Ho 1

Joelle Ho

Writing 39C

Dr. Broadbent

31 May, 2018

Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures

“Please, I am out of options. I am absolutely desperate” - Martina

Martina bought a plane ticket to Mexico. She was in the early stages of a pregnancy that

she did not want. As a Texas resident, she did not have adequate access to abortion services. She

tried to email a Dutch non-profit, Women on the Web, to try to obtain pills to self-induce her

abortion. Women on the Web mails these pills, mifepristone and misoprostol, to women living in

countries where abortion is outlawed. Since abortion is legal in the United States, they denied

Martina’s pleas for the pills. However, they suggested she take a trip to Mexico, where abortion

pills are available in pharmacies without the need of a prescription. Not wanting to travel to

another country, Martina googled different ways to terminate her pregnancy on her own through

different vitamins and herbal remedies. She began taking cinnamon capsules and thousands of

milligrams of vitamin C a day. To her dismay, these alternatives did not work. She was forced to

go to Mexico.

When she arrived, Martina had to go to six different pharmacies until she found someone

who would sell her the drug. However, they only sold misoprostol, the drug that expels the dead

fetus. Although she worried about the negative consequences she may face for taking illegitimate

pills bought from a foreign country, she had no other option. After an exhausting trip, Martina

returned to the U.S. and received an ultrasound confirming the termination of her pregnancy.
 Ho 2

Although she was happy for the whole ordeal to be over, she stated that she would “​much rather

have a health professional help [her] in this and kind of guide [her] through it versus DIY”

(Redden).

History of Abortion in the United States

In the 1950s, abortion was outlawed across all of the United States.​ It is believed that the

movement behind this was that many “native” Anglo-Saxon women were having abortions

performed whereas foreign women were not. This led to the fear of the fall of the Anglo-Saxon

race (Beisel). In order to prevent this from happening, the United States decided to criminalize

any type of abortion services.

It was not until ​January 22nd,

1973, well over a hundred years

later, that abortion would finally

be legalized in the United States.

On this day, the U.S. Supreme

Court announced its decision on

Roe v. Wade​, a case that

challenged a Texas law that banned abortions unless the woman’s life was in danger. The Court

ruled that a woman’s choice to terminate her pregnancy fell under the Fourteenth Amendment,

the constitutional right to privacy (Mively 614).

This was a gigantic win for women’s reproductive rights. However in 1989, another

controversial abortion case was presented to the Court, ​Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.
 Ho 3

In this case, the Court upheld a regulation in Missouri that required women to receive viability

tests before undergoing an abortion (Mively 621). This sent a message to all states that they

could find loopholes around ​Roe v. Wade​ to regulate abortion services in their states. Since this

decision, states that are dominated by anti-abortion politicians have attempted undermine ​Roe​ by

enacting extremely restrictive abortion laws.

Women are having to go through exhaustive experiences similar to Martina’s in order to

obtain a procedure that is their constitutional right. Currently, many states are going out of their

way to restrict access to abortion services, just like in the 1950s. By placing extremely restrictive

laws on abortion, certain states are forcing women to have children that they do not want to have,

leading to serious consequences in terms of their health and quality of life. ​Most women decide

to have an abortion because it is not a good time to have a baby in their life due to

socioeconomic struggles, continuing education, the pregnancy is bad for their health, or they

simply just do not want to have a baby.

Gestational Age Limits on Abortion

In order to undercut ​Roe​, many states have placed limits on where you can obtain an

abortion, who can perform them, who is allowed to obtain them (with or without permission

from family), whether or not insurance providers can cover abortion, and many other ridiculous

laws. Although all of these are extremely pressing issues, it is impossible to try to solve every

aspect of anti-abortion politics in the United States. Therefore, I will only focus on the

inconsistency on gestational age requirements throughout certain states in America, specifically

Iowa and Texas, and its negative effect on women seeking to terminate their pregnancies.
 Ho 4

Gestational age is a term

used to describe how far along in

her pregnancy a woman is,

measured in weeks from the start of

her last menstrual cycle to the

current date (“Gestational”). States

have different limits as to how far

along in her pregnancy that a

woman is allowed to obtain an

abortion. These limits range from as little as 6 weeks, to no limits at all (“Abortion”). Many

people have different beliefs as to when it is appropriate to terminate a pregnancy. Some of these

beliefs are based on religious views or based on scientific research. There is an abundant amount

of research that has been done on fetal development, however there is no consensus as to when it

is ethical to terminate a pregnancy.

