Campus reacts to legislative abortion talks
In the first month of this year’s legislative session many topics dealing with reproductive rights were brought to the table.
The issue of defining a person, extending the period a woman must wait after requesting an abortion and receiving the mandated information, as well as questioning the amount of funding Planned Parenthood should receive, were considered by the state Legislature.
There is no text in some of the mentioned bills at this time, but the fact that these discussions presently exist at Utah’s Capitol is concerning, said Karrie Galloway, CEO of the Planned Parenthood Association of Utah.
Nationally, 3 percent of women seeking care from Planned Parenthood do so for an abortion. This number decreases to 1 percent in Utah. Though there are a handful of women’s health clinics in Logan, none of them offer abortion procedures, Galloway said.
As the issues encompassing reproductive rights are nationally controversial, many Utah educators are careful to expose both sides of the argument and analyze related statistics and data as scientists but still prompt their students to consider the heated issues.
“You aren’t spinning anything,” said Eddy Berry, a USU sociology professor. “Just tell them how it is. A woman’s risks are substantially lower in getting a clinical abortion. What you do as a scientist is you explain what your chances are of dying in childbirth in a First World country (or) in a Third World country … and your chances are surprisingly high.”
Pro-life vs. pro-choice
Everyone Berry has met is “for life,” she said, and labeling reproductive rights as pro-life or pro-choice creates a divide between people.
“The terminology is a political labeling and it is no more than that,” Berry said. “It completely hinders the discussion, and it places walls between people and their ability to talk to one another.”
When people with opposing views sit down in a room and discuss their views on reproductive rights, the subject is rarely black and white, Berry said, and this is true for any controversial topic.
“I am very pro-choice,” said Claire Ahlstrom, vice president of USU College Democrats. “I think that a huge reason why I am pro-choice is because we haven’t defined life yet. I am LDS, but the church hasn’t even come out and said what defines a person.”
Ahlstrom, whose father is an obstetric gynecologist, said she believes many people who claim to be pro-life don’t realize they may be pro-choice. Being pro-choice doesn’t mean thinking abortion is a good idea, but that there are certain extenuating circumstances, including rape, incest and health problems of the mother, under which a pregnant woman should have the right to obtain an abortion, she said.
Many who say they are pro-life are saying the pregnant woman must go through with giving birth even in the case of rape or life-threatening health concerns, she said. Though Ahlstrom said she would never have an abortion for any reason other than ensuring her continued health, she believes other women should have the choice.
“If abortion is murder, then you have to tell me when murder is justified,” said USU philosophy Professor Richard Sherlock. “Just because you are having a hard day or because you don’t think you can’t take care of somebody? All of that is just nonsense.”
Sherlock, who said he is pro-life, also said he disagrees with GOP candidate Mitt Romney’s previous stance on abortion, which was that he would never advocate for abortion but will not take that right away from another individual.
The question of abortion will be solved when society can collectively decide when a human becomes a human, Sherlock said.
Brittany Wilson, whose name has been changed for her protection, first found out she was pregnant at 15 and said she never considered having an abortion, though her mother was supportive in whatever her decision was. She said she considers herself to be pro-life, but thinks it is OK to abort a baby in the case of rape or health concerns.
“I just feel like it’s taking a life away,” Wilson said, “that you’re making a choice for their life and they’re not getting the chance.”
Currently she is working to graduate from a local high school using unique services for students with children. Free child care is offered at the institution while she attends her classes. She made the right decision in raising a child at a young age, she said, because it’s rewarding and fulfilling watching her daughter grow up, always learning to do new things.
“The terms pro-life and pro-choice … aren’t actually statements about what a person believes. It’s like describing someone as pink or purple,” Berry said.
Current local legislation
Reproductive rights have been a hot topic on Capitol Hill in Salt Lake City this year, with several bill proposals that would change the way people access abortion procedures in Utah.
Galloway said a bill was proposed that would increase the length of time a woman must wait before going through with an abortion. Currently, a woman must wait 24 hours after receiving the state-mandated information to receive an abortion, but legislators proposed that period be extended to 72 hours.
“People will die from that,” Ahlstrom said. “Some situations in pregnancy need to be dealt with immediately or the woman will die.”
Berry said she does not understand why legislators would push for this law, because she believes women who enter an abortion clinic have thought thoroughly about their decision.
“If anyone thinks that someone has chosen to go to a health-care provider to make this decision and they have taken it lightly, they are wrong,” Berry said. “They have never sat with a woman in a waiting room.”
Neither waiting for a 24-hour or a 72-hour period is an effective process, Sherlock said. Instead, Utah government leaders should consider a Texas law that requires all women requesting an abortion to look at an ultrasound of their baby before making the final decision.
The debate on defining “personhood” was also brought to the table in the ongoing legislative session. Some believe this decision must be made by the individual, while others believe it must ultimately be a collective effort.
Just as the U.S. population eventually decided slavery was unacceptable, the U.S. must come to terms on when it is unacceptable to kill a fetus, Sherlock said.
“The pro-choice people don’t want to debate this argument, saying the individual has to make the decision,” he said. “But we wouldn’t accept that to the respect (of) slavery, but why do we accept it to the respect of abortion? The problem is pro-choice people don’t want to debate that question. Is rape a good enough reason to kill a person?”
Ahlstrom believes a fetus becomes a human at the date of viability, she said, which is when the fetus can exist without the mother, at about 28 weeks after conception.
However, Berry said she doesn’t have to make that decision, because it’s “a leap of faith” to do so. She sits where she does on this issue because she is for life but has heard of many girls and women dying from abortions and while giving birth.
During the legislative session, officials discussed the funding amount Planned Parenthood should be allotted from this year’s budget. Nothing was officially decided, but Galloway said cutting the nonprofit organization’s funding would take away women’s ability to access affordable health care.
Planned Parenthood of Utah has a $7 million budget and about $2 million of that amount comes from the Department of Health and Human Services, she said.
“A lot more of what Planned Parenthood does is screening,” Ahlstrom said. “Those are essential health-care services for women. It’s not a luxury. It’s not something you shouldn’t feel the need to skip to put food on your table.”
Planned Parenthood does more than abortions: it provides birth control, annual exams and, depending on the clinic, offers prenatal care, said Jamie Huber, program coordinator for the USU Center for Women and Gender. Making the decision to cut funding to Planned Parenthood could prevent a woman from managing her health.
Addressing issues in the classroom
Huber is one of a handful of employees on campus who were hired to make students aware of bigger issues like reproductive rights. In the USU Center for Women and Gender they do not advocate for certain sides in an argument, but rather — as an academic unit — take an educated stance with statistics, making students aware of the facts, she said.
Sherlock said he takes a different approach in his classroom. All the students in his medical ethics class know his stance, but he wants students to take their own stance on an argument and strengthen it against his. He said he deems himself an “in-your-face” professor.
Students must make up their own minds, Huber said, but issues like abortion seem to be seldom addressed on campus.
“I think there are a few issues that play into that,” Huber said. “One is the kind of demographic of the community and how religion plays a role. I think that causes a bias in how people perceive issues, just like anything else. Issues get skirted around on academic campuses due to the idea of not bringing politics into education.”
It’s a fine line between discussing issues and raising awareness about issues, she said.
– catherine.meidell@aggiemail.usu.edu