Roe V Wade overturned: the fallout and what it will mean.

Disclaimer:

I’ve been wanting to write this article for a really long time (since the leaked proposal of the overturn of Roe V Wade came out in May) but of course, time is limited when you have a toddler (not to mention we have both been sick for the last 2 months).

This article is tricky for me to write (one of the reasons I was putting it off), as I am not an American, and I don’t fully know the ins and outs of Roe V Wade- I know quite a bit though. However, I am not a lawyer, and I am certainly not well versed in American laws or constitution, so this article might have some errors or discrepancies within it (I will try my best to ensure that it does not). I have tried my best to ensure that this article is well researched and I have the evidence to back up my points. If it does have any facts that I have gotten wrong, please contact me so I can amend them. However, I am not open to having an argument over opinion- you are entitled to your opinion, as I am with mine, and this piece is wholly pro-choice. You are more than free to discontinue reading if you have a problem with that. But I could not sit idly by and not voice my feelings on the news of Roe being eradicated.

When I was in Year 9 English we were studying Debating. I was in a group with other students and the teacher gave us the topic of abortion, and whether it should be legal (which looking back, is pretty intense for a Year 9 English class! I remember another group had euthanasia). The opposing team had already chosen “for” (as in, Abortion should be legal) leaving us with “against”; having to argue that abortions should not be legal. Now, I knew what abortion was, but I didn’t have any strong feelings about it. I was neither for nor against, as I didn’t really understand the ramifications and the gravity of what it meant. I was 14 years old- I had not developed the feminist ideals that I now have, and I certainly didn’t know what being “pro-choice” or “pro-life” meant.

I don’t remember much of the debate, as it was a very long time ago. But I do remember that I was the key speaker as I was generally very loud and passionate as a child (and let’s face it, things haven’t changed). All I can remember that my constant rebuttal was “you can’t kill a human life” and “it doesn’t matter what you say, it’s still murder”. And even at the age of 14, I knew that my argument was pretty weak. Our opponents kept coming back with other rebuttals, but the best I could do was keep repeating how no matter what they said, it was murder and that was that. Needless to say, we lost the debate.

Since the discussion of Roe V Wade has been going around I am constantly reminded of that debate. I wish I had known then what I know now. I wish I had not been on the side I was on. I wish I had the facts in my back pocket to whip out and win my argument with. But I cannot go back and change it. As an adult woman and a feminist, it makes me squeamish knowing that in the past, I debated against abortion rights, even though it was just for a school task that I inevitably failed anyway. How dare my English teacher make me choose sides in such an under-researched way?

So I thought I would voice some of my concerns on what the reversal of Roe V Wade actually means and the dire ramifications it will have on women EVERYWHERE (yes, not just America, but everywhere). This is not an article about what Roe V Wade is, or how it came to be overturned, but rather is an article about the unsuspecting fallout of it. We all know that it will make it nearly impossible for women to get an abortion in a lot of states across America, but there are other additional consequences that you may not have realised at first that will make the lives of American women so much worse.

1. Women will increasingly be denied aftercare for miscarriages and still-births, and will be increasingly convicted of manslaughter charges for cases of still-birth and miscarriage.

The problem with still-births and miscarriages is that it is very hard to figure out what the root cause of them were. Sometimes it is due to trauma, illness, mother’s stress, but sometimes there is no reason for them to happen. You can be having a healthy pregnancy and still have it end in a miscarriage or still-birth. Regularly after a miscarriage or abortion a Dilation and Curettage (D&C) procedure is required to clear out any tissue left behind in the uterus to prevent infection and heavy bleeding. Whilst sometimes it is not needed, there is no way of the mother knowing a D&C is required to ensure that they won’t get an infection from any left over tissue. Now with the changes to US laws, the line between an abortion and a D&C procedure have become blurred. A woman in Texas was denied a D&C after her miscarriage, and was sent home to “bleed it out”. As an extension of that, more and more women are be prosecuted for manslaughter and murder charges for experiencing miscarriages and still births. From 2006 to 2020, approximately 1,300 US women have been charged for their actions during pregnancy. These women face months and years in prison for something that is out of their control.

2. Increased surveillance of women

We have all heard the reports of women deleting their period tracking apps in light of the reversal of Roe V Wade. The fact that police and law enforcers can check the phone of a suspected abortion-seeking woman to track her period and Google searches seems insane, but it not only can happen, it has happened. The digital paper-trail left behind when women begin seeking an abortion is enough to convict a woman if her pregnancy has ended unexpectedly. Coupled with the laws around assisting women to get abortions by crossing state lines, or the $10,000 bounty on the woman’s head if anyone finds out she is seeking an abortion, finding a secret and secure way to get a legal abortion is nearly impossible. So much so, this article was released by the Washington Post highlighting ways women can seek a legal abortion with as limited surveillance as possible. With suggestions such as “do not drive your own car as law enforcers can run number plates” to “using a temporary burner phone” it is easy to see how women seeking abortions have now become fugitives.

