Blog Posts

Not Every “Prolife” Proposal Is Prolife in Effect

The organization Liberty Counsel has its own amicus brief in support of Alabama’s drive to criminally prosecute pregnant women who use substances.

Why? On the grounds that the unborn child is a full-fledged human being.

Liberty Counsel amasses historical evidence that the law has treated unborn children as human beings like any other.

But its brief does nothing to assess whether in the real world, the criminal prosecutions in Alabama actually foster the treatment of unborn children–not to mention their mothers!–as full-fledged human beings.

Liberty Counsel thus takes an enormous and unwarranted leap from the claim of fetal humanity to a position that *threatens* fetal and female lives, health, wellbeing, and rights.

Any such claim needs to have advocacy of robust, generous, nonpunitive assistance with abortion alternatives written right into it, or it has no validity whatsoever.

In the case of pregnant women who abuse substances and their fetuses, that means immediately accessible, free/affordable, specialized, high quality drug treatment programs.

Liberty Counsel mentions nothing of the sort in the brief, or anywhere else.

It also invokes nineteenth century physicians and academics who opposed abortion, without mentioning or discussing the fair amount of misogyny mixed into their views.

The brief does quote the antiabortion views of one feminist doctor, Mary Dixon Jones. But it omits her connections to the women’s rights movement.

It says nothing of early feminists’ consensus on abortion. They defined it as unjust prenatal lifetaking that could not be opposed without simultaneously and throughly challenging its root causes, such as the denial of women’s sex education and family planning rights, and the criminalization of single mothers as sex offenders.

Small wonder that All Our Lives got behind the opposing brief, not Liberty Counsel’s!

gavel, law book, scales of justice
Blog Posts, Feature, Past Actions

All Our Lives Joins Amicus Brief in Alabama Substance Abuse Cases

Joining over 40 other organizations concerned about maternal and child health and welfare, All Our Lives has signed onto an amicus curiae or “friend of the court” brief in the case of Hope Elisabeth Ankrom v. State of Alabama, documenting the many evidence-based reasons why the State of Alabama should not criminalize substance using pregnant women.

One reason is that women will feel pressure to have abortions because substance abuse treatment is so difficult for them to access during pregnancy and they fear prosecution. Yet this criminalization is pushed in the name of establishing rights for unborn children! Punishing women and driving up the abortion rate doesn’t accomplish that in the real world.

We signed onto the brief after reaching out to National Advocates for Pregnant Women, in response to an RH Reality Check article by their attorneys Lynn Paltrow and Emma Ketteringham, Now It’s Clear: Pro-Life Means Pro-Imprisonment.

It doesn’t have to. And it won’t, if we can at all help it!

Thanks especially to Emma Ketteringham for her help.

Blog Posts

What *Did* Early Feminists Think?

There’s a scenario that’s gotten way past tiresome. (Example: here.)

To wit: Right-wing prolifer invokes early feminism. S/he produces problematic quotations in an utterly sloppy and yet oddly selective way to give the impression that early feminists did not simply oppose abortion; they were all exemplars of today’s misogynist “traditional family values.”

Prochoice critics rightfully point out the sloppiness and selectivity–thereby leaving their own impression that only an unscholarly, idiotic, deceptive person would argue that early feminists opposed abortion. Especially for any reasons that could matter today.

What *does* the historical record say?

Early feminists left plenty of solid material in their own words that expressed opposition to abortion–as prenatal lifetaking that resulted from the denial of women’s right to family planning and other substantive alternatives. Very often as part of a serious critique of “traditional family values”! For reasons that in many ways still apply today.

I have carefully researched and published on this material for over two decades and this is my well substantiated conclusion.

But who cares what *I* think, right? I’m just a family-destroying fake prolifer/antichoice woman-hating liar, right?

Blog Posts, Past Actions

Why Lila Rose Doesn’t Even Speak for Pro-Life Feminists

(A recent article by the wellknown antiabortionist Lila Rose has frustrated our board members, some of whom campaigned for contraception before she was even born. We privately and publicly asked Rose several times to engage with us on this matter, but have to date gotten no response from her. Thanks to Fem 2.0 for publishing our response.)

Lila Rose, founder of the controversial anti-abortion group Live Action, recently penned an article on Politico entitled “Battle Hymn of the Anti-Abortion Feminist.” As board members of All Our Lives, an unapologetically feminist organization whose (interfaith, nonsectarian, secular) mission is to alleviate the societal problems responsible for so many abortions, we are outraged by Rose’s presumption that she speaks for us. Starting with that militaristic title…

(Read the rest at Fem 2.0…)

Blog Posts

Protecting life in Nebraska

Something very encouraging is happening in Nebraska.

