Really made me think about how men/medical industry, in more ways than just the law, are still the gatekeepers of abortion care under Roe. It also made me re-think why pregnant folks opt to have home births, and when and why that’s been really frowned upon in the States. If first trimester abortions are low-risk (they are) and if a term pregnancy is low-risk as can be for an individual, why shouldn’t home abortion/birth be more of an option? Especially, as the article details, in states with limited access to clinics-and in terms of birth, so many rural hospitals have shuttered their maternity wards due to insurance cost/other medical costs.
I see a CNM (certified nurse-midwife) for my well-woman visits and I’ve never felt so cared for, physically and emotionally. They even gave me laughing gas when I couldn’t get through a pelvic exam without it. Contrast this with my first visit, with a male doctor annoyed that I scheduled my appointment with the female doctor who wasn’t there that day (I was not told; I was 20, a virgin, and never had a pelvic before); said that the pain from the exam was all in my head; and when I informed him of my choice to not have sex for the foreseeable future as I was in college and not wanting to risk anything, he said “You’re 20, you won’t be a virgin for long.” It was awful and dehumanizing, and a kind of thinking that is the result of, I think, the violent origins of gynecology as a medical industry in the 19th century. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that gynecology, anesthesia, and bans on abortion, all officially practiced/brought about by men, rose to prominence at around the same time (as I understand, I could be wrong). And that pushing women out of women’s health leads to the dehumanization that we still see today. (Also note how historically it was women of color and low income women attending to abortion care in the 19th c.).
Thoughts on the article?
Also, apologies that it takes me awhile to reply; I’ve been keeping GT and Jez just to my desktop.