WoMN Focus

Access to comprehensive reproductive care as a right is a dream many women in America will never achieve. Many states put so many restrictions on abortion access that women have no doctors to turn to. Geographic isolation can be one of the greatest barriers to women’s health care in the nation.

Abortionaccess.org

Women in places such as Mississippi, Kentucky, West Virginia and Arkansas share a troubling commonality – they all live in states with the least accessible abortion services in the United States.  Because of where they live, these women face daunting barriers to get safe abortion care if and when they need it.  These least access states have the most restrictive laws and the fewest number of abortion providers.  These states also share other traits: low levels of contraceptive care, high rates of poverty, and strong anti-abortion cultures.  With little help to prevent pregnancy, few financial resources to help pay for abortion care, and the threat of isolation or even harassment within her community, the health and autonomy of a woman living in one of these states is at risk.

Among the states labeled ‘least access states’ are both North and South Dakota, which is not surprising considering the Dakota’s record on women’s health. Even in Minnesota, the state currently funds ‘clinics’ that intentionally mislead women about reproductive health.   How are anti-choice activists continue to chip away at women’s right to a legal medical procedure? Funding. Restriction of funding began in 1976 when Congress passed the Hyde amendment.  During the “Gingrich Revolution” of the 90’s conservatives went even further by banning abortion coverage for all federal employees, preventing military hospitals from  performing abortion, banning prisons from funding abortions and eliminating 35% of funding to family planning centers. The issues today’s women face in obtaining a safe abortion:

Prochoice America

Making abortion access more difficult and dangerous is a key tactic in the anti-choice movement’s strategy. Today, 87 percent of U.S. counties have no abortion provider, yet anti-choice lawmakers continue to impose a broad range of restrictions on women’s access to abortion.

• Anti-choice members of Congress and their allies are trying to use health-care reform legislation to impose a new nationwide abortion ban in the private health-insurance market.
• Refusal clauses and counseling bans (“gag rules”) limit women’s access to honest information and medical care, making it virtually impossible for some women to access abortion services altogether.
• Congress has imposed restrictions on abortion care for women who live in Washington, D.C. and those depend on the government for their health care needs, including women serving in our military.
• Numerous federal and state laws aggressively limityoung women’s access to abortion care and information.
• Anti-choice activists have developed “crisis pregnancy centers” to confuse, coerce, and mislead women in order to prevent them from exercising their constitutional right to choose.
• Anti-choice lawmakers have used propaganda and distorted scientific information as part of a strategy to instill fear in women to prevent them from exercising their right to choose.
• Clinic violence, murder, threats, and intimidation endanger doctors and patients and further restrict women’s access to reproductive-health care. While there are state and federal laws in place to protect women and doctors, this campaign of violence is still a very real threat to the right to choose.

A large proportion of women in our society depend on Medicaid for health care and as health care costs soar the dependence on governmental aid will only increase.  Congress, in negotiations for passing HCR, has enabled some legislators to dictate coverage of specific medical procedures by insurance companies.  In an attempt to prevent any federal subsidies for abortion, something already accomplished by Hyde, congress has gone further by preventing money going to companies that provide abortion coverage.  This is the largest attempt to limit access to abortion in my lifetime and if the Stupak language becomes law, health insurance coverage for abortions will essentially be eradicated, even for those receiving no governmental aid.

Abortion opponents strategy for targeting public funding are two-fold, first to immediately reduce access and secondly as a broader strategy to recriminalize abortion. The limits on abortion coverage overwhelmingly affect the most vulnerable among us and while the government will cover sterilization, they won’t fully fund access to all other forms of reproductive care.