Among all of the policy areas where Barack Obama and Mitt Romney clash, their views on abortion present some of the starkest contrasts, despite what some see as an attempt by the Romney campaign to dial back its conservatism on abortion.
(UPDATE: Just as I posted this, I came across this article on a new Romney ad. So much for "what some see." It's what it is.)
The New York Times published an editorial predicting what would happen if the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade (actually, Casey v. Planned Parenthood). In short, around half of the states would enact much more restrictive abortion laws within a legislative session after the undoing of Roe/Casey.
One thing that I wonder about in a post-Roe/Casey landscape is how states would attempt to ban medical abortions, in particular self-abortions by women using drugs like Cytotec, which is an anti-ulcer medication but is also effective in causing a miscarriage early in pregnancy. (The active ingredient in Cytotec is misoprostol, which one of two standard drugs used in medical abortions, the other being mifepristone, or "RU-486.")
Traditionally, American states did not make criminals out of the women who actually obtained an abortion, treating them instead as victims of rapacious abortionists and/or coercive husbands, boyfriends, fathers, etc. In many countries, and among many pro-choice organizations, medical abortions are the future. How would states abortion laws deal with women who could get their hands on Cytotec and self-abort?
Links:
Editorial in The New York Times (October 15, 2012): If Roe v. Wade Goes
The Caucus blog in The New York Times (October 16, 2012): In New Ad, Romney Stresses Moderat Positions on Reproductive Issues
(UPDATE: Just as I posted this, I came across this article on a new Romney ad. So much for "what some see." It's what it is.)
The New York Times published an editorial predicting what would happen if the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade (actually, Casey v. Planned Parenthood). In short, around half of the states would enact much more restrictive abortion laws within a legislative session after the undoing of Roe/Casey.
One thing that I wonder about in a post-Roe/Casey landscape is how states would attempt to ban medical abortions, in particular self-abortions by women using drugs like Cytotec, which is an anti-ulcer medication but is also effective in causing a miscarriage early in pregnancy. (The active ingredient in Cytotec is misoprostol, which one of two standard drugs used in medical abortions, the other being mifepristone, or "RU-486.")
Traditionally, American states did not make criminals out of the women who actually obtained an abortion, treating them instead as victims of rapacious abortionists and/or coercive husbands, boyfriends, fathers, etc. In many countries, and among many pro-choice organizations, medical abortions are the future. How would states abortion laws deal with women who could get their hands on Cytotec and self-abort?
Links:
Editorial in The New York Times (October 15, 2012): If Roe v. Wade Goes
The Caucus blog in The New York Times (October 16, 2012): In New Ad, Romney Stresses Moderat Positions on Reproductive Issues
Comments