponsorship Is Bad for Everyone’s Health

More Than One-Third of Adults with Medical Debt and Depression or Anxiety Delayed Mental Health Care in Previous 12 Months

Women's Reproductive Rights Thesis

The fight over reproductive rights has been a struggle that women have dealt with for centuries. Women’s reproductive rights include, but are not limited to the rights to unrestricted access to birth control and the right to abortions. The issue with women’s reproductive rights is that they are being threatened to be taken away. Due to abortions being a highly controversial topic, many restrictions have been placed on abortions since they became legal. Since abortions were legalized in 1973, due to the Roe vs. Wade case, there have been hundreds of laws that restrict the access of abortions. In the recent years the pro-life movement has drastically altered the view of abortion in politics. “The number of Texas abortion clinics has dropped by …show more content…

Women who seek abortions should have full access to them without being questioned as much as they are today. They also should not have to be subjected to endure the awful ridicule brought on by the rude protesters outside abortion clinics to preaching hateful slurs. These protesters believe it is their right to slander these women by calling it “freedom of speech”. By criminalizing abortions, women are at risk of losing their lives or suffering damage to their health. Women who end up having a miscarriage become too frightened to get themselves any medical treatment because they are afraid they will be accused of getting an abortion. Then there are women and girls who have been raped who are too afraid of being ridiculed for getting an abortion so they turn to illegal abortions, also known as “back-alley” abortions. In addition, religion plays a big role in the controversy over abortion, which causes more problems with the fight over women’s reproductive rights. Due to how religion is a big part of many people’s lives, it heavily influences their stance on …show more content…

When the restrictions are removed a solution is put in order because the rights, women should already have, are given back to her. The restrictions on abortion infringe on women’s reproductive rights, restrictions that they should not have to be forced to deal with; women should have the right to make their decision without any third party influence. In Texas, in order for a woman to be allowed to have an abortion she must have at least four visits to a licensed physician, in addition to having to go through an ultrasound, then she must have received and shown the image of the ultrasound. These requirements place “undue burden” on women who have made the decision to get an abortion but must go through unnecessary procedures to go through with it. The solution to this issue would be to make abortions more accessible to women. Making abortions more accessible allow a woman to choose if she may or may not want one as well as make it a discrete choice. In Texas a “bill attacking women's access to safe reproductive-health services” was passed by Texas legislators (Hooton & Schvey 1). The law states that women are not allowed to have an abortion after 20 weeks; it also restricts access to medication abortions, which safe terminations during the first trimester. These restrictions “dramatically reduce Texas women's access to safe abortion

Unwind Analysis

Where should the parameters surrounding women’s reproductive rights lie? The dystopian future book Unwind by Neal Shusterman discusses the aftermath of a war fought around a woman’s right to choose. The Heartland War, also commonly known as the Second Civil War, was fought by the Pro-Life and Pro-Choice armies. To end the war and settle the issue, a set of amendments to the Constitution called the Bill of Life was passed, which stated that human life cannot be touched from the time of conception until the age of thirteen. However, under these laws, parents or guardians may “abort” their child, as long as their child’s life doesn’t technically end.

Clinic Entrances Act Of 1994 By Edward M. Kennedy

The definition of a woman's freedom is never truly free. In an article, author Edward M. Kennedy, wrote “Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act of 1994,” published in May of 1994. He argues that the groups of pro-life people gathering outside and blocking abortion clinics from women has gotten out of hand. Kennedy beginning to build his credibility with images and reputable sources, citing both statistics and persuasive facts, and is successfully reaching the readers emotional appeals throughout the article. This is especially when towards the end when Kennedy begins stating reliable statistics to reach the readers emotions one more time to really strengthen his argument.