The majority of states in America require that abortions be performed before a fetus is

viable. Viability is defined as the point where the fetus is able to survive outside of its mother’s

womb. ​Many studies have been conducted on when a fetus is viable, some saying that it is after

the 25th week while others say at the 20th week (Peterfy 608). Additionally, there are many

debates on when it is ethical to abort a fetus. Some claim that it is before the fetal heartbeat can

be heard whereas others believe it is before the fetus can feel pain (around the 20 weeks

gestation). Others place more emphasis on the mother’s life and claim that is always ethical to

abort a fetus due to the stress an unwanted pregnancy places on a woman’s life. ​Fetal
 Ho 5

development is a complicated

process that works in stages. Just

like children go through puberty

at different times and rates,

fetuses develop at different

times and rates as well. Dr.

Anne Davis, an OB/GYN and

medical director for Physicians for Reproductive Health, states that there is no conclusive

scientific evidence that pain receptor pathways are fully developed by 20 weeks (Miller). ​These

discrepancies lead to inconsistency regarding gestational age limits across the nation, creating

greater struggles for women to obtain access to abortions.

On May 4th, 2018 the Governor of Iowa, Kim Reynolds, signed a bill that bans abortion

after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, except in cases of rape, incest, or if the pregnancy is

life-threatening (Ingber). The heartbeat can be detected as early as 6-7 weeks into a woman’s

pregnancy (“Concerns”). The problem with this is that most women do not find out they are

pregnant until 6 weeks into their pregnancy. Therefore, this bill almost completely abolishes a

woman’s option to terminate her pregnancy–a blatant attack on ​Roe​ and its supporters. Reynolds

refuses to take into account the time frame between when a woman realizes she is pregnant and

when the fetal heartbeat can be detected–there is no time in between these two events. They

occur simultaneously. As a mother of three children, one would expect Reynold’s to know

around when a woman first finds out she is pregnant, since she has experienced it three times.

Yet she chooses to disregard this fact and decides to act on her own agenda, to eliminate abortion
 Ho 6

procedures in Iowa. When asked about the reasoning behind signing the bill, Reynold’s logic

was as follows: “​if death is determined when a heart stops beating, then doesn't a beating heart

indicate life?” (Ingber). However, the Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in

Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research conducted a study that concluded that death

should be determined by total-brain death, not

just when the heart stops beating (Sarbey). By

this logic, an unborn child is not truly ‘alive’

until it’s nervous system is completely

developed. A fetus’s nervous system is not fully

developed until the 28th week of pregnancy.

Reynold’s decision to sign this bill was

completely uneducated and made through her

bias of being an anti-abortion advocate.

Texas’s gestational age limit on abortion is 20 weeks gestation, when the fetus is believed

to feel pain (“Abortion”). It is a little more forgiving than Iowa’s, however Texas has found other

ways to limit abortion. While Iowa is taking a very direct approach to restricting abortion with a

large, overarching law, Texas has been implementing many small laws that have a significant

impact. One of those being a limit on when women can take the abortion pill. Many women opt

for the medical abortion rather than undergoing the surgical procedure. It is not invasive, consists

of them simply taking a pill at a clinic, then they are able to take the second in the comfort of

their own home. The first pill taken is mifepristone, which is the medication responsible for

terminating the pregnancy. The second pill, misoprostol, is taken hours later and is responsible
 Ho 7

for expelling the fetus. It leads to heavy bleeding and cramping, similar to a woman’s menstrual

period, however does not need to be monitored by a nurse or physician. Originally, it was

believed that the pill could not be taken after 7 weeks of gestation. However, after further

research, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) made a statement saying that the pill can be

taken up to 10 weeks of gestation. If taken later, the pregnancy will not fully terminate since the

embryo is too far developed for the medication to work. However, Texas has implemented a law

under House Bill 2 that rejected the FDA’s

decision, and continued to restrict medical abortion

to 7 weeks gestation (Baum). By using another

approach to attempt to rid of abortion in their state,

Texas further limits the accessibility of abortion

services for women. Similar to Iowa’s heartbeat

law, it almost completely abolishes the availability

of abortion for women seeking the medical route.

This shorter limit adds an extra stress for women because they might be facing socioeconomic

barriers that hinder their ability to obtain the procedure, therefore they need more time to build

up the funds to pay for it. Additionally, they might have to resort to measures like Martina and

cross the border to Mexico since their own state will not grant them access to the pill. Texas’s

refusal to listen to the FDA demonstrates the influence of bias from anti-abortion politicians to

simply finish their agenda of ridding of abortion. However, they fail to recognize the detrimental

effects these restrictive laws have on the women of their state.

 Ho 8

The Aftermath of Gestational Age Limits

These disparities in the beliefs as to when a pregnancy can be ethically terminated leads

to many obstacles for women living in states with shorter gestational age limits. Many women

are forced to travel far in order to obtain abortions if their state has restrictive laws such as these.

Due to insufficient funds for far travel and the expenses of the procedure, women are not able to

get an abortion and are forced to carry out with their pregnancies. However, if they are really

pressed to obtain an abortion, some women resort to extreme measures–similar to pre-​Roe​ times.

