By Natalie Zeifman (she/her)

Content warning:

Mentions of abortion, rape, sexual assault, eugenics

Editor’s Note:

In this article, we would like to recognise that Roe V Wade being overturned affects all people with uteruses or those assigned female at birth (AFAB), and that many in this biological category do not identify with the gender role of ‘woman’. That being said, it is also important to recognise that though Roe V Wade being overturned affects people of all genders and sexes, the impacts are at best underestimated, or at worst completely and deliberately overlooked. Such erasure comes from conservative Americans’ insistence on the dichotomous model of sex (there are two sexes) and of gender (there are two genders). So although the pro-life/forced-birth campaigns have historically targeted who conservatives have grouped under the umbrella of ‘woman’ based on their biological make-up, we acknowledge how anti-abortion legislations are also detrimental to trans men and intersex/non-binary folks. Conservatives’ refusal to recognise these impacts contribute to ongoing violence against the trans, intersex, and non-binary community. Throughout the piece, I use gendered language such as ‘woman’ and ‘women’ when commenting on conservatives’ efforts to limit access to abortion. Elsewhere, gender-and-sex-inclusive language will be used to draw attention to Roe v Wade’s pervasive effects.

On Roe V Wade Being Overturned:

I don’t know where to start because it feels like everything has already been said again and again, and yet we are still here. It seems pointless to speak, and yet to let the moment pass in silence seems equally wrong.

On June 24th, the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe V. Wade, declaring that American women (and all those with a uterus) have no constitutionally protected right to an abortion. This occurred despite the fact that two thirds of the United States supports legal abortion, and that the United States is supposedly a democracy where the will of the people is supposed to rule (6).

Without federal protection, a dozen states immediately outlawed abortion and many more conservative states are expected to follow (1). For years, the most anti-abortion states had already been restricting the procedure to the point it was just about impossible to obtain, even while the procedure was consistutionally protected (2, 3, 9).

What Is Roe V Wade and Why Was It Overturned?

Roe V Wade was a legal case that began in 1969. Norma McCorvey had been raped and wanted an abortion. She sued the state of Texas under the alias of Jane Roe, arguing that the government infringed on her right to privacy when they policed her body. The case eventually found its way to the US Supreme Court in 1973 and the court declared that a woman’s right to early abortion (within the first three months) was protected by the consitution, in so far as the constitution guaranteed reasonable privacy to US citizens (3, 9). In legal terms then, abortion was protected as a matter of privacy, moreso than bodily autonomy.

It is of course insult to injury for American women that Brett Kavanaugh, one of the conservative justices who supported the overturning of Roe v Wade, was very publicly accused of rape before he was accepted to the Supreme Court in 2018 (7).

Justice Samuel Alito justified the court’s decision by arguing,“The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions” (4). His basic argument was that if a right wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the constitution written by men, it at least had to have some precedent in the American history that had been ruled by men. His comments are amazingly ignorant, and many articles have already been written challenging how exactly a history of extreme sexism and bigotry justifies its own continuation (5).

The (Invisible) Context of Abortion in the US:

People with uteruses have been having abortions since time immormial, with approximately 1.4% of US cis-women obtaining an abortion in 2020 (6). It is estimated that one in three US cis-women will have an abortion in their life time and this rate has held relatively steady over decades (8). Although most abortion studies unfortunately exist within the gender binary, not all do. We can add onto these numbers an estimate of the modern trans and non-binary abortion rate from a review of 2017 statistics, which found that approximately 500 abortions had been provided to trans and non-binary people in that year (46).

To say there is no historical pattern or tradition of abortion in the US then, is to simply shut one’s eyes. The laws may not have historically supported those gendered female at birth, but for centuries, millions have risked death because the procedure was so important to them.

Who Do Abortion Restrictions Most Affect?

In 2019, about 9% of cis-women obtained abortions outside of their state of residence. Compare this to the 1972 rate pre-Roe V Wade, which saw 41% of cis-women obtain an abortion outside of their own state (6). There is no reason to think history will not repeat itself again. As we know, it will be the most privileged who will be able to afford taking time away from their jobs and lives to obtain an abortion. Those affected by poverty (and the racist and bigoted histories that contributed to such), disability, and abusive relationships will be the least able to terminate their pregnancies.

