In 1971 I had an illegal abortion. It was a nightmarish experience complete with an angry male doctor who sexually assaulted me as a part of the initial exam. It was his little perk. The actual procedure was done under an anesthetic and I have no idea what else might have happened. Afterward I was sent outside to my car and told if the bleeding didn't stop to go to an emergency room and not to come back. Well, the bleeding stopped, but that was just the beginning of my understanding of the rage I felt as I was victimized by stigma, by the doctor, and by a health care system that wanted to dictate to me what is and is not acceptable. I survived, but many women didn't. My rage survived very well.
When Roe v. Wade was handed down in 1973, I reacted gratefully, knowing that women could now get a safe and legal abortion. Over the 50 ensuing years I thought maybe the issue had dissolved within me and that we would continue to be able to make appropriate health care choices forever. I was also aware that the GOP and far-right groups started beating the old drum of the right to life and whittling away at the decision in any way possible. (Texas recently passed the most restrictive abortion law in the country, and ironically, Roe v. Wade started in Texas.)
Now, with the advantage of a lifetime of watching how little changes when everything needs to, I have no delusions about those who seek to overturn this decision. The people who condemn abortion are those who wish to keep women enslaved to childbirth, enslaved to men, and enslaved to a system that forces all women into second-class citizenship.
That will never work.
All that needs to be said is this: Get your laws off my body. Health care is a right! Stop the insanity of trying to legislate feelings.
Blake Lynden, Minneapolis
•••
The Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts has demonstrated that the long-honored principle of stare decisis (that is, adhering to precedent) is less than compelling. So, despite the precedent of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court is invited, in a recently argued Mississippi case, to reconsider, and to reverse, that decision.