3. Emerging notion of “fetal personhood”

At this point in time, American constitutional rights attach to people who are actually born. A fetus only becomes a person after it has been born; before birth the fetus is “connected to, and a part of, the body of its mother” as described by Savell in ‘The Legal Significance of Birth’. Until the fetus achieves an independent existence it is not granted legal personhood in its own right. However, pro-lifers in America are trying to change this notion by pushing the idea of fetal personhood- that the fetus is a human being from the moment of conception and therefore all rights and privileges granted to all living breathing humans here on Earth should also be granted to the unborn fetus, despite the fact that the mother is also a living breathing human being (more so than the fetus) and they they too should have access to rights and privileges that they are entitled to. Yet, the pro-lifers don’t see it that way.

And it is not just pro-lifers in America who are wanting this. The unfortunately named “Zoe’s Bill” (now that’s going to be stuck in my head every time I call out my daughter’s name) is a bill that has been trying to pass through the New South Wales government since 2013. Christian Democratic Party MP Reverend Fred Nile is wanting to amend the Crimes Act 1900 to establish a separate offence for conduct causing serious harm to, or the destruction of, a "child in utero". If passed, the new law would mean that if someone caused the destruction or harm to a fetus they would be charged with grievous bodily harm to the fetus, instead of being charged with grievous bodily harm to the pregnant woman. This proposed bill has been voted down year after year, but each time it is brought back up into the conversation, more acceptance builds around it. To the point where in 2018, then premier of NSW Gladys Berejiklian stated she was open to discussions about changing the law.

4. Economic issues - gender and class pay gaps will grow

Australia just announced that in the ACT abortions will be free from early 2023 despite whether or not you have a Medicare card. That’s right- FREE. You are able to go to the hospital, have a medical or surgical abortion, and then leave without having to pay any money- as it should be. Additionally, the government will ensure that every person who comes in seeking an abortion will be given FREE contraception from that point onwards.

In the US, abortions can cost anywhere from $650 to $3000 depending on where in your gestational period you are, and of course, if your insurance company covers it. If you either don’t have insurance, or have insurance and your insurance company doesn’t recognise abortion as healthcare, then you are up shit creek without a paddle. Many Americans are living week to week, and many Americans live below the poverty line. To save up the money to have an abortion will takes weeks, if not months, and by that time, you will not be eligible for one. So accessing safe and legal abortions becomes an issue of class and wealth- those with the available funds will be able to seeks safer abortions. However, we knew this already. 49% of women seeking abortions are in the High Poverty Risk category, and 75% of women seeking abortions are in low income. These women lack access to paid maternity leave, paid childcare and simply cannot afford to raise the child. So the class divide grows.

As more women, particularly women of colour, are forced into having children they don’t want, and do not have the means to care for, they will be forced out of the workforce to care for these children. Jason Lindo, professor of economics at Texas A&M University stated how, “the evidence is very clear that this is going to lead to negative outcomes on things like women’s educational attainment, women’s labor force participation and measures of economic success.” More time is needed to take off to look after the children and therefore less educational and workplace opportunities will arise for the woman, making that gender pay gap increase. Less opportunities for promotions and upskilling, more part time work, more unpaid leave and more women being forced to stay as stay at home mothers will result in the gap widening. Being a stay at home mum is not a job to be discouraged, but it will mean that women who want to get back into the workforce might not be able to, despite the need for money to support their child. And so it becomes a vicious cycle.

As a result of this, it will mean less women in the workforce. Less women in the workforce means a strain on certain industries where a female workforce is dominant- like teaching, nursing, personal care workers, cleaners, and clerical and admin workers. These industries will see a strain that will then have a ripple effect on other social aspects. We are seeing the effects of a lack of nursing staff in hospitals due to COVID related reasons and the effect that it has on hospitals- enormous wait times, short stays, overworked and burnt-out staff. That’s just because of COVID, imagine if it was all the time due to the fact that 69% of your staff weren’t there as they had no means to be able to work and look after their children at the same time.

The debate around abortion really shouldn't exist. It shouldn’t be something that is up for debate. Just how operating on someone who has appendicitis isn’t debated upon, neither should this be. Abortion is healthcare, plain and simple. And just like any other form of healthcare, it needs to be supported, funded and accessible to all to ensure there is little to no inequality experienced. You would not deny a diabetic their medication, why would you deny a woman an abortion?

THAT is what I should have said to my Year 9 English teacher.