Trans and non-binary people, in particular, already had restricted access to reproductive healthcare before the overturning of Roe V Wade, and the shutting of clinics will not help matters. Only 23% of clinics provided transgender-specific healthcare (46), and transgender individuals were known to delay their abortions more so than cis-women, due to fear of a system that wasn’t properly built for helping them (47).

Bodily Autonomy, Organ Donation and Abortion:

When we discuss abortion, we generally have to talk about bodily autonomy. In this vein, I will discuss the context of organ donation in the United States to give you an idea of the laws around this issue.

In the US, it is not mandatory to be an organ donor (23, 24). Why?

Even if you are literally dead and people’s lives could be saved from your corpse, you are still considered entitled to bodily autonomy. It is estimated that one person’s body can save eight lives and better the quality of life of seventy-five people (10). Eighteen people in the US die everyday because they can not get the organ transplant they need (11). But you are still entitled to take your body with you into the dirt!

Lifesource—an American organ donation organisation, has spoken out on why the US has an opt-in organ donation system: “Requiring an affirmative donation decision through opt-in policies aligns with the U.S. cultural emphasis on individual rights and autonomy principles that is not achieved in the opt-out international experience… A legislative change to an opt-out system would undermine the existing legal framework of donation, opening it to possible unforeseen legal consequences and negative public response” (23). This ideology of individualism and bodily autonomy holds that one must donate their body; it cannot be taken for someone else’s use without permission. It is considered that individuals have a property right to their bodies.

“The donation model requires that society respect the right of an individual to control the disposition of [their] own organs and tissues” (30). Many physicians and bioethicists support that one should absolutely respect the will of a person around their body even if they are deceased (25, 26). Some academics have argued that the government is already over-regulating people's lives, and that "assuming possession of our body parts…would be a step too far" (27). Given that the Republican party is the party of individualism in the United States, it is especially interesting that these beliefs stop short when it comes to women’s autonomy.

But the real question is this: how in the world can you have a law that tells people assigned female at birth that they must donate their living bodies to someone who isn’t even a person yet, but if they die they’re entitled to more bodily autonomy? The dead can keep their bodies, but the living, if they are not cis-men, cannot? How can we have such inconsistent laws?

Once you’ve thought over that question, there’s the obvious next one:

Why Is Abortion a Hot Button Issue In a Way That Organ Donation Isn’t, If The True Point Is To Save Human Life?

Cutification and Meritocracy:

One answer lies in the way that humans are drawn towards the cute and charismatic. For example, animal conservationists have long criticised how some species are granted endangered status and greater fundraising efforts, while others are ignored (12, 14). It is not a logical matter of who most needs these efforts, but of who can attract the most crowds. Babies are cute; poor adults aren’t.

This perhaps helps explain the long criticised inconsistency in the anti-abortion movement: they support more people being born, but they do not support social welfare programs or funded childcare (13). Indeed, a 2004 survey of US women by the Guttmacher Institute found that 74% of cis-women had had an abortion because they could not afford a child, yet anti-abortion activists show little concern for the conditions a child will be born into (32). A baby very quickly loses its charisma and grows into an adult. The United States has a strong ideology of meritocracy, suggesting that if things aren’t going well for that adult, it is their own fault (17). This is a movement that values quantity of life over quality of life.

Sexism:

It is also undeniable that a history of sexism is at the roots of the anti-abortion movement. The classic “female gender role” is that of a woman who bears children and stays within the home, subservient to her male family members. It has long been argued that the anti-abortion movement has its root in such gender role ideology. Otherwise the anti-abortion movement wouldn’t also be against sex education, contraception and socialised health insurance to cover the cost of contraception, when the lack of such has been tied again and again to increased rates of unwanted pregnancies (15, 16).

