Ever since the most recent Comets for the Preborn demonstration this last
Tuesday, I’ve found myself thinking a lot about exactly what it means to be
“pro-life.” As someone who’s protested at both of CftP’s demonstrations, I’ve
had the chance to hear the main concerns of those who consider themselves to be
pro-life, and it always seems to go back to the idea of the sanctity of life
and the importance of protecting an allegedly vulnerable population. However,
promoting anti-abortion policies does nothing but put women at risk for unsafe
abortions and take efforts away from supporting policies that could serve as an
alternative to abortion, such as improving the U.S. foster care system.
Abortion is meant to serve as a medical option, and trying to remove this
option doesn’t protect the sanctity of life but instead puts more people at
risk. Anti-abortion policies generate more harm than it prevents.
First and foremost, the United Nations recognizes access to abortion as a
human right. In 2000, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
stated that the right to health includes “the right to control one’s health and
body, including sexual and reproductive freedom, and the right to be free from
interference” and “requires the removal of all barriers interfering with access
to health services, education and information, including in the area of sexual
and reproductive health.” Therefore, attempting to deny people access to
abortion is preventing them obtaining a medical procedure that, according to
the UN, they should be able to access. Additionally, denying people access to
abortion leads to higher rates of maternal mortality because of unsafe
abortions. The World Health Organization estimates that about 25 million unsafe
abortions take place worldwide every year and that between 4.7% and 13.2 % of
maternal deaths can be attributed to unsafe abortions. If people who support
anti-abortion policies are just as “pro-life” as they claim to be, then they
would recognize that all that removing access to abortion does is lead to more
deaths.
Another concern raised constantly by pro-lifers is how
their main goal is to provide a defense for these
unborn children who have done nothing wrong, and my response to that is always:
“What about the vulnerable children that are already here?” The websites for
famous anti-abortion organizations such as the National Right to Life and
Created Equal, the national organization to which CftP belongs, don’t make a
single mention of any actions or policies that can be taken to improve
alternatives to abortions, such as the U.S. foster care system. Instead, the
main focus is targeting and adopting punitive measures against those seeking
abortions with no regards for the hundreds of thousands extremely vulnerable
children stuck in our incredibly damaging foster care system. According to the
American Society for the Positive Care of Children, there are currently over
437,000 children in foster care, 10% of whom eventually end up aging out of the
system, which lowers their chances of finishing their schooling and increases
their chances of incarceration. The
National Conference of State Legislature found that up to 80% of children in
foster care suffer from significant mental health issues, compared to between
18% and 22% of the general population, and yet the “greatest unmet health need
for children and teens in foster care,” according to the Healthy Foster Care
American Initiative is mental health. So when people who consider themselves to
be “pro-life” rally against abortion so fervently and yet remain awfully quiet
on issues concerning the U.S. foster care system, the hypocrisy in the
anti-abortion argument becomes that much more apparent. Anti-abortion policies
aren’t about protecting children, because if they were, then the supporters
would be devoting the same amount of passion to making sure the vulnerable
children that are already here and in dire need of help that they do to
demonizing a safe medical procedure and vilifying anyone who chooses to get
one.
All in all, referring to the anti-abortion movement as “pro-life” is a
misnomer. If those who support anti-abortion policies were actually as
“pro-life” as they claim to be, they wouldn’t be devoting their time to
policies that have been shown to lead to more deaths while neglecting an
already present vulnerable community that could actually use their help.
Ruqiya Barreh is a sophomore from Austin who is
majoring in psychology and minoring in public health.