Thanks to Sen. Hillary Clinton for her recent
attempt to reopen and reframe the abortion discussion. As a strong
pro-choice advocate, she is looking for common ground with those
who campaign against abortion rights. Both sides, she said, want to
reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies, promote adoption, and,
in general, to reduce the number of abortions.
“We can all recognize that abortion in
many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many, many
women,” Clinton said in a Jan. 24 speech. “The fact is
the best way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the
number of unwanted pregnancies in the first place.” Her
remarks were echoed by Howard Dean, the new chairman of the
Democratic National Committee. “There’s nobody
who’s pro-abortion in America,” he said. “But we
do believe that a woman has a right to make up her own
mind.”
Much of what Sen. Clinton said is what family
planning advocates have been saying all along — that
prevention of unwanted pregnancies through education, abstinence, and contraception
is the best way to avoid coming to the “sad, even tragic”
choice. But her conciliatory tone is new. “There is an
opportunity for people of good faith to find common ground in this
debate,” she said. “We should be able to agree that we want
every child born in this country to be wanted, cherished, and
loved.”
These are new times. The recent election has
Democrats looking for ways to reach out across the red state-blue
state divide. But the Roe v. Wade decision, which extended reproductive freedom
to all American women, is 32 years old now. For millions of women
accustomed to the right to make their own decisions, there can be
no turning back to the days when abortions were illegal, unsafe, or
available only to the wealthy. So it is appropriate to lower
voices, to avoid stridency, to look for what works, and to try
again to build a consensus around prevention.
“Yes, we do have deeply held differences
of opinion about the issue of abortion,” Sen. Clinton said.
“And I, for one, respect those who believe with all their
hearts and conscience that there are no circumstances under which
any abortion should ever be available.” She also praised
groups that promote abstinence. “Research shows that the
primary reason teenage girls abstain from early sexual activity is
because of their religious and moral values. We should embrace this and
support programs that reinforce the idea that abstinence at a young age
is not just the smart thing to do; it is the right thing to
do.”
Judith Barringer, the chief executive officer
of Planned Parenthood Springfield Area for the past 12 years,
emphasizes that the clinic has always been primarily interested in
family planning, not only abortion referrals. Last year PPSA
provided a wide range of reproductive health services to 5,000
clients. In addition, it prevented unwanted pregnancies by
providing emergency contraception, the so-called
“morning-after” pill, to about 1,500 clients. Barringer
hopes that this form of contraception will soon become widely
available as an over-the-counter product in pharmacies. Planned
Parenthood counselors have at times become advocates for young
women who want to carry their pregnancies to term, sometimes
against their parents’ wishes. “Our mission is to help
support women’s choices,” she says.
There are practical ways to increase the use
of contraception, which will do more than anything else to cut down
on the number of abortions. The fact is the 7 percent of American
women who do not use contraception account for more than half of all unintended pregnancies.
Improved insurance coverage of contraception will make it more
affordable. Proposed federal legislation would require private health
plans that cover prescriptions to also cover prescribed contraceptives.
Also, there are proposals to make emergency contraception automatically
available to victims of rape, who now account for 15,000 abortions a
year.
For many years battle lines have been drawn
over whether abortion should be legal. Today’s debate should
be widened to make room for those who are anti-abortion but
pro-choice. It should hear the voices of women who want abortions
to be legal, without government interference, but who would most
likely choose not to have an abortion themselves. The new debate
should recognize that every case is different, and that women need
support as they make complex and difficult decisions. And the
debate should be colored with compassion, both for women and for
the unborn. Renewing the debate, while changing the terms, can
hasten the day when abortions are safe, legal, and rare.
This article appears in Feb 24 – Mar 2, 2005.