People not wanting to be organ donors fits within the US’s normalisation of individualism, but women violate their gender role by not wanting to be mothers. Abortion has been around forever, but now women are truly stepping outside of their gender role utilising it. Abortion is combined with education, a career, and demands for better quality of life. So the person who refuses organ donation is called an individual, and the woman who doesn’t want to be a mother is called a murderer.

Instinctively something tells us that what she does is just more wrong, because within the cultural narrative it is. That instinct is centuries of ingrained sexism. Women should be this and if they aren’t, they should be punished.

Bigoted Aspects of Abortion:

There is undeniably a eugenic aspect to the abortion debate as well, more so than can be covered in this article (40). The United States has a long history of forcibly sterlising Indigenous, poor, disabled, and queer people with uteruses. There are cases of forced sterilisation even today (41, 42). Birth control in the US was even popularised with the argument that it would help control the birth of less desirable groups (43). It is worth noting then that the pro-life movement has often valued the reproductive rights of some groups moreso than others. In the same way that women are seen as violating their gender role by not wanting to be mothers, white, cis, able-bodied, and privileged women, in particular, violate a eugenic cultural standard when they refuse pregnancy. If it was only marginalised groups desiring abortions, one might wonder if the Republican party would give such priority to the issue.

The Consequences of Banning Abortion Affect Everyone With A Uterus, Even if There Are Legal Exceptions:

At this point I feel like a tired bag of bones to bring up what I know has and will be brought up again and again these days, but we need to talk about how abortion bans harm all people with uteruses, even when there are legal exceptions. People like Savita Halappanavar.

Sativa entered an Irish hospital in 2012 due to complications with her pregnancy that soon became life threatening. It was known that she was in the middle of a miscarriage and that her fetus would not survive, but her physicians did not consider her case to be yet life threatening enough to proceed with an abortion. Abortion was illegal in Ireland at the time, except in the case of medical emergency, and phyciains were very scared of legal action if they proceeded with abortion too soon. Savita Halappanavar’s medical care was delayed for days and she ended up passing away. The case became famous in Ireland and a rallying point that eventually influenced the re-legalisation of abortion in the country (28, 29).

Common exceptions to abortion bans include cases where the person’s life would be in danger if the pregnancy were caried out, incest or rape. Savita’s case shows how having this exception in place does not protect people with uteruses when physicians exist in a framework that is very hostile towards abortion.

Within the US itself, there have been many seriously concerning cases where pregnant people, their families and their institutions were punished and shamed for prioritising the life of the pregnant person over their baby in medically dangerous circumstances (44, 45). This level of antagonism occurred even with the previous protection of Roe V Wade. When legal requirements ask that every effort be made to save the baby, even at risk to the pregnant person, they are literally requiring that a person risk their life for (a potential) someone else. One should note that there is absolutely no other area of life where a person would be required, against their will, to risk their life for another.

In the case of exceptions for incest and rape… Let’s take a long sigh here. It is already incredibly difficult to prove rape, so if you need to prove it to get an abortion, good luck (31). Even if you can, you will still face a system hostile towards abortion (35). Why blame you for the way you dressed when they can invalidate your assault by calling you a baby killer? The trauma such a trial puts an assault victim through is unacceptable (33).

However, in recent years conservative lawmakers in the US haven’t even bothered to pretend they want these exceptions. A dozen conservative states make no exception for rape and incest. Although it is widely regarded that these exceptions don’t do much for survivors, their not being present even in writing truly feels dystopian (33, 34).

Why Was So Much Effort Put Into Banning Abortion, Rather Than Fighting For Contraceptive Advances?

I think about what the world would look like if the anti-abortion movement had put all its efforts into more effective, healthier and more accessible contraception, instead of just banning abortion outright. We would live in a seriously different world today. A world that truly has less need of abortion, while still maintaining quality of life. A world where people with uteruses are more free to live a life that is healthy, secure, fulfilling, and true to their dreams.