The Historical Significance Of The 1988 Abortion Bill Strike Down

The 1988 decision to legalize abortions was a historically significant event that altered the course of history by granting women the right to bodily autonomy, established a legal precedent and sparked a major public debate continuing to this day. Since the law was struck down, women in Canada have been granted the right to choose and have anatomy over their own bodies, saving many lives in the process. The absence of safe and legal abortions, women often resorted to alternate methods, seeking out unsafe procedures that put their lives at risk. 13% of deaths from pregnancy are related to unsafe and illegal abortions, this is translated to the deaths of 47000 women and 85 million injured each year. (SITE)

Roe V. Wade Argumentative Analysis

From 1848 to 1920, an outrageous span of 70 years, women fought for equal rights, to have their voices and opinions heard. Little by little women have gained rights they have so passionately fought for. In 1973, about 50 years after women became eligible to vote, and began to be taken more seriously, the case of Roe v Wade granted women to have one of the most impactful rights to date, to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Now, it is safe to say that all women and perhaps most men would not want women to lose the rights they have today, especially because there have been many influential women around the world who have been given the chance to be impactful because of the rights they possess. So, if we do not want to take away women’s rights and

Whole Woman's Health Vs Hellerstedt Case Analysis

Impact on literature The articles which have been influenced by the case Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt are: Woman's health and abortion rights20, Quantifying The Case's Potential Impact on Abortion Access and Woman's Health21 and Reflections on the Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, savoring victory, anticipating further challenges22. The first article is focused on the rights for women and it uses the case as a basis or beginning of the claim for woman's rights. The second article is from a quantitative and methodological point of view. It remarks the amount of people seeking an abortion and it emphasis on the problem of the distance between woman looking for an abortion and a facility to provide it in Texas.

Roe V. Wade Argumentative Essay

Before Roe v. wade the number of deaths from illegal abortions was around 5000 and in the 50s and 60s the number of illegal abortions ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. These illegal abortions pose major health risks to the life of the woman including damage to the bladder, intestines as well as rupturing of the uterus. The choice to become a mother must be given to the woman most importantly because it’s her body, her health, and she will be taking on a great responsibility. A woman’s choice to choose abortion should not be restricted by anyone; there are multiple reasons why abortion will be the more sensible decision for the female.

Roe V. Wade Essay

The Right to Abortion On January 22, 1973, in a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down it’s landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade, which recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians (Planned Parenthood). There are many moments in history when Roe v. Wade has been so close to being overturned, yet it is still in place. Abortion should stay legal, or not overturned, for the health of women everywhere. First, this important case took place at the time of abortion being illegal in most states, including Texas, where Roe v. Wade began.

Reproductive Rights And Fetal Rights Summary

Rachel Roth begins this article by examining the historical components of reproductive rights and fetal rights in this country. She then explains that the history of the two have created the now issue that women face in around the topic of abortion. She explains that the long struggles of abortion have led to fetal rights. “This idea has served to punish women in nontraditional behavior than to protect their children, while reinforcing the idea that women’s bodies are and should be public property” (Roth, 322). Meaning, the concept of fetal rights has begun to take its own course of action, which in the process has decreased the rights of the woman.

Women And The American Dream In The 1970's

Due to the introduction of contraceptives such as the pill in the 70s, women gained greater freedom in society and greater control over their bodies. Along with contraceptives, women made their greatest stride with Roe v Wade. This monumental case gave women the right to an abortion. This, in turn, gave women the right to choose how they wanted to live their lives. “The ability to make this personal health care decision has also enabled women to pursue educational and employment opportunities that were often unthinkable prior to Roe” (Planned Parenthood).

Essay On Planned Parenthood

Despite the numerous accusations that the organization has faced in the past years, Planned Parenthood and other similar groups may have been providing an effective means on educating and making available the use of protection and prevention of unwanted pregnancies. This is demonstrated by numbers released that in 2014, abortion rates in the United States have dropped to a record low of 14.6 per 1000 since 1973. US women are having abortions at the lowest rate on record since Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion. In fact, the rate has been steadily declining over the past three decades from its peak in the 1980’s.