In fact, a study conducted Texas that resulted estimated that 100,000-200,000 women had

attempted to self-induce an abortion in that state

(Grossman). ​They did this through pills bought

from Mexico or from illegitimate websites,

ineffective herb remedies, or through violent blunt

trauma to the abdomen. All of these means in

self-inducing abortion are extremely detrimental to

the health and safety of women, however like

Martina, they feel as if they have no other choice.

Whether abortion is illegal or not, women will keep obtaining them. A study conducted in

2016 confirms this by finding that in countries where abortion is illegal, 37 per 1,000 women still

have abortions. In countries where abortion ​is​ legal such as the U.S., this number is 34 per 1,000

women (Sedgh). Restrictive laws are not reducing the incidence of abortion. However, they are

putting women in harm's way by putting their health and well-being at risk. Rather than choosing
 Ho 9

to recognize the negative effects women are facing, anti-abortion politicians still do not back

down. Their ridiculous laws have not limited the amount of abortions being performed, they have

just decreased the safety of them.

Furthermore, women who are unable to obtain a legal abortion and choose not to

self-induce one face the harsh reality of bringing a child into their potentially unstable lives. A

study published in the American Journal of Public Health concluded that laws that restrict

abortions may lead to worsened economic outcomes for women (Foster). Women who received

abortions were less likely to face the socioeconomic hardships to a much lower degree than

women who were denied the procedure. By restricting their rights, states are forcing women to

carry unwanted pregnancies to term and bring a baby into their lives during difficult times,

leading to a poor quality of life for the mother and child.

Potential Solutions

There have been efforts to ease the financial burdens women face such through

fundraising events and charities used to fund procedures for women in need. The National

Network of Abortion Funds helps cover abortion costs for women in 38 states (Winter).

Although these might help some women, they do not reach out to everyone. The issues women

are facing are due to the short gestational age limits on abortion and sadly, these type of

fundraising solutions are not easing their troubles. In order to enact change, there needs to be an

agreement on when a fetus is ethically able to be aborted. However, due to conflicting religious

and political viewpoints, it is too difficult to get every state to agree on a set time limit on when

women can obtain abortions. Additionally, requiring all states to adhere to one gestational age
 Ho 10

limits could cause conflict between regional and federal governments, since the state

governments may feel as though their powers are being stripped away.

Before Trump was elected, President Obama had granted a contraceptive mandate under

ObamaCare. Contraceptives are devices or drugs that prevent pregnancy, such as condoms, birth

control pills, intrauterine devices (IUD), Plan B pills, etc. This mandate required all health

insurance providers to cover FDA approved birth control methods at no extra cost (“Birth”). In

the following ​NPR podcast​, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards explains how helpful

this mandate was for American women. It helped women save money on contraceptives, allowed

them to plan their families and therefore continue to be part of the workforce, and most

importantly reduced the amount of unintended pregnancies. However, recently Trump decided to

rollback this mandate due to the fact that faith-based groups were being forced to issue birth

control against their beliefs under it. This will lead to contraceptives that are too expensive for

women to afford, ultimately leading to more unwanted pregnancies and more need for abortion

services.

Anti-abortion politicians will do anything to reduce the incidence of abortion throughout

the country to eventually rid of the procedure entirely. They will continue to reduce gestational

age limits, however fail to provide the one thing that is meant to prevent unwanted pregnancy,

and in turn, prevent abortion. The sole purpose of contraceptives are to allow people to have sex

without worries of becoming pregnant. No unwanted pregnancies, no need for abortion.

However, the Trump administration would rather protect the beliefs of religious groups than the

health and well-being of American women. These religious groups do not want to provide

cost-free birth control because they believe it will increase the amount of people engaging in
 Ho 11

premarital sex and other things they believe are sin, since they can have sex without the

consequence of pregnancy. However, people will continue to engage in these sins, as even our

beloved President Trump has demonstrated with his infatuation for pornography stars and

pageant queens, with or without contraceptive regulations. Rather than allow people access to

practicing safe sex, this rollback on the Obamacare mandate only increases the incidence of

unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

If anti-abortion politicians truly want

to see the incidence of abortion decrease,

contraceptives should be made more

available to all women across the United

States. Rather than force religious groups to

provide cost-free contraceptives as well,

other actions should be taken to increase

access to birth control. For example, women

currently have to have a prescription to obtain birth control pills. They can do so at a drugstore,

Planned Parenthood, or other health clinics. However, if their insurance does not cover it, it is

very expensive to pay out of pocket. Additionally, minors in seek of birth control pills are

hesitant to allow their insurance to cover the expenses if there is a chance that their parents will

find out. Allowing the birth control pill to be offered over the counter at drug stores will allow

women to have access to it whenever they need at a reasonable cost, without forcing religious

groups to provide something that goes against their beliefs. By creating better access to effective

birth control for women, the number of unwanted pregnancies will be reduced and therefore, the
 Ho 12

number of abortions will be reduced as well. Simply putting gestational age limits on abortion

will not reduce the number of procedures occurring, it only makes them more dangerous.

