Who Cares?
Both the 1995 and 2003 proposed legislation banning the partial birth abortion (PBA) procedure were highly controversial in the minds of the public. The procedure partially delivered the fetus before terminating it inside the birth canal. Both of the proposed bans received significant attention from religious leaders, politicians, the medical community, and the public. Debate around both PBA bans was heavily influenced by both the pro-life and pro-choice communities. Outcry from various religious denominations attempted to sway public opinion into believing that PBA procedures were morally wrong. Politicians weighed into the conversation with their support for or against the proposed legislation. Either in an attempt to gain votes or to appease pro-life organizations, many politicians sided with the ban. Medical professionals also voiced their opinions regarding the D&X procedure. Most believed that banning the D&X procedure interfered with the medical community’s decision making. Furthermore, banning a procedure that may save the life and health of a woman placed risk on both the mother and the doctor.
Both the 1995 and 2003 proposed legislation brought into question women's health and the right to bodily autonomy. Some vehemently opposed the fact that both the religious and political communities were meddling with medical procedures. Others supported the legislation in order to protect what they deemed were innocent lives. Overall, partial birth abortions were a divisive issue that combined concerns from the political, religious, and medical communities in 1995 and 2003. Its implications were far reaching, with both sides of the debate having strong cases for their reasoning. The high level of controversy surrounding the D&X procedure was the very reason that politicians, religious authorities, and the medical community fought over the legality of the procedure for over a decade.
The exhibits prior show us a widespread view of this ban’s implications. But, who cares?
With the recent overturn of Roe v. Wade, the right to an abortion is being threatened. Female bodily autonomy and the ability for the medical community to make decisions for the health of women is at risk. After the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, pro-life politicians have been working extensively in state legislation to ban abortions. Late term abortions, such as modern variations on the D&X procedure, are being actively targeted by politicians as particularly inhumane. It is important to understand both the pro-life and pro-choice’s reasonings for or against abortions. In the modern abortion debate, it is ever more important to separate fact from fiction. Both the 1995 and 2003 conversations around PBAs are examples of the pro-life movement misconstruing medical information surrounding abortions.