Get Your Hands off me: why Abortion Access is just a Small Part of What "Choice" is really about

Have you ever heard this phrase: "abortion activists [meaning pro-choice folks] only want women to choose one option and that's abortion!"  There are people who genuinely believe that "pro-choice" is the opposite of "pro-life" where they equate "pro-life" with carrying to term and "pro-choice" with "never carrying to term."  I have a fairly plausible idea that this assumption is derived from the fact that "choice" and "pro-life" are argued together as an exclusive dichotomy.  "Pro-choicers" fall into arguing for abortion and defending abortion which may send the message that individuals who are pro-choice like and prefer abortion over any other option.  It is easy to fall into this well-worn path of argument because of the rampant misinformation about abortion and women's health care that is often found in "pro-life" pregnancy resources; people fall into this argument of exclusivity because they try to correct the misinformation.  The extreme detriment of falling into this well-worn path of arguing over the "choice" vs." no choice" dichotomy surrounding unwanted pregnancy is that no one is focusing on or educating about the bigger picture that the "choice" part of this debate comes from.  Many pro-choicers themselves do not understand the larger picture of choice which is why it is important to talk about it.


In this post, I wrote something many of you commented on or asked about:

Choice, in my mind, is simple.  The right to choose describes a basic human right known as "autonomy" or "consent."  Women, as fully human, autonomous, equal human beings, should have control and say at all times over their own bodies.  A fetus cannot thrive without her body nor can its growth be supported without her welfare.  A fetus and a woman cannot have personhood at the same time because when it comes right down to it, for a fetus to be a person a woman must be rendered nothing more than a biological vessel that serves to support its welfare and has rights secondary to the needs of the fetus.  Care cannot be administered to a fetus without first someone touching a woman's body.  To say that a woman cannot have control over her own body at all times, even if pregnant, is to say that women are not autonomous and have no right to give or revoke consent to be touched by others.  It means others get to make decisions for her body in order to sustain the welfare of her pregnancy, such as forcing a woman to go on bed rest or denying a woman's right to refuse medical care while pregnant.  A woman's right to choose means she has a right, not only to be in control of decisions regarding her own body at all times, but also in control of decisions regarding her body that may impact the welfare of her pregnancy; abortion included.  I am not pro-choice because I believe abortion is a wonderful thing or a preferable or easy choice.  I am pro-choice because I believe women are people and because the value of obtaining consent when it comes to touching a woman's body is extremely important to me.

To make an addendum to this, I'll point out that people say "oh well, a woman can have an abortion if she is going to die without one," and really, there goes the whole "personhood" argument right out the window.  If the fetus is a person, what is it about the change in the mother's medical condition that erases that personhood where suddenly, abortion is now magically OK?  Then on the other hand, if she is disallowed the abortion, then she and the fetus she is supporting will both die.  That hardly follows the "respecting life" rhetoric.  In fact, that, no better exemplified by the passing of the recent "Let Women Die" bill, sounds like nothing more than a cruel, punitive jab at a human being for the crime of having a uterus.  What about a woman who discovers an aggressive cancer in her body while pregnant?  Who wants to be the one to decide if she must die or risk her pregnancy trying to fight it?  "Oh, well I would let her fight her cancer" some might say.  But what about the "personhood" of the fetus?  Personhood is not circumstantial--either you are a person or you are not.  Either the woman is a person or the fetus is, both cannot be.  And if one really "respects life" they will allow a woman to make her own decisions and acknowledge that a woman's life belongs in her own hands, not the hands of some politician.

Continuing on with my new blog topic, autonomy and consent are two basic human rights that make the difference between being respected as an individual who has sole ownership over your own body and being seen as everyone else's property.  Abortion is one such area where some say that being pregnant is one circumstance where a woman should lose the ability to choose what happens to her own body.  If the continuing of a pregnancy becomes more important than what a woman wants for herself, then what consent is there really needed to touch a woman's body to continue a pregnancy at any and all costs, per someone else's discretion?  "Choice" is not about seeing abortion as superior than any other option.  Choice is about acknowledging that we are first and foremost dealing with the woman's body when it comes to pregnancy and that she alone is the best person to make decisions for what happens to her own body.  Stepping back from the picture even further, this plays into a larger theme of autonomy and consent that makes the abortion debate just one part of the over-all picture.  When you understand how society views a woman's body, you understand why choice is so easy for people to second-guess or write off completely.