Research into contraception has almost completely stalled in the last several decades, despite the fact that current contraception doesn’t serve many people (22, 20). People with uteruses are currently pressured to use hormonal birth control, which can have a host of side effects ranging from depression to loss of sexual interest (18). One third of women stop their contraception within the first year of use, with the side effects of contraception being a major factor in their decision (21). Popular contraception such as the pill are not fully effective. For example, ten percent of people who take the pill get pregnant each year (19).

A recent article in Nature describes the situation:

“Many [...] are highly dissatisfied with the contraceptives available. [Condoms] fail too often — in the first year of condom use, about 13% of women become pregnant — and women must rely on men. Implants and intra-uterine devices (IUDs) require medical procedures and can be invasive; pills have to be taken every day. Hormonal methods and non-hormonal IUDs can have side effects, including irregular or unpredictable menstrual bleeding, headaches, acne and weight gain, as well as depression and other mood changes For many women worldwide, contraception has been difficult to obtain or afford, even before the COVID-19 pandemic.

All of this has serious consequences. Around 40% of pregnancies globally are unintended, and about half of those end in induced abortion” (22).

What could all the effort, time, and money of the anti-abortion movement have accomplished if they focused on an empathetic solution, rather than simple judgement?

The Anti-Contraception Movement and Class Warfare:

Many have criticised the anti-contraception movement for waging class warfare on people with uteruses. Having sex is simple human nature, but for those who have restrictions placed on their ability to access contraceptive care, a pregnancy can seriously impact their familiy’s economic mobility and hinder their leaving poverty (48).

Moving Forward:

While much blame will be put on the right wing for what has come about in the United States, the Democrats also had a major part to play. Many have already criticised how the party did not do enough to support abortion rights when they had the chance, as they tried to toe the middle line to win conservative votes. While the Republican party was relentless, the Democratic party was lukewarm (36). It is a lesson that if America can’t learn, many other countries are listening to. New discussions are springing up everywhere on how to better support abortion rights. Barriers to accessibility are being widely talked about. People want to know what the abortion laws are in their country and if they’re good enough. Conversations that weren’t happening before are happening now (37, 38, 39).

Citations:

Bryant, Miranda. 2022.“Abortion Banned in Multiple US States Just Hours after Roe v Wade Overturned.” The Guardian. June 25, 2022. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/25/abortion-banned-in-multiple-us-states-just-hours-after-roe-v-wade-overturned.
Coghill, Arianna. 2022.“The States That Have Made It Virtually Impossible to Get an Abortion Now.” Mother Jones. April 22, 2022. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/04/strict-abortion-laws-roe-wade-heartbeat/.
“Roe v Wade: What Is US Supreme Court Ruling on Abortion?” BBC News. June 24, 2022. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54513499.
Gerstein, Josh, and Alexander Ward. 2022. “Exclusive: Supreme Court Has Voted to Overturn Abortion Rights, Draft Opinion Shows.” Politico. May 2, 2022. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473.
Andrews, Becca. 2022. “Abortion Has Always Been a Part of America—Even If Alito Won’t Admit It.” Mother Jones. May 6, 2022. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/05/alito-opinion-roe-missing-history-abortion/.
Diamant, Jeff, and Besheer Mohamed. 2022. “What the Data Says about Abortion in the U.S.” Pew Research Center. June 24, 2022. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/06/24/what-the-data-says-about-abortion-in-the-u-s-2/.
Kessler, Glenn. 2018. “Analysis | Brett Kavanaugh and Allegations of Sexual Misconduct: The Complete List.” The Washington Post, September 27, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/27/brett-kavanaugh-allegations-sexual-misconduct-complete-list/.
Foster, Diana Greene. 2017. “Dramatic Decreases in US Abortion Rates: Public Health Achievement or Failure?” American Journal of Public Health 107 (12): 1860–62. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2017.304152.
The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. 2018. “Roe v. Wade | Summary, Origins, & Influence.” In Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade.
“Organ and Tissue Donation - Topic Overview.” My Health Alberta. https://myhealth.alberta.ca/alberta/Pages/organ-and-tissue-donation-topic-overview.aspx#:~:text=Just%201%20organ%20and%20tissue.
Scheiber, Francesca. 2012. “‘Opt Out’ Policies Increase Organ Donation | SPARQ.” https://sparq.stanford.edu/solutions/opt-out-policies-increase-organ-donation.
Bellon, Alejandro M. 2019. “Does Animal Charisma Influence Conservation Funding for Vertebrate Species under the US Endangered Species Act?” Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 21 (3): 399–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10018-018-00235-1.
“Why Are Republicans so Threatened by Universal Daycare? | Arwa Mahdawi.” 2021. The Guardian. May 1, 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/01/republicans-threatened-biden-universal-daycare-week-in-patriarchy.
Ducarme, Frederic, et al. 2012. "What are 'charismatic species' for conservation biologists?" BioSciences Master Reviews, July 2013. http://biologie.ens-lyon.fr/biologie/ressources/bibliographies/pdf/m1-11-12-biosci-reviews-ducarme-f-2c-m.pdf?lang=fr.
15. Landman, Keren. 2022. “6 Things Sex Educators Want You to Know about a Post-Roe America.” Vox. June 26, 2022. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/23167769/abortion-post-roe-sex-educators.
16. Potera, Carol. 2008. “Comprehensive Sex Education Reduces Teen Pregnancies.” American Journal of Nursing 108 (7): 18. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.naj.0000325800.22230.d0.
Reynolds, Jeremy, and He Xian. 2014. "Perceptions of Meritocracy in the Land of Opportunity.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 36: 121-137. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeremy-Reynolds-2/publication/260914149_Perceptions_of_Meritocracy_in_the_Land_of_Opportunity/links/5b0d699f4585157f871f920c/Perceptions-of-Meritocracy-in-the-Land-of-Opportunity.pdf.
Skovlund, Charlotte et al. 2016. “Association of Hormonal Contraception With Depression." JAMA Psychiatry 73(11): 1154-1162. https://www.aulavirtualesar.org/news/antidepresion.pdf.
“What Is the Effectiveness of Birth Control Pills?” Planned Parenthood. ww.plannedparenthood.org. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/birth-control-pill/how-effective-is-the-birth-control-pill#:~:text=If%20you%20use%20it%20perfectly.
Swift, Bethan, and Christian Becker. “Birth Control Continues to Fail Women – so Why Has Nothing Changed?” The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/birth-control-continues-to-fail-women-so-why-has-nothing-changed-164195.
“Contraceptive Discontinuation: Reasons, Challenges, and Solutions.” 2018. FP2020. https://fp2030.org/resources/contraceptive-discontinuation-reasons-challenges-and-solutions.
Chamberlain, Sarah G., Kirsten M. Vogelsong, Michelle Weinberger, Emily Serazin, Sarah Cairns-Smith, and Stephen E. Gerrard. 2020. “Reboot Contraceptives Research — It Has Been Stuck for Decades.” Nature 587 (7835): 543–45. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03287-0.
“Opt-in vs. Opt-Out.” 2020. LifeSource. July 23, 2020. https://www.life-source.org/latest/opt-in-vs-opt-out/.
Glazier, Alexandra K. 2018. “Organ Donation and the Principles of Gift Law.” Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 13 (8): 1283–84. https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.03740318.
Michielsen, P. 1996. “Presumed Consent to Organ Donation: 10 Years’ Experience in Belgium.” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 89 (12): 663–66. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1296026/.
Zink, Sheldon, Rachel Zeehandelaar, and Stacey Wertlieb. 2019. “Presumed vs Expressed Consent in the US and Internationally.” AMA Journal of Ethics 7 (9): 610–14. https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.9.pfor2-0509..
Kennedy, I. et al. 1998. “The Case for ‘Presumed Consent’ in Organ Donation.” The Lancet 351 (9116): 1650–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(97)08212-3.
Sinead O'Carroll. 2018. “Savita Halappanavar: Her Tragic Death and How She Became Part of Ireland’s Abortion Debate.” The Journal. https://www.thejournal.ie/eighth-amendment-4-3977441-Apr2018/.
Specia, Megan. 2018. “How Savita Halappanavar’s Death Spurred Ireland’s Abortion Rights Campaign.” The New York Times. May 27, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/27/world/europe/savita-halappanavar-ireland-abortion.html.
“Ethics of Deceased Organ Donor Recovery - OPTN.” https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/professionals/by-topic/ethical-considerations/ethics-of-deceased-organ-donor-recovery/.
QC, Jennifer Knight. 2020. “Why Do so Few Rapes Result in a Conviction?” Aljazeera. May 7, 2020. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/5/7/why-do-so-few-rapes-result-in-a-conviction.
Finer, Lawrence. 2016. “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives.” Guttmacher Institute. December 6, 2016. https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh/2005/reasons-us-women-have-abortions-quantitative-and-qualitative-perspectives.
“Rape Exceptions to Abortion Bans Were Once Widely Accepted. No More.” 2022. Los Angeles Times. April 8, 2022. https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2022-04-08/red-states-eliminate-rape-exceptions-from-abortion-bans.
Hoffman, Jan. 2022. “The New Abortion Bans: Almost No Exceptions for Rape, Incest or Health.” The New York Times, June 9, 2022, sec. Health. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/09/health/abortion-bans-rape-incest.html.
“Brazil Judge Probed for Banning Abortion for Child Rape Victim.” Aljazeera. June 23, 2022. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/23/brazil-judge-probed-for-banning-abortion-for-child-rape-victim.
“Abortion Ruling: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO).” 2022. https://www.youtube.com. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MalsOLSFvX0.
“Abortion Is Legal in Canada -- but Is It Accessible? Experts Weigh In.” 2022. CTVNews. May 6, 2022. https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/abortion-is-legal-in-canada-but-is-it-accessible-experts-weigh-in-1.5892397.
38.“Getting an Abortion in Australia Isn’t as Simple as You Might Think.” ABC News. June 25, 2022. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-26/roe-v-wade-australia-abortion-law-access-not-guaranteed/101183518.
“What Is Roe v Wade, What Are UK Abortion Laws, and What Is Different in the US?” 2022. The Independent. June 25, 2022. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/what-is-roe-v-wade-uk-abortion-laws-b2109349.html.
“Definition of Eugenics.” 2018. Merriam-Webster.com. 2018.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eugenics.

