How realistic are the abortion solutions filling social media? : NPR

A protester in Berlin in 2020 holds a placard reading ‘Against abortion?! vasectomy” while protesting Poland’s near-total abortion ban.

Tobias Schwarz/AFP via Getty Images

Hide caption

toggle caption

Tobias Schwarz/AFP via Getty Images

A protester in Berlin in 2020 holds a placard reading ‘Against abortion?! vasectomy” while protesting Poland’s near-total abortion ban.

Tobias Schwarz/AFP via Getty Images

As abortion is severely restricted in many US states after the fall of now Roe v. calfSocial media is full of complicated, and in some cases baseless, workarounds that experts say should be thoroughly scrutinized before even considering pursuing them.

Mandatory vasectomies, building clinics offering abortion services on Native American reservations, and placing children for adoption or foster care are among the most popular options for post-roe Abortion workarounds, but experts say these suggestions are unrealistic.

Here’s what these researchers have to say about why this post-roe Workarounds are not as realistic as they might seem.

Mandatory vasectomies

When the news broke that abortion would be almost completely banned in several states, that’s how it was reported in the US that calls for vasectomy appointments increased.

While many men were quoted as saying they were doing it for their significant other or because they weren’t interested in having children, Twitter was awash with suggestions, both serious and not, that Men should be forced to have a vasectomy.

“I understand they’re trying to show how restrictive abortion is [bans] on the body and how unfair it is and how it’s an attack on women, but I find they’re pretty deaf to the very real history of eugenics and the forced sterilization of men,” Georgia Grainger, a graduate student from the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, who is studying the history of vasectomy, told NPR over the phone.

in one thread Grainer, who received over 17,000 retweets, explained why the idea of ​​mandatory sterilization is harmful to men, especially men of color and men with disabilities.

Eugenics was a form of sexism and racism in the United States in the 20th century report declared by the University of Michigan.

According to the report, the first sterilization law came from Indiana in 1907, and other states passed similar laws almost immediately afterwards. Currently, these laws still apply exists in 31 states.

Grainer said there are ways to talk about unfair limitations on bodily autonomy without suggesting further limitations on other people’s bodies.

“As long as it’s voluntary,” Grainer said, “and voluntary, then any contraception is good, any reproductive choice is good in my opinion.” But when it’s not about choice, I think there’s a real problem.”

Construction of clinics offering abortions on Indian reservations

The sovereign status of Native American reservations has prompted the idea of ​​building clinics that perform abortions on reservations.

The tribal sovereignty that the US has accorded Native Americans gives Native people the right to govern themselves and allows them to manage their own affairs in their own homes, meaning they are exempt from laws like abortion bans that after theroe.

One suggestion that has been circulating on social media is to start building clinics on reservations, since they are sovereign nations where state government decisions do not apply.

But Aila Hoss, an associate professor at IUPUI’s McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis, said building clinics on reservations is a lot more complicated than it might seem.

“First of all, legally it’s not as simple as ‘oh, tribes are sovereign nations,’ although it should be,” Hoss told NPR over the phone.

She said the difference between criminal and civil law, who provides the services, and funding and tribal affiliation are among many of the reasons that providing outsider abortions is difficult for tribal nations.

Hoss said practitioners on reservations usually work under a government-funded system called I do. The I/T/U consists of three parts: the Indian Health Service (IHS), which is supported directly by the federal government with clinics and other health services for the Native Americans; tribal health services, which are IHS-funded health services administered directly by the tribes; and Urban Indian Health Programs, also funded by IHS but run by nonprofit organizations.

Physicians within the I/T/U system cannot perform abortions on tribal land except in certain situations due to the Hyde Amendment. This 1976 law prohibits state funding of abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or threatening the life of the pregnant patient. That means that if they wanted to offer abortions for non-Indigenous patients, reservations would have to use their own resources to bring in a practitioner who was not part of the state-funded system and who would not be afforded some of the legal protections afforded to practitioners who are in the federal system work.

For example, under the government-funded system, practitioners are protected from having to personally bear the brunt of a malpractice lawsuit. But Hoss said practitioners who are not under the federal system would not have those protections should a medical procedure go wrong. She added that tribes would have to take these legal and financial risks to build clinics that would offer abortions to non-members.

Aside from the legal issues surrounding this idea, ethical and cultural factors are also ignored.

Hoss said that none of the proposals for building clinics that offer abortions come from the tribes themselves, but from non-native national organizations that don’t think about the legal and ethical ramifications of tribes voluntarily taking on the weight of a tribe, which is complicated Theme.

Reproductive health care, including abortion, is already difficult to access for Native American women on their own land, Hoss said, so this proposal to build clinics on reservations now comes just at a time when the lack of access to abortion is affecting the non-Native population regards .

According to a 2014 study in the American Journal of Public Health, over 80% of Indian Health Service facilities, the main provider of reproductive health care to Native American women, failed to comply with IHS and Hyde Amendment regulations because they do not provide abortion services in cases of rape, incest or the life of the pregnant patient in danger. Only 5% of these facilities performed on-site abortions, and none had Mifeprex, a drug used for medical abortions.

Indians have them too highest poverty rate every racial group in the US that has negatively impacted theirs access to adequate health care.

“So I think the first point is a reflection on why that wasn’t important to you before-Dobbs. Why do people make these kinds of generalizations without considering the legal, ethical, and cultural ramifications?”

accept as answer

When protests took place in the United States that morning Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturned roea tweet featuring a couple holding up a sign that reads “We Will Adopt Your Baby” became a meme.

That couple in the photo, Neydy Casillas and Sebastián Schuff, are lawyers who have spent most of their careers supporting conservative Christian legal struggles. Casillas is linked to an anti-LGBTQ law firm, Alliance Defending Freedom, which is pushing to transform the US into a nation with more “Christian values.”

To convince people not to have abortions, many have suggested putting babies up for adoption or putting them into the foster care system.

Already in 2020, more than 100,000 children were waiting for adoption in the foster care system, according to the Kids Count Data Center.

Dana Davidson, co-director of adoption and family support at The Cradle, which helps make adoption easier for families across the country and internationally, told NPR via email that the impact of the toppling of Roe v. calf and its impact on adoption will vary in different parts of the country.

“We know that adoption is complex and comes from loss,” Davidson said.

Davidson said that in the agency’s experience, clients don’t make the decision between abortion and adoption at the same time.

“Adoption is an alternative to raising children, not an alternative to pregnancy,” she said.

States like Texas that have a trigger law that once banned abortion Roe v. calf was knocked over were among those with the most foster children as of 2021, according to the project Who Cares: A National Census of Nursing Homes and Families.

“I think it’s also important to point out that while there has been a lot of online conversation that suggests that a Roe v. calf The overthrow could be great for future parents looking to adopt. The Cradle is not looking for babies for families,” Davidson said [is] the best option for themselves and their families.”

Comments are closed.