Unplanned Parenthood

Unplanned Parenthood For decades, women’s rights have been compromised at the hands of the government a sector primarily composed of men. Even with the passing of Roe vs. Wade in 1973 declaring a women’s right to privacy of her body a new rival on the issue of abortion has garnered nationwide attention in light of a video released by an anti-abortion organization the Center for Medical Progress. The highly edited video depicting the sale of fetal tissue by a Planned Parenthood facility caused a grand upheaval among politics and the minds of millions of Americans but, in particular, led to the attempted defunding of Planned Parenthood for one year. The following cartoon claims that denying millions of women access to the affordable health services

Persuasive Essay On Abortion

“Young women today will come of age with fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers.” The decision to overturn Roe v. Wade will impact generations of women which was made clear by dissenting judges Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Abortion is a medical procedure that terminates a pregnancy before the fetus is viable, which is considered to be around 24 weeks of gestation, a procedure that is listed in essential healthcare services published by the World Health Organization. The ethics of this procedure has created controversy in the United States and around the world, forcing this medical procedure to become political and “on the ballot” each election. Since procedures similar to abortion are in our country’s

The Pros And Cons Of Abortion

An ongoing debate on whether Abortion is ethical or should be legal has not only shaped the mindset of citizens around America but the policies that are created by lawmakers. Currently, abortion is legal in all 50 states but each state has its own set of policies that apply to abortion. However, certain requirements or standards are set to make the process of abortion longer such as waiting periods or only allowing an abortion to take place within a specific timeframe. Various pro-life and pro-choice have made it their mission to create policies they believe will have the most benefit for the women, her body and her un-born child. In the analysis, I research abortion policies in Texas and the advantages and disadvantages that come along with

Persuasive Essay On Pro Life

Making abortion illegal will not prevent abortion from happening, but having it as an option will provide the opportunity for women to get it done professionally in a safe and risk-free manor. “Medication abortion promises the ultimate in women’s empowerment and privacy”(Greenhouse). With support from communities for abortion, it will be more widely accepted as an educated decision not a panicked resort. “Abortion exists because women need to make their own, best decisions about whether or not she can carry a pregnancy to term at that particular moment in her life. Making abortion illegal will not change that”(Glass).

The Maiden Archetype

The legal status of abortion actually does not affect the number of abortions performed. However, the rate of unsafe abortions increases when abortion is made illegal and women are forced to turn to unofficial and unqualified sources. If a woman is planning to get an abortion, she will not be deterred from using any available option, regardless of the word of law. By trying to control women’s decisions to protect them, the generally male legislators who would make laws banning abortion would actually lead the women to more

More about Women's Reproductive Rights Thesis

The 10 states where abortion rights will be on the ballot this fall

After months of gathering signatures, filing petitions and navigating lawsuits, constitutional amendments that would protect or expand abortion rights are officially set to appear on the general election ballot in 10 states.

Voters in the swing states (Arizona and Nevada), blue-leaning states (Colorado, Maryland and New York) and red-leaning states (Florida, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and South Dakota) will have the ability to directly decide the future of abortion access this fall. Among the organizers who submitted signatures to qualify an abortion rights amendment for this year's ballot, only those in Arkansas fell short.

These 10 initiatives will be the latest to pursue enshrining abortion access in a state's constitution since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

Here is what the proposed amendments would do if passed — and how they would impact current abortion care laws in those states.

The proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot in this crucial southwestern battleground would create a “fundamental right” to an abortion up until fetal viability, or about the 24th week of pregnancy. After that point, the measure would bar the state from restricting abortion in situations when the health or the life of the pregnant person is at risk, according to the treating health care professional.

Under current Arizona law, abortion is legal up until the 15th week of pregnancy , with an exception after that to save the woman’s life and no exceptions after that for rape or incest. If voters approve the proposed ballot measure in November, it would effectively undo the 15-week ban. It needs a simple majority of support to pass.

