Blog Posts, Past Actions

“Do you find most public discourse on abortion painful?”

Jen R

I'm excited to be attending the Open Hearts, Open Minds, and Fair Minded Words conference that will be taking place at Princeton University this Friday and Saturday. The conference is for activists on all sides of the abortion debate to:

  1. Explore new ways to think and speak about abortion. Recognizing the divisive nature of the debate, and its larger effect on public discourse, we wish to explore new words, ideas, categories, arguments and approaches for engaging with each other
  2. Approach issues related to abortion with open hearts and open minds. We wish to make a concerted effort to engage with each other with the kind of humility and quiet necessary to really listen and absorb the ideas of someone who thinks differently.
  3. Define more precisely areas of disagreement and work together on areas of common ground. Some sessions are intended to cut through the confusion and fog of the public abortion debate, by clarifying more precisely areas of disagreement, potentially highlighting areas where we can move forward.
  4. Get to know those on multiple sides of the issues more personally. In part because it is often easier to take seriously and listen to those one knows personally, we will self-consciously promote social interaction at this conference through lunches, cocktail hours and breaks.

 

One of the first things on the conference web site is: "Do you find most public discourse on abortion painful?" That's what really drew me to it. Is there anyone who finds the way we talk about abortion satisfying? I don't mean useful — I think all sorts of people find it useful — but satisfying?  Like it's really bringing out the best in us, like we're really doing our best thinking and relating to each other when we fling "baby killer!" and "woman hater!" at each other for the thousandth time? I hope not. I want to have a richer, more constructive conversation and try to find a way out of the toxic swamp we've been mired in for the last few decades. I want to talk to people who won't dismiss ideas out of hand just because they come from one of Those People. I really hope to meet other reproductive peace advocates (even if they don't call themselves that)!

If you can't come to the conference, good news! All but one of the panels will be livestreamed on the web site, as well as archived for later viewing. I make no promises about liveblogging, but I'll have my phone and hope to be tweeting (within the rules, that is).

Blog Posts

Good news on pregnancy assistance, sex ed; “common ground”?

Jen R

Good news for mothers and children: last week, the Department of Health and Human Services announced the distribution of $27 million in funding to assist pregnant women. The grants will be used to help pregnant and parenting students complete their educations, serve pregnant women who are the victims of violence or stalking, and publicize resources available to teen mothers. The White House promoted this Pregnancy Assistance Fund as part of its "common ground" approach to reducing the incidence of abortion.

Robin Marty at RHRealityCheck doesn't think much of it:

Is putting in more support for pregnant women and teens common ground in trying to bring down the numbers of abortions in this country? Sure, assuming that those women did in fact want to be mothers. But there seems to be an assumption that we find common ground by converting unwanted pregnancies into wanted pregnancies, rather than trying to stop unwanted pregnancies before they are conceived.

This initiative is trying to prevent those abortions that happen because a woman believes she has no better options. Marty considers this an attempt to  "[convert] unwanted pregnancies into wanted pregnancies" and doesn't consider it an area of common ground between pro-lifers and pro-choicers. But when a woman has an abortion because she can't afford to carry her child to term, is that really an unwanted pregnancy — or is it unwanted poverty?

How's this for common ground? No woman should ever be in a position where she feels that abortion is her only choice.

Now, I do agree with Marty that we should be able to find common ground on giving people the information they need to make fully informed choices about sexuality and contraception. That brings me to the second piece of good news: for the first time since 1996, the U.S. government is funding effective, evidence-based sex education programs. To be eligible for funding, a program must "be supported by at least one study showing a positive, statistically significant effect on at least one of the following categories: sexual activity, contraceptive use, sexually transmitted infections, pregnancy or births."  There's room for improvement in those criteria, but it's a step in the right direction — away from the inaccurate, slut-shaming programs that have been getting the funds, and toward effective education.