The anti-abortion group Nebraska Right to Life sent a letter to six State Senators yesterday urging them to support a bill restoring prenatal care to babies with undocumented mothers. In the open letter, the group’s executive director, Julie Schmit-Albin, wrote, “It is sad and alarming that we have come to this point where some of the major pro-life leaders in the Legislature are choosing to put the illegal immigration issue and who pays for what, over the life and health of babies in the womb.”

The letter went on to point out that these six senators had all likely made statements in the past about the "necessity of protecting innocent human life from fertilization on."

Can I get an "indeed"?

A little background on the situation in Nebraska: In 2010, Nebraska specifically prohibited undocumented immigrants from receiving free prenatal care provided by the state to low-income women. Pro-life groups in Nebraska have been part of the coalition to remove the prohibition, arguing that respect for life in the womb doesn't cease to matter because of who the child's mother is. I think it's great to see principles and compassion trumping partisanship here.

A few moments ago, the Nebraska legislature passed LB 599, which restores funding for pre-natal care for all low-income mothers and their unborn children regardless of immigration status. The bill will now go to Governor Dave Heineman, who has threatened a veto. Babies Born Healthy is holding a vigil at 5pm tonight at the Nebraska State Capitol to urge him to sign the bill.

Blog Posts

On the claims that emergency contraception is abortifacient

Today is the National Day of Action for the “Back Up Your Birth Control” campaign, which aims to increase awareness and use of emergency contraception (EC). Since there has been a lot of talk in pro-life circles about EC being “abortifacient,” and in particular about the Affordable Care Act “mandating the provision of abortifacients,” I thought this would be a good opportunity to discuss the mechanisms of action of emergency contraception pills and clear up some misunderstandings.

1. Plan B does not cause abortions.

The best available evidence indicates that levonorgestrel emergency contraception pills, often known as LNG ECPs or Plan B, have no mechanism of action other than prevention of fertilization. Plan B stops ovulation, and may also inhibit sperm transport. Studies designed specifically to test whether LNG ECPs prevent implantation found no evidence that they do.

2. Whatever definition of pregnancy or abortion is being used, Plan B still does not cause abortions.

Abortion advocates often dismiss claims that EC is abortifacient by saying that it does not disrupt an “established pregnancy,” meaning that it has no effect upon an implanted embryo. The definition of “pregnancy” used by the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, among other medical authorities, refers to the specific physical relationship between a woman and the child she’s carrying that begins when the embryo implants. Some have charged that this definition of pregnancy is politically motivated. Whether or not that is the case, it is nonetheless the definition that’s currently in use. (The ACOG actually argues that “conception” should be defined as successful implantation, but that definition hasn’t really caught on.)

Although the term “abortion” is often used in everyday language to refer to the killing of an embryo or fetus, in medical terminology it specifically means the ending of a pregnancy with resulting death of the embryo or fetus. To aid in communication, it might be helpful to use the term “contragestive” when referring to a substance or device that prevents gestation of an already-conceived embryo. Contragestives are not abortifacient in the strictest sense of that term, but neither are they contraceptive by most people’s definition. And of course, it is the induced death of the embryo or fetus, not the ending of the pregnancy per se, that pro-lifers object to.

What you need to know is that there is no evidence that EC does anything but prevent fertilization. In fact, there is strong evidence that Plan B can only prevent fertilization. It is not abortifacient by anyone’s definition. It is not contragestive. It is contraceptive.

3. Product labeling which states that Plan B may inhibit implantation is based on out-of-date information.

Opponents of EC often point to the product labeling that says “In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium).” However, that language is based on what was known at the time that the product and labeling were submitted to the FDA for approval. At that time, there was still speculation that it might prevent implantation. Subsequent research has found no post-fertilization mechanism of action for LNG-ECP. The product labeling is simply not up to date.

4. Emergency contraception works after intercourse because fertilization does not take place immediately, and can be prevented if ovulation is prevented.

Contrary to popular belief, a woman does not have to be ovulating at the time of intercourse in order to conceive. Sperm can live up to five days in a woman’s reproductive tract. Thus, conception can take place even if a woman ovulates several days after intercourse. EC works by preventing ovulation if it has not already taken place.

5. ella has not been studied as extensively as Plan B, but has not been shown to prevent implantation at the dosage used for EC.