41. Agtuca, Jacqueline. “Past and Current United States Policies of Forced Sterilization.” NIWRC. https://www.niwrc.org/restoration-magazine/november-2020/past-and-current-united-states-policies-forced-sterilization.

4‌2. Kennedy, Ellen. 2019. “On Indigenous Peoples Day, Recalling Forced Sterilizations of Native American Women.” MinnPost. October 14, 2019. https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2019/10/on-indigenous-peoples-day-recalling-forced-sterilizations-of-native-american-women/.

4‌3. PBS. 2019. “Eugenics and Birth Control | American Experience” https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/pill-eugenics-and-birth-control/.

44. “In Theory: Save the Mother or the Baby?” La Cañada Valley Sun. December 29, 2010. https://www.latimes.com/socal/la-canada-valley-sun/news/tn-vsl-intheory-20101229-story.html.

4‌5. Austrew, Ashley. 2022. “Mom Says She’d Choose Her Life over Her Child’s and Is Shamed for It.” Care.com Resources. March 18, 2022. https://www.care.com/c/mom-would-choose-her-life-over-child/.

46. Guttmacher Institute. 2020. “Transgender Abortion Patients and the Provision of Transgender-Specific Care at Non-Hospital Facilities That Provide Abortions.” https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2020/01/transgender-abortion-patients-and-provision-transgender-specific-care-non-hospital.

47. Reynolds, Win. 2021.“Texas Abortion Ban Will Likely ‘Disproportionately Impact Trans and Marginalized People.’”Northwestern News. September 15, 2021. https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/september/texas-abortion-trans-marginalized-people/.

48. Blackmore, Jex. 2018. “Restricting Anortion Access is Class Warfare.” Vice April 5, 2018. https://www.vice.com/en/article/9kgddp/restricting-abortion-access-is-class-warfare.