The proposed amendment in Colorado would declare formally that “the right to abortion is hereby recognized” and that “government shall not deny, impede or discriminate against the exercise of that right.”

It also explicitly states that the government may not prohibit health insurance coverage for abortion, including insurance plans for public employees and publicly funded insurance plans. That provision would effectively undo a 1984 law that barred people from using their health insurance to pay for abortion care.

The ballot measure in Colorado — where there are no laws restricting abortion and no gestational limits at all for women seeking an abortion — is intended to formally enshrine those rights, a move organizers say is crucial to prevent lawmakers from having any future opportunity to undo them.

To pass in November, the measure requires the support of 55% of voters under state law, not just a simple majority.

The state's ballot initiative would bar restrictions on abortion before fetal viability and would include exceptions past that point for “the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

Passage of the amendment would effectively undo the state’s six-week ban on abortion, which includes exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the woman.

Under Florida law, the measure must receive the support of 60% of voters in November, rather than a simple majority, to pass.

Lawmakers, who control the amendment process in Maryland rather than citizens, voted to place a measure on the ballot that would enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution.

It would add language to guaranteeing the right to “to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one’s own pregnancy.”

Abortion is already legal in the state through fetal viability, with exceptions afterward when the woman’s life or health is at risk, or when a fetal anomaly is detected. A simple majority is needed for passage.

Missouri's amendment would enshrine language in the state constitution to protect abortion rights up until fetal viability, with exceptions after that point for the life and health of the mother.

The amendment specifically states that the government “shall not deny or infringe upon a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom,” which the amendment defines as all decisions related to reproductive health care, explicitly including “birth control,” “abortion care” and “miscarriage care” — up until fetal viability. The proposal also deems any “denial, interference, delay or restriction” of such care as “invalid.”

After that point, the government may regulate abortion except in cases where a treating health care professional has judged the “life or physical or mental health” of the mother to be at risk.

At the same time, the amendment would allow lawmakers and state officials to restrict or limit abortion rights in situations in which doing so “is for the limited purpose and has the limited effect of improving or maintaining the health of a person seeking care, is consistent with widely accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that person’s autonomous decision-making.”

Missouri currently has one of the strictest abortion bans in the U.S. in place, with exceptions to protect the life of the mother and for medical emergencies. If the amendment were to pass, it would effectively undo that law. A simple majority is needed for passage.

The ballot measure in Montana would amend the state constitution to provide a right to “make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion.” It would also “prohibit the government from denying or burdening the right to abortion before fetal viability,” and  “prohibit the government from denying or burdening access to an abortion when a treating healthcare professional determines it is medically indicated to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.”

Abortion is currently legal in Montana until fetal viability, so enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution would serve to make it more difficult for lawmakers to undo current protections in the future. A simple majority is needed for passage.

In Nebraska, two dueling constitutional amendments will appear on the November ballot.

One of the ballot measures , known as “Protect the Right to Abortion,” would amend the state’s constitution to state that “all persons shall have a fundamental right to abortion until fetal viability, or when needed to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient.”

The other, called “Protect Women and Children,” bars abortions in the second and third trimesters, except in the case of a medical emergency or when the pregnancy is a result of sexual assault or incest.

Nebraska law currently bans abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy, with exceptions for rape, incest and saving the mother’s life. The pro-abortion rights measure would effectively undo that law, while the other would basically codify the law in the state constitution.

For a ballot measure to pass in Nebraska, it needs to receive a majority of the vote and at least 35% of the total votes cast in the election in favor of it. If both amendments pass, the one with the most votes prevails.

In Nevada, abortion is already legal until the 24th week of pregnancy. But fearing that such rights could be undone in the future, reproductive rights advocates succeeded in placing a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would enshrine similar language, protecting abortion rights up until fetal viability.

Under state law, even if the measure passes in November, voters would need to approve it again in 2026 before the Nevada constitution is formally amended.

