Before Roe v. Wade

  • December 21, 2011
    Guest Post

    By Kate Michelman, President Emerita of NARAL Pro-Choice America and author of With Liberty and Justice for All: A Life Spent Protecting the Right to Choose


    When Roe v Wade became law of the land, we who had fought for so long believed it would be the threshold of broader protection of women’s health — of women’s rights. In our exuberance, we thought that we could establish abortion in its proper context, along the continuum of women’s reproductive health decision-making. We thought we could move on to other pressing health and equality issues, including bringing sexuality education to adolescents throughout the country — to help our young people understand the complexities of sexuality, of contraception and of the serious responsibility of childbearing.

    That was almost forty years ago.

    In the meantime we’ve learned the numbing lesson that what Justice Harry Blackmun wrote was not close to the final declaration of women’s reproductive liberty. It was not the beginning of the public’s embrace of educating our young to enable them to make responsible and informed decisions regarding sex and reproductive health. And it was certainly not an opening to the broad cast of reproductive options.

    Instead of opening a dialogue that might ultimately lead to wide consensus about healthy reproductive choices, healthy sexuality, and healthy families, we have instead witnessed religious and culturally conservative voices demanding reversal. We are confronted with the word “abortion” writ red on walls wherever we turn. The opponents of abortion don’t want to discuss the social conditions that led to that decision. They talk of family values but those values seem not to include compassion, logic, or the willingness (ironically) to reach some obvious common ground with those of us who have long struggled to lessen the need for abortion by reducing unintended pregnancies. 

  • July 1, 2010
    BookTalk
    Before Roe v. Wade
    Voices That Shaped the Abortion Debate Before the Supreme Court's Ruling
    By: 
    Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel
    ACSblog recently caught up with Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel to ask them about their new book, "Before Roe v. Wade: Voices that Shaped the Abortion Debate Before the Supreme Court Ruling." Linda Greenhouse is a Pulitzer-Prize-winning journalist and former New York Times Supreme Court correspondent and author of the biography "Becoming Justice Blackmun: Harry Blackmun's Supreme Court Journey." Greenhouse is a member of the ACS Board of Directors. Reva B. Siegel is the Nicholas deB. Katzenbach Professor of Law at Yale University and coeditor of the "The Constitution in 2020" and "Processes of Constitutional Decisionmaking." Siegel is faculty adviser to the ACS Chapter at Yale Law School.

    ACSblog: What were you trying to capture with this book? Why the focus on the pre-Roe period?

    Greenhouse and Siegel: A C-Span poll a few weeks ago found that of all those people who said they could name a Supreme Court decision, three-quarters named Roe v. Wade -- the runner-up, Brown v. Board of Education, was volunteered by only 9 percent of the respondents. After decades of conflict, Roe has come to stand for Supreme Court decisions. Yet few of us know much about the forces that led to Roe, or to conflict over the decision. The book explores how the abortion debate began-and acquired the partisan shape it has today.

    The debates prompting liberalization of abortion in the 1960s started out looking little like our own. The public health community challenged bans on abortion as discriminating between the rich and the poor. It was not until the late 1960s that feminists began to argue that restrictions on abortion violated the constitutional rights of women.