Nobody is pro-abortion. Nobody wants to see abortions being performed at every street

corner. What people do want is their right to reproductive services that allow them to choose

what is right for them without worries of not having the means to do so. By placing strict laws on

abortion, states are simply trying to accomplish one thing–to abolish the existence of abortion in

the United States. However, in doing so, women are having to resort to extreme measures to

obtain the procedures they need.

It is difficult to fathom the thought process behind the decision to restrict women’s rights

just because one person does like it. These decisions are leading to the detriment of women’s

health and well-being, yet anti-abortion politicians choose to disregard that. We currently live in

a world where apathy has began to eclipse empathy. Politicians currently in office are more

motivated by their own agendas than by the needs of the people. Why did Trump need to

rollback the contraceptive mandate in Obamacare? He did not need to do it, and he should not

have done it. He simply wanted to get rid of all Obama-era mandates to establish his own power.

If politicians continue to do so, be prepared to live in a country where the wishes of these

politicians are put before the fundamental rights of the people.

“You’re not really helping anyone. You’re not really protecting anyone.

You’re just causing women who are in these situations who feel

desperate to take desperate measures.” - Martina

 Ho 13

Works Cited

“Abortion Restrictions in States.” ​The New York Times​, The New York Times, 17 June 2013,

archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/18/us/politics/abortion-restri

ctions.html?_r=1.

Beisel, Nicola, and Tamara Kay. “Abortion, Race, and Gender in Nineteenth-Century America.”

American Sociological Review​, vol. 69, no. 4, Aug. 2004, pp. 498–518.,

doi:10.1177/000312240406900402.

Baum, Sarah E., et al. “Women’s Experience Obtaining Abortion Care in Texas after

Implementation of Restrictive Abortion Laws: A Qualitative Study.” ​Plos One​, vol. 11,

no. 10, 26 Oct. 2016, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0165048.

“Birth Control Benefits and Reproductive Health Care Options in the Health Insurance

Marketplace.” ​HealthCare.gov​, www.healthcare.gov/coverage/birth-control-benefits/.

Foster, Diana Greene, et al. “Socioeconomic Outcomes of Women Who Receive and Women

Who Are Denied Wanted Abortions in the United States.” ​American Journal of Public

Health​, vol. 108, no. 3, 7 Feb. 2018, pp. 407–413., doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.304247.

“Gestational Age: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia.” ​MedlinePlus​, U.S. National Library of

Medicine, medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002367.htm.

Ingber, Sasha. “Iowa Bans Most Abortions As Governor Signs 'Heartbeat' Bill.” ​NPR​, NPR, 5

May 2018, 11:22AM ET,

www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/05/608738116/iowa-bans-most-abortions-as-

governor-signs-heartbeat-bill.
 Ho 14

Miller, Sara G. “Do Fetuses Feel Pain? What the Science Says.” ​Live Science​, 17 May 2016,

05:22pm ET, www.livescience.com/54774-fetuses-feel-pain-anesthesia.html.

Mively, Donald E., and D. Scott. Broyles. ​Contemporary Supreme Court Cases. Landmark

Decisions since Roe v. Wade​. ABC-CLIO, 2016.

Peterfy, Agota. “Fetal Viability as a Threshold to Personhood.” ​Journal of Legal Medicine​, vol.

16, no. 4, 23 July 2003, pp. 607–636., doi:10.1080/01947649509510995.

Redden, Molly. “'Please, I Am out of Options': inside the Murky World of DIY Abortions.” ​The

Guardian​, Guardian News and Media, 21 Nov. 2016,

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/21/home-abortions-emails-secret-world.

Sarbey, Ben. “Definitions of Death: Brain Death and What Matters in a Person.” ​Journal of Law

and the Biosciences​, vol. 3, no. 3, 20 Nov. 2016, pp. 743–752., doi:10.1093/jlb/lsw054.

Sedgh, Gilda, et al. “Abortion Incidence between 1990 and 2014: Global, Regional, and

Subregional Levels and Trends.” ​The Lancet​, vol. 388, no. 10041, 11 May 2016, pp.

258–267., doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30380-4.

Winter, Meaghan. “The Abortion-Rights Activist Who Believes in 'Ferocious Love'.” ​The Cut​,

22 Nov. 2016, 12:41 PM,

www.thecut.com/2016/11/national-network-of-abortion-funds-yamani-hernandez.html.