Reproductive freedom still
elusive in Rhode Island
By Rep. Edith
Ajello and Sen. Gayle Goldin
On
January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Roe v Wade ensured
that women have the right to reproductive freedom. This opinion was reaffirmed in 1992 when the Court ruled that “throughout this century, this Court also has held that the fundamental right of privacy protects citizens against governmental intrusion in such intimate family matters as procreation, childrearing, marriage, and contraceptive choice…and this Court correctly applied these principles to a woman’s right to choose abortion.”
Our
views of women’s equality, participation in the labor force, and control over
one’s own body have shifted dramatically in the past five decades.
In 1965, only married women had contraceptive rights guaranteed by Griswold v. Connecticut.
It took until 1972, a year before Roe, for the Supreme Court to rule that unmarried women had the right to birth control pills.
In 1965, only married women had contraceptive rights guaranteed by Griswold v. Connecticut.
It took until 1972, a year before Roe, for the Supreme Court to rule that unmarried women had the right to birth control pills.
Prior
to Roe, thousands of women died in the United States because they were forced
to seek abortion in unsafe conditions. Women of color and those of limited
economic means were particularly at risk of losing their life from an illegal
abortion. Affluent women, however, were able to travel overseas or to states
where abortions were legal.
Unfortunately,
the gains made to protect women’s reproductive care – from access to abortion
to affordable, accessible birth control – continue to be threatened by those
who aim to take away a woman’s right to determine what is best for her own
health and her own life.
In state legislatures across the country, opponents of reproductive freedom continue to gain ground. In the past five years, state legislatures have passed over 280 laws restricting a woman’s right to safe, legal abortion.
Many
of these laws intervene in the physician-patient relationship, requiring a
woman’s doctor to provide her with inaccurate medical information. Other laws
add unnecessary red tape to physicians’ practices and create hurdles to
providing women with health care.
The
effect has been to increase costs and close clinics. In parts of the United
States, women are once again traveling hours to access health care.
Some
of the most egregious laws have been enacted in Texas. The U.S. Supreme Court
is set to hear arguments in early March and this case is likely to be the most
important decision about abortion rights since Roe itself.
Attorneys General from twelve states, including our neighbors in Connecticut and Massachusetts, filed an amicus brief asking the Court to invalidate the Texas laws.
Attorneys General from twelve states, including our neighbors in Connecticut and Massachusetts, filed an amicus brief asking the Court to invalidate the Texas laws.
While
we have not seen similar roll backs enacted in Rhode Island, women’s autonomy
is still at risk. In 2013, the Rhode Island General Assembly attempted to
create Choose Life license plates that would support “pregnancy crisis centers”
and religious institutions that lobby against reproductive rights.
The
bill was vetoed by Governor Chafee. Just last week, a “fetal heartbeat” bill
was introduced into the Rhode Island House that, if passed, could potentially
criminalize abortion.
Even
without new laws, however, the ones we currently have significantly curtail a
woman’s right to make her own health care decisions. Women under 18 must receive parental consent
to have an abortion.
Though
it’s been found to be unconstitutional, Rhode Island law still says a woman
must tell her husband of plans for an abortion, even if doing so would put her
life at risk.
Thousands
of Rhode Islanders do not have health insurance that covers abortion because
state law prohibits health insurance plans available to state and municipal
employees from covering it.
Our
state also prohibits Medicaid from covering abortions in most circumstances.
Rhode
Island’s constitution provides equal protection under the laws, stating that “no
otherwise qualified person shall, solely by reason of race, gender or handicap
be subject to discrimination by the state, its agents or any person or entity
doing business with the state.”
There’s
just one caveat: such protections do not apply to a woman’s access to abortion.
In New England, Rhode Island sticks out like a sore thumb: our state receives a
grade of D+ from NARAL Pro-Choice America, because our laws do not adequately
protect reproductive freedom.
By
contrast, even conservative states like Alaska and West Virginia get Bs,
because their constitutions provide stronger protections.
Just
as they did 50 years ago, these current and proposed restrictions on
reproductive rights disproportionally affect middle and low income Rhode
Islanders. While some women can travel to neighboring states and privately pay
for health care, many cannot.
As
we look back and see how far we’ve come on our march for reproductive freedom,
let’s not forget that we still have far to go.
Rep. Edith
Ajello is a Democrat who represents District 1 in Providence. Sen. Gayle Goldin
is a Democrat who represents District 3 in Providence.