A few prime examples of women-as-society's-chew-toys:

• Wanting women to have permission from a doctor or partner, to have to wait 24 hours after a consultation, or experience an ultrasound before being able to consent to an abortion.
• Random strangers feeling perfectly entitled to walk up to a pregnant woman and rub her belly.
• Random strangers feeling perfectly entitled to walk up and stroke a woman's hair (this is an issue especially for Black women).
• Sexual harassment issues in the workplace where women have their shoulder's squeezed or massaged without their consent by a co-worker or superior.
• Random strangers placing their hands on a woman at a club because she's dancing so she must be "asking for it."
• The concept that "there is no such thing as rape when you're married" when husbands/partners force themselves on their wives without consent.
• The unratified ERA.
• The exotification of women of color.
• The over-representation of the scantily-clad, uber-"feminine," damsel in distress in all of media.
• The horrible phenomena where professionals delivering babies feel perfectly entitled to carry out medical procedures in labor and delivery, like adding medications to the IV drip, injecting a woman directly, or performing an episiotomy without a woman's consent.
• The forced (and often uninformed) sterilization of many women throughout history, namely women of color and underprivileged women.
• The idea that single, expectant mothers who live under the poverty line have something to "provide" to someone else who is more deserving.

The list goes on.

I have seen the double standard too many times.  For men, it is perfectly acceptable to be reserved and stoic.  What a leader!  However, for a woman to say she does not like to be touched or to not appreciate an endearing squeeze on the arm?  She's a "bitch."  When I was 17 years old, I was called a "bitch" by an older male co-worker because I told him it was not appropriate to walk up and jokingly tickle a woman he did not know up the sleeve of her scrubs (I was a nursing student at one point).  Apparently being a woman who is not willing to be everyone's scratching post doesn't make you popular.  I have heard people describe women, who do not acquiesce to another's desire to touch them, "who take themselves too seriously," over and over and over again this way.  Hugging, embrace, and kissing, these are all very important part of relationships, closeness, and togetherness with others.  However, there is a difference between what is culturally appropriate, given a specific culture, and what understanding you already have with a friend or family member about what types of touching is appropriate, and the over-all general idea that it's OK to pet a random woman like a cat in some way or exploit her body in a print-ad.

Choice, consent, and autonomy is not just about reference for women's bodies and equality in how women are treated.  These concepts are not just about choosing abortion; it involves a woman's right to make healthy decisions for her body that positively impact her pregnancy, should she choose, too.  I think a lot of people may find it hard to believe that the view of women as incapable of making their own decisions and this idea that women do not own their own bodies does not translate into sustaining a healthy pregnancy either.  However, this fact is very true.

For example, a woman who had a Cesarean delivery for one pregnancy and wants to try a VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Cesarean) for the delivery of her next pregnancy may have difficulty finding a doctor who will comply.  I have had several friends who wanted to attempt a VBAC whose doctors told them that they would drop them as patients unless they agreed to schedule a C-section instead.  One friend of mine, with a normal, healthy pregnancy, was turned down for her VBAC nearly one dozen times.  There are both risks and benefits associated with VBAC.  The risk is a 2% change that the uterine wall could rupture where the incision from the first C-section was made.  The benefits are the benefits generally associated with vaginal birth.  It's a woman's right to weigh the risks and benefits and decide for herself whether or not she would like to be subjected to invasive surgery to delivery her baby; too often this right is not respected by doctors.

Another example would be a woman's diet and ingestion of pre-natal vitamins.  Many doctors will recommend that all women of child bearing age, pregnant or not, take a once-daily pre-natal vitamin.  However, another school of thought questions the benefits of these vitamins and their necessity, especially if a woman already has an excellent diet.  This is one instance where many women go against conventional wisdom, so to speak, and make their own choice for what they feel is right for them.  Since it may go against doctor's recommendation and, according to him/her not be good for the fetus, should we take away a woman's right to decide not to put the pills into her body?

One more example, mentioning again the phenomena of women reporting the instance of receiving procedures they did not consent to during labor and delivery.  A woman, whose body is respected as her own, has a right to make decisions as to what happens to her body during labor and delivery, including requesting perineal massage instead of an episiotomy and what medications she is or is not administered.  I had this experience with the birth of my children.  With my most recent birth, I felt that the monitors were painful and distressing (and my delivery was progressing just fine, I saw no need for them).  I was denied the right to refuse monitors as the nurse took it upon herself to place them on my body despite my wishes.  Just as with abortion, this is an instance in child birth where someone thought they knew better than I did and proceed to make a decision for me and my body without my consent.  This is unacceptable.

 I don't know what it is about being a woman that makes people think we're so incompetent to make our own decisions, especially when we're pregnant.  I don't live another woman's life, I only life my own. I would not want to be told what to do with my own body and I can hardly tell another woman what to do with her's.  The bottom line is, choice is about so much more than just the abortion debate.  Until a woman's body is respected as her own and sole discretion is left to her as to what does or does not touch or happen to her body, our mothers, sisters, daughters, and granddaughters will not be equal, respected, and protected members of society.

I trust women.  Do you? Join the Silver Ribbon Campaign to Trust Women