In the same week, Rand Paul praised his sister for having six kids but denounced a hypothetical woman on assistance who has only five. The contrast lays bare the hypocrisy and prejudice of the anti-choice movement, and shows how conservatives use children as weapons against women.
Conservatives have been turning up the volume on the irrational, unevidenced claim that poverty is caused by not being married. In reality, poverty is caused by not having enough money. This should be obvious, but it clearly needs to be said more often.
The plan will result in less access to affordable, consistent birth control for the poor working women of Pennsylvania—which, as the federal birth control mandate demonstrates, is counter to the intention of health-care reform.
New anti-choice laws in Texas and other states around the country could push more women and their families deeper into poverty.
Abortion funds are critical because they help bridge the gap left by the Hyde Amendment and enable access to abortion for those who are financially denied their right to choose.
Gosnell’s clinic is an extreme version of what I call “rogue clinics,” facilities that today prey on women, primarily women of color and often immigrants, in low-income communities.
What does a future without Roe v. Wade look like? In a lot of ways, it looks like Texas, where those who are in the least ideal financial and socio-economic position to provide for an unplanned-for child are the ones for whom abortion–and contraception–is hardest to access.
After 40 years, isn’t it time that our policies reflect real women and real families?
On this 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we honor and celebrate US women’s legal right to abortion, and we reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that abortion is accessible to women everywhere, and that the promise of the decision is a reality for all of us.
For nearly four decades, the Hyde Amendment has limited the abilities of low-income women to implement timely decisions about ending a pregnancy.