As in Maryland, lawmakers, not citizens, control the amendment process in New York. State legislators voted to put a measure on the ballot that would enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution.

The Equal Protection of Law Amendment doesn’t actually explicitly mention abortion, but would enshrine rights in the state constitution designed to protect against anything the government does to affect a person’s “pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy.”

In New York, abortion is legal up to around the 24th week of pregnancy. Passage of the proposal — which requires a simple majority — would effectively cement those projections constitutionally. 

South Dakota

The proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot in South Dakota would make abortion legal in all situations in the first trimester of pregnancy. It would allow “regulation” by the state of abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy, but such regulation “must be reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.” 

The amendment would allow “regulation or prohibition” by the state in the third trimester, except in cases when a physician has determined that the care would be necessary to “preserve the life or health” of the woman.

If it passes, the amendment would effectively undo the state’s near-total ban on abortion, which snapped back into effect after Roe v. Wade was struck down in 2022. The law, which abortion advocates say is among the harshest in the U.S., prohibits all abortions except when necessary to save the woman’s life.

The ballot measure will need to win a simple majority to pass.

Adam Edelman is a politics reporter for NBC News.

Advertisement

Supported by

More Voters, Especially Women, Now Say Abortion Is Their Top Issue

Donald J. Trump is shifting his stance on reproductive rights, but voters, by a wide margin, say that they trust Kamala Harris on the issue.

• Share full article

By Ruth Igielnik

Attitudes on abortion are deeply entrenched and have motivated voters across the American political landscape for decades. But in a post-Roe world, with abortion access sharply limited or at stake in several states, voters who want to protect abortion rights are increasingly energized.

Although the economy remains the No. 1 issue for voters, a growing share of voters in swing states now say abortion is central to their decision this fall, according to New York Times/Siena College polls earlier this month . This represents an increase since May , when President Joe Biden was still the Democratic presidential nominee. And by a wide margin, more say they trust Vice President Kamala Harris over former President Donald J. Trump to handle abortion.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly changed his position on the issue, despite appointing Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case that found a constitutional right to abortion.

On Thursday, he even suggested that he might support a Florida ballot measure that would expand abortion rights — which he and his campaign quickly tried to walk back. But his shifting stance may reflect hope among Democrats, and concern among Republicans, that backlash to abortion restrictions may drive voters to the polls.

That may be especially the case for women — particularly now that Kamala Harris is at the top of the Democratic ticket.

What one issue is most important in deciding your vote this November?

Percent of voters who stated ...

Economy/inflation

Immigration

All respondents

Public opinion on abortion is relatively stable

Percent of U.S. adults who say abortion should be:

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

2024 Election

'i'll be voting no.' trump clarifies his stance on the abortion amendment in florida.

Sarah McCammon

Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump arrives to speak at a campaign event in Potterville, Mich., on Thursday. Alex Brandon/AP hide caption

After confusion over his stance on abortion rights, former President Donald Trump is clearing things up.

"I'll be voting no," he told a Fox News reporter Friday when asked how he'll vote on Florida's abortion-related ballot measure.

Currently, abortion is not allowed in Florida after six weeks of pregnancy with few exceptions in rare instances. In the general election, voters will be asked to choose whether to protect access to abortion in the state on Amendment 4.

In that same Fox News interview, Trump repeated that he disagrees with the six week ban, but went on to use misleading talking points about access to abortion later in pregnancy to paint Democrats as extreme on the issue.

On Thursday, Trump indicated he would vote in favor of abortion rights in his home state of Florida, where it is on the ballot . Saying he thinks the "six week [ban] is too short," he said he favored "more time."

When asked explicitly, "so you'll vote in favor of the amendment?", Trump seemed to affirm that he would.

"I'm going to be voting that we need more than six weeks," he told NBC News in an interview , before saying he favored exceptions in abortion law for the life of the mother, rape and incest.

