Jeannette Sefcik: Can there be a silver lining to the Roe decision?

Maybe there is a silver lining in the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, but only if we can compromise and not let states ban abortions outright and instead allow reasonable restrictions that will reduce the numbers.

We first need to state strongly that criminalizing abortion is not the way to deter women from the abortion option. Even as outlaws, thousands of women will, for diverse and complex reasons believe that abortion is their best (or only) choice. Our guiding philosophy in dealing with abortion should be, as Hillary Clinton stated so well back in 2008, “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.”

The silver lining in the recent Roe decision could be if Republicans will now broaden their view of what it means to be “pro-life,” and include taking care of children after they are born. They could support public policies like paid family leave, child allowances, adoption tax credits and other family and child oriented legislation.

This richest country in the world currently is sadly lacking in resources and support available for women to assist them in having and raising children.

Maybe conservative pro-life advocates who have been hesitant to support these policies in the past can be prodded toward a new awareness of our common responsibility for helping families.

Perhaps activists in the right-to-life movement who really care about kids, not just fetuses, can pressure lawmakers to pass legislation to help those precious new persons and their often-struggling mothers and families.

To-date, Republican members of Congress have over and over again voted against the family-friendly policies that could naturally curb the need for abortions. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that increased social support will result in fewer abortions.

I’m not optimistic that Republicans can make this change, because why haven’t they already taken this logical, consistent step that should go along with being “pro-life.”

Utah is a real mixed bag, both on abortion policy and on family assistance programs. Just hours after the Supreme Court overturned Roe, Utah’s “trigger law” went into effect, which prohibits abortions with limited exceptions. Outnumbered House Democrats are trying to modify the ban, and Planned Parenthood won a temporary restraining order blocking the “trigger law,” and allowing abortion services to resume for now.

There are a few glimmers of hope for action on increasing support that would help struggling mothers. Gov. Spencer Cox has called on the Utah Legislature to devote more resources toward preventing unwanted pregnancies and helping those who now have to carry a pregnancy to term.

It remains to be seen how far any of these ideas to modify the ban or help women and children would get with the Republican supermajority in the legislature.

It’s easy for states to ban all abortions and force women to have babies, but they can’t force unwilling and unprepared mothers to take care of those kids. The state must step up.

Isn’t it a natural extension of caring for prenatal life to create strong social support programs, particularly for economically vulnerable women, so that no one feels she has to abort to stay financially afloat?

On the subject of reasonable restrictions, polls show most people are okay with some limits. The vision that extremists like to paint of the pro-choice side is that they support abortion on request as a social good through all nine months of pregnancy, paid for with pro-life tax dollars.

The truth is that those who are against a total ban have nuanced views about access to abortion. Most would probably agree that a good starting point is deciding when is the reasonable, practical time to limit abortions. Why is the “viability” standard determined by the Supreme Court in their Roe decision still not sensible?

So let’s stop the ban movement, and do those things that will reduce the numbers, like introducing reasonable restrictions, as well as promoting and enacting policies that help women make the “right” pregnancy decisions.

This should start with access to birth control and continue with the promise of help in bearing and raising children, plus making adoption easier. These policies should be part of the definition of “pro-life.”

Jeanette Rusk Sefcik
Jeanette Rusk Sefcik

Jeanette Rusk Sefcik, Glendale, is a retired newspaper reporter and editor, having worked at newspapers including the Tucson Citizen, Daily Spectrum in St. George, Southern Utah News in Kanab and Lake Powell Chronicle in Page, Ariz. She has a master’s degree in journalism from the University of Arizona.



from The Salt Lake Tribune https://ift.tt/JcyR7sL

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post