Ulipristal acetate, also known as UPA or by its brand name of ella, is effective for a longer period of time after intercourse than Plan B. The reason is that UPA is capable of delaying ovulation even after the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, when ovulation is imminent, whereas Plan B is only effective when taken before the LH surge.

UPA is chemically similar to mifepristone, also known as RU-486. Because of this, many people have assumed that it must also induce abortion. Drugs in this class administered at high or repeated doses cause changes to the endometrium that may theoretically impair implantation. However, ella is a relatively low dose of ulipristal administered once. One study has shown that if administered shortly after ovulation, UPA can decrease endometrial thickness by 0.6 ± 2.2mm. Although some researchers who consider prevention of implantation to be contraception viewed that as an indication that ulipristal could be used as a “contraceptive,” in fact it has not been demonstrated that this relatively small effect on the endometrium is enough to inhibit implantation. Only one of the 61 women in the study, on a dose more than 3 times that used in ella, had what was considered a thin endometrium (less than 6 mm).

Concerns have also been expressed about the possibility that ella could cause miscarriage. So far, women taking ella have been found to have miscarriage rates in line with the rate in the general population.

The mechanism of action of UPA has not been thoroughly described and women who are unwilling to risk even the possibility of a contragestive effect should avoid it. However, it cannot be factually stated that a single dose of 30 mg of UPA, as used in ella, is known to have any mechanism other than the prevention of fertilization.

6. That UPA could theoretically be used off-label in higher doses to induce abortions doesn’t mean that it can’t be used for legitimate purposes.

Methotrexate can be used to induce abortion. Does that mean that it shouldn’t have been approved to treat cancer and autoimmune diseases? And of course, sleeping pills — even ones sold over the counter — can be used to commit suicide. The possibility that a drug can be abused doesn’t mean that it should never be used.

Blog Posts

Exciting new collaboration for All Our Lives

The front-page story on the young feminist blog Fem2pt0.com today comes from our own Mary Krane Derr, whose "Susan B. Anthony Was Slutshamed, Too!" is the first post in a new collaboration between Fem2.0 and All Our Lives. Earlier this month, Fem2.0 editor Abigail Collazo approached us about crossposting some of our posts on their blog. Even though we differ on abortion, All Our Lives and Fem 2.0 share many of our other values, and we are delighted to have this opportunity to talk with their audience.

So, thanks to Abigail Collazzo, and I hope this will be the start of some great discussions.

Blog Posts, Past Actions

Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act

The Violence Against Women Act was originally passed in 1994 with the help of a coalition of pro-choice and pro-life advocates, including Feminists for Life. Since then, it's been relatively uncontroversial and enjoyed bipartisan support. VAWA is up for renewal again, and is now meeting with resistance from Senate Republicans who oppose new provisions aimed at improving services for Native Americans, undocumented immigrants, and LGBT individuals.

If you need additional pro-life incentive to help reauthorize VAWA, take a look at the statistics on the relationship between intimate partner violence, unintended pregnancy, and abortion in our "Family Planning Freedom is Prolife" presentation (.ppt) (.pdf), or in this factsheet from the Family Violence Prevention Fund.

The National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence has all the info you need on how to help:

You did it!! We now have 60 Sponsors in the Senate!

Thanks to Senator Heller (R-NV), who signed on to sponsor VAWA this week, we now have 60 sponsors – and one full day before our goal! Thank you for all your hard work!

Now we need to secure our sponsors’ commitment to S. 1925, the real VAWA, and to get as many new Senate supporters as possible. VAWA is coming to the Senate Floor and we need to have as big an outpouring of support as we can!

This week, we want you to help us by signing petitions, engaging your friends and family and getting the word out that every Senator needs to hear from you and your loved ones about why VAWA must be passed immediately.

Things are moving quickly – so “like” our Facebook page to get up to the minute information: http://on.fb.me/NTF_Facebook_page or check out our website: www.4VAWA.org

TAKE ACTION TODAY!
Suggested actions for this week include:
1. Ask your FRIENDS AND FAMILY members to call Senators to urge co-sponsorship and votes for S. 1925, the real VAWA!
2. Ask all the men you know to sign a petition supporting VAWA

Action 1: Ask your FRIENDS and FAMILY to call both of their senators’ D.C. offices today (http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) and ask them vote YES on S. 1925 the real VAWA:

I urge Senator _____ to support the Violence Against Women Act and vote YES on S. 1925 AS IS. Don’t use VAWA as a political tool – pass it now so that all survivors of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking can get the support they need!