The Trump campaign quickly shot down the idea that the former president indicated how he would be voting.

"President Trump has not yet said how he will vote on the ballot initiative in Florida, he simply reiterated that he believes six weeks is too short." Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign's press secretary said.

He does remain in support of other reproductive rights, reiterating several times if he’s elected again, his administration would fund the fertility procedure known as IVF.

“I was always for IVF. Right from the beginning, as soon as we heard about it,” the Republican nominee said in an interview with NBC News on Thursday.

Trump is trying to allay concerns on abortion, and abortion opponents aren't happy

Trump told NBC he’d support public funding for in vitro fertilization, or a mandate requiring insurance companies to cover it. The procedure to treat infertility can cost tens of thousands of dollars.

“We’re doing this because we just think it’s great. And we need great children, beautiful children in our country, we actually need them,” Trump said in the interview.

Shots - Health News

The push for embryo rights in state legislatures worries ivf patients and doctors.

Some anti-abortion activists want to restrict or ban IVF because the process typically involves discarding excess embryos. But most voters, including many Republicans , support access to the procedure.

An Alabama Supreme Court decision earlier this year temporarily cut off access to IVF until state lawmakers intervened , forcing many high-profile Republicans to weigh in on the issue.

Trump’s comments come as he appears to be trying to soften his image on reproductive rights ahead of the November election over concerns about voter backlash. Earlier on the campaign trail, he proudly took credit for overturning Roe v. Wade , by appointing three conservative Supreme Court justices.

Tim Walz is a new kind of reproductive rights messenger

Last week, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he would be “great for women and their reproductive rights.” That statement drew criticism from some abortion rights opponents including his former vice president, Mike Pence. Trump also recently indicated in a CBS News interview that he would not use a 19th-century anti-obscenity law, the Comstock Act, to restrict abortion pills. That statement also drew pushback from some activists.

The Harris-Walz campaign also responded in a statement to Trump's comments.

"Because Trump overturned Roe v. Wade, IVF is already under attack and women’s freedoms have been ripped away in states across the country," the statement from spokesperson Sarafina Chitika said. "There is only one candidate in this race who trusts women and will protect our freedom to make our own health care decisions: Vice President Kamala Harris.”

Abortion is a key issue in this election, with Democrats warning voters that Republicans would further restrict access to reproductive healthcare if former Trump is elected.

• Israel-Gaza War
• War in Ukraine
• US Election
• US & Canada
• UK Politics
• N. Ireland Politics
• Scotland Politics
• Wales Politics
• Latin America
• Middle East
• In Pictures
• Executive Lounge
• Technology of Business
• Women at the Helm
• Future of Business
• Science & Health
• Artificial Intelligence
• AI v the Mind
• Film & TV
• Art & Design
• Entertainment News
• Destinations
• Australia and Pacific
• Caribbean & Bermuda
• Central America
• North America
• South America
• World’s Table
• Culture & Experiences
• The SpeciaList
• Natural Wonders
• Weather & Science
• Climate Solutions
• Sustainable Business
• Green Living

Trump to vote against Florida abortion measure after backlash

Donald Trump has said he will vote against a ballot measure in his home state of Florida that would protect abortion rights after facing backlash from conservative supporters.

The former president's announcement came one day after an NBC News interview in which he appeared to support the measure - a statement that caused anti-abortion activists to openly criticise him.

On Friday, Trump told Fox News that he still thinks Florida's ban on abortions after six weeks is too strict.

However he said would still vote "no" on a measure that would amend the state's constitution to protect abortion rights.

"You need more time than six weeks," Trump said. "I’ve disagreed with that right from the early primaries when I heard about it."

He then falsely alleged that Democrats in the US supported allowing abortions at any point during a pregnancy, which he used as his explanation for deciding to vote against the ballot measure in Florida as a voter in the state.

Abortion laws vary widely in states across the US, but procedures after 21 weeks of pregnancy are rare and are often related to foetal anomalies or threats to the mother's life, according to the non-profit health organisation KFF.

