The health care reform that passed Saturday left a bitter taste in the mouths of many progressives concerned with reproductive choice. But the Stupak amendment forces the hands of only some women.
Under the amendment, wealthy women would retain the choice to have an abortion for any number of reasons. Poorer women—those likely to take part in the newly created insurance exchange and to receive federal subsidies—will not. Poor women are also four times more likely to have an unplanned pregnancy. What could be a more blatant way to ensure poor women and their families remain that way?
If one can set aside the simple injustice of that and talk about resources, the tragedy of the amendment becomes even clearer. With poorer women unable to afford the high upfront cost of an abortion, they may choose to carry unplanned pregnancies to term. A child from a lower income family will require early childhood care, children’s health insurance, education, food assistance, among other social services with costs to be shouldered by both the mother and the government.
The unplanned pregnancy itself can limit the mother’s ability to complete her education and participate in the workforce, hampering her ability to shoulder the increased costs.
Then consider the fact that many children from low-income families receive little to no early childhood education, struggle with health and nutrition, and face numerous barriers to an education that will lift them out of poverty.
This amendment essentially takes choice away from the very women and families that would struggle the most.
Instead of reducing the number unintended pregnancies—access to contraception, anyone?—Rep. Bart Stupak and his gaggle of men have decided to deepen the divide between poorer women and wealthier women.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: It's not an Abortion Bill, It's Oppression.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/17072
"Poor women are also four times more likely to have an unplanned pregnancy. "
How the hell did this happen?
Thank you for writing this. And second to Phenicks' comment.
Did Poor Women, Inc. tell you that they'd rather continue to have no insurance at all than gain insurance that doesn't cover abortion but does cover diabetes, pre-natal care, accidents, diseases, and birth control? Or are you assuming the privilege of speaking for all women everywhere because, after all, how could any woman have priorities different from yours?
I don't believe I asked for no health care reform - in fact, I am a strong supporter of much of the bill's contents - but the inclusion of this amendment goes against the bill's goal of increasing access to health care.
The first time I heard about the Stupak Amendment I was angry to the point of feeling ill. I feel so utterly betrayed by my party- 64 Democrats voted for this thing.
I'm angry for the sake of all women on principle, but thank you for pointing out the immense class (and unfortunately, by extension, race) component of this as well.
There's a guy named "aleks" posting similar sentiment over at dkos. hmmmm