Abortion: The Underlying Systemic Issues
Recently, the Alabama State Legislature passed a measure to ban abortion procedures, except where carrying a pregnancy to term would put a prospective mother’s life at risk or in cases of a severe and mortal fetal abnormality. This means those performing abortion procedures in Alabama would be subject to imprisonment, though women procuring abortion would not be held criminally liable. The law is set, when signed by the Republican Governor, to be the most restrictive in the nation—even its co-sponsors have acknowledged that the bill was crafted with the intent of forcing a Supreme Court case challenging Roe v. Wade. Surely, it is bound to bring new vigor to the American abortion debate, particularly following Georgia's controversial "Heartbeat Bill," which outlawed abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat.
I do not intend to take a stance on abortion in this piece, though I certainly have one. Rather, I believe that there is a deeper issue behind the Alabama measure, which should be of grave concern to both sides of the abortion debate. First, however, we should establish something—no one, at least in the mainstream, genuinely believes abortion to be a good thing. Perhaps some argue it is necessary, some argue that it must be legal, etc. But they don't go so far as to call themselves “pro-abortion,” and for good reason—the decision to terminate a pregnancy can be one of the most painful ones a woman can make, and the experience is often traumatic for mothers. To part with a child, to live without ever knowing what could have been, to end a pregnancy; none of these are easy. So, abortion isn't good, certainly.
The fact that thousands of pregnancies end in an abortion clinic speaks volumes about our treatment of women as a society—92% of abortions in the U.S. are performed for "social or economic reasons," which begs the question: What kind of socioeconomic conditions are we putting women in that hundreds of thousands of women each year feel compelled to obtain an abortion and part with their own child? Some of these conditions are economic. How is a single mother working two jobs just to get by supposed to also provide for a child, both financially and developmentally? How often will she actually be able to be present with that child? Will she be equipped to bring them up in stable conditions? In a society where universal childcare, for instance, is not guaranteed, should we be surprised that abortion procedures are as prevalent as they are?
On the other hand, some of the conditions are social and largely a consequence of a culture that believes in “free, open sex” and devalues the importance of stable relationships. This sort of free sexuality oftentimes ends up hurting women the hardest, because women always have to bear the consequences of sex—pregnancy. When a condom fails, the man is no worse off, physically speaking. The woman is pregnant. And a lot of that sexual activity ends up being divorced from stable relationships, which is why we see significantly higher proportions of single mothers considering abortion. To clarify, this is not “their fault,” as some pro-life advocates would argue—rather, it is the consequence of a culture freely willing to engage in sexuality, but not so willing to accept the responsibilities that come with that. And women are hurt by that, because someone has to deal with the realities that come alongside sex.
Of course, there is still the issue of teen pregnancy to consider. Where are our systems of sexual education failing? Why do we refuse to adequately prepare teens for their future sexual lives? It reflects the failures of both our cultural values and our education system.
We shouldn’t have to live in a society where so many women have to face such a profoundly painful and difficult choice, regardless of where we stand on the abortion issue. There are absolutely steps we can take to help reduce the number of abortions in this country if we are actually willing to address the real socio-economic problems that lead women to consider abortion. Those pro-life people who would do nothing to, for instance, ensure that a mother can pay for her child’s healthcare, are not truly pro-life. Those who would seek to deny women contraceptive access again are not pro-life. And those who would undermine our welfare systems are not pro-life.
On the flip side, pro-choicers should acknowledge that abortion is not “women’s liberation.” It is the consequence of women’s oppression and a society with a systematic disregard for the needs of mothers. Whether or not it should be legal is a different question, of course, but abortion is certainly regrettable. When one-third of a generation is missing because our society fails to provide mothers the socioeconomic support they need, there is a problem. Those who would seek to protect the legality of abortion without addressing its causes are not pro-choice, because no mother should ever feel compelled to seek an abortion.
So, we should reject the approach taken by Alabama. Merely legislating abortion out of existence without addressing its causes does nothing to end abortion. Not one bit—instead, it shoves abortion into back-alleys. Both sides of the debate should and can move forward, even if it's hard to believe. We just have to think beyond the question of legality for just one moment and stand together against a society that enables abortion in the first place.