Action 2: Ask all the men you know to sign a petition supporting VAWA
VAWA is everyone’s issue. Help us engage more men by asking the men you know and love to sign the 10,000 Men for VAWA petition
:

http://www.change.org/petitions/us-congress-10-000-men-supporting-the-violence-against-women-act

Check our website for fact sheets, press coverage, support letters and updates: www.4vawa.org

Check out and “like” our Facebook page where you can find a toolkit and other action and information items: http://on.fb.me/NTF_Facebook_page

Don’t forget to tweet about VAWA using the hashtags #ReauthorizeVAWA and #VAWA.

If you aren't on one of the VAWA email lists or want to add members of your staff or state/community leaders to our grassroots alerts e-mailing list, send names and contact information including email to Sean Black, sblack@icasa.org.

 

Blog Posts, Past Actions

Justice for Trayvon Martin and his parents

Most of the talk of reproductive rights in mainstream politics and media in the United States revolves around not bearing children. Family planning advocates, ourselves included, argue for sex education and access to contraception to prevent unintended pregnancy. Pro-choice advocates argue for a right not to bear children who have been conceived.

What is too often neglected in the mainstream discourse is the right to have children, and to raise them safely and with dignity. One reproductive right that women of color do not have in this country is the right to raise their children free of the fear that their babies will be killed because they are “suspicious.”

Trayvon Martin
was a 17-year-old African American who was visiting family in Sanford, Florida. On February 26, during halftime of the NBA All-Star Game, he walked to a nearby store to get candy for his brother and a can of tea for himself. As he walked back to his father’s home, the hood of his sweatshirt pulled up against the rain, he was spotted by the (self-appointed, as far as I’ve been able to tell) Neighborhood Watch captain George Zimmerman. Zimmerman, 28, thought Trayvon looked “like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining, and he’s just walking around, looking about.” He called 911, then told the dispatcher “these assholes, they always get away” and “he’s running.” Zimmerman left his SUV and followed Martin, despite being told by the 911 dispatcher that he didn’t need to and a squad car was on the way. Neighbors reported hearing a fight, and cries for help. On one 911 tape, cries and a gunshot can be heard. When police arrived, Trayvon Martin was dead — shot in the chest by George Zimmerman. Zimmerman claimed he had acted in self-defense. Sanford police accepted his explanation, saying that they had no probable cause to believe otherwise, despite the fact that Zimmerman shot an unarmed minor with whom he had needlessly initiated a confrontation.

Trayvon Martin had no history of violence or misbehavior, and had no drugs or alcohol in his system. George Zimmerman has a history of belligerent behavior, and was not tested for drugs or alcohol.

I think of how devastated I would be if this happened to my daughter. I also know that it wouldn’t happen to my white daughter; she will never be found guilty of Walking While Black. If she were killed while walking down the street on a simple errand, police would pursue and charge her killer. So while I stand in solidarity with Trayvon’s parents, I also don’t presume to really know what they’re going through, or what all the parents of young men of color who fear that their sons might be next are going through.

It’s too late to help Trayvon Martin’s family keep their son alive. Here’s how you can help them with their demand for accountability for his death:

  • Sign their petition asking the Florida State’s Attorney to prosecute George Zimmerman. Or call the office of State’s Attorney Wolfinger at 407-665-6410.
  • Contact the Department of Justice to ask them to investigate the case and the reluctance of Sanford police to act.
  • Call Attorney Jasmine Rand at 850-222-3333 to give to the family’s legal fund.
  • Share this information. Follow @attorneycrump and @blacklaw18 and the #TrayvonMartin hashtag on Twitter, or “like” the Justice for Trayvon Martin page on Facebook, or follow the blogs I’ve linked here. Don’t let the case fade away without so much as a charge.
Blog Posts, Past Actions

Honduran women could be jailed for using emergency contraception

Following a Supreme Court decision in February which inaccurately declared that emergency contraception is abortifacient, the Honduran Congress is poised to make distribution or use of levonorgestrel emergency contraception (LNG EC) a crime punishable by jail time. Once again, we see that misinformation about EC has severe consequences. The best available research shows that LNG EC has no mechanism of action other than the prevention of fertilization. The blog Feministas en Resistencia Honduras has more information (English translation).

 

Please sign this petition to the President of the National Congress of Honduras urging him not to criminalize the use of emergency contraception. Please also continue to educate governments, media, and pro-life or pro-choice organizations wherever you live on the facts about emergency contraception.