The Republican presidential nominee's decision to vote against the Florida abortion measure comes just one day after he was asked by NBC News how he would vote.

“I think the six week is too short,” Trump said in the interview on Thursday. “It has to be more time. I told them that I want more weeks.”

“I am going to be voting that we need more than six weeks,” he said when pressed.

His Democratic opponent, Vice-President Kamala Harris, quickly responded to Trump's announcement that he would support continuing Florida's abortion ban as indicative of him continuing his anti-abortion stance.

“Donald Trump just made his position on abortion very clear: He will vote to uphold an abortion ban so extreme it applies before many women even know they are pregnant," she said in a statement.

Trump's comments open him to conservative criticism

Thursday's comments - in which Trump appeared to be open to voting in favour of the constitutional amendment - were heavily criticised by leaders in the anti-abortion movement, which plays a critical role in shaping conservative politics in the US.

“If Donald Trump loses, today is the day he lost,” conservative pundit Erick Erickson wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

“The committed pro-life community could turn a blind eye, in part, to national abortion issues. But for Trump to weigh in on Florida as he did will be a bridge too far for too many.”

Albert Mohler Jr, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote on X that Trump's comments on reproductive rights, including on the six-week ban, "seem almost calculated to alienate prolife voters".

“Pro-life Christian voters are going to have to think clearly, honestly, and soberly about our challenge in this election - starting at the top of the ticket," he said.

After the Thursday NBC interview, the Trump campaign and his running mate JD Vance made public statements emphasising that the former president had not yet made up his mind on the ballot initiative.

Mr Vance said the former president will "make his own announcement on how he's going to vote" on the Florida measure that will be based on "his own judgement".

Trump has criticised Florida's six-week abortion ban before.

Last September he said Florida Governor Ron DeSantis made a "terrible mistake" signing the ban into law.

Mr DeSantis was challenging the former president in the Republican primary at the time.

What are the abortion laws in US states?

Republicans put abortion disagreements aside at 'unity' convention, abortion is a key issue in 2024 us election.

Responding to Trump's comments, the Harris campaign made clear that they would make abortion rights central to their election effort.

Kevin Munoz, a campaign spokesperson, told reporters that they would continue to frame it around the concept of freedom, a campaign theme: “Kamala Harris is going to fight for your rights. Donald Trump will take them away.”

In 2022, the US Supreme Court struck down the right to abortion nationwide, leaving the decision to states. As a result, Florida banned abortion after six weeks of pregnancy .

The proposed constitutional amendment sought by reproductive rights advocates in Florida does not specify a number of weeks, but would protect abortion access in the state until the point of foetal viability, which is about 23-25 weeks of pregnancy.

As it stands, the state has a near-total ban on abortion, as many women do not know they are pregnant at six weeks.

Opinion polling indicates that a majority of Americans support abortion access.

A July poll from the University of North Florida suggested that 69% of likely voters supported the Florida ballot measure, and 23% opposed it.

The political backlash after the Supreme Court brought an end to Roe v Wade has presented Trump with a political conundrum he has yet to fully solve.

Trump rose to power with the help of the religious right, which broadly supports restrictions on the procedure.

In his first run for president, he pledged to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn the constitutional right to abortion in the US.

He kept the promise by appointing three conservative jurists who ultimately voted to overturn Roe v Wade.

Trump has taken the position in his 2024 campaign that abortion policy should be left to individual states, which has put him at odds with many conservatives who seek to restrict the procedure nationwide.

Nevertheless, rank-and-file party members fell in line behind the former president at the Republican National Convention in July.

Further complicating Trump's standing is his new proposal to make the government or insurance companies pay for in-vitro fertilisation (IVF).

Some anti-abortion and religious groups object to IVF due to its use of embryos.

Florida takes centre stage in US abortion battle

Florida six-week abortion ban will be felt beyond the state.