Going Further
Option 1: Learn more.
After reading the featured article, reflect in your journal:
What is your reaction to the protests happening in Poland? Do you feel surprised? Encouraged? Upset?
Do you support the protesters? Why?
Do the events in Poland remind you of anything else happening in the world today or in the past?
On Wednesday, Poland’s government delayed putting the new ruling into effect. In “Poland Delays a Near-Total Ban on Abortion,” Monika Pronczuk writes:
But on Tuesday, the government indefinitely delayed the publication of the court’s ruling, which prevents it from going into legal force, in an apparent response to the protests. For the change to take effect, the government would have had to publish the ruling by Nov. 2.
The government could still publish the ruling at any time, as it has done with other controversial rulings, even though legal experts say that to do so would violate the Constitution.
“A discussion is ongoing,” said Michal Dworczyk, the head of the prime minister’s office. “In this situation, which is difficult and causes a lot of emotions, it is good to give ourselves a bit of time for dialogue and for working out a new position.”
To learn more about what’s now happening in Poland, read the entire article. Here are additional questions to respond to in your journal:
What is your reaction to the government’s delay in imposing the ruling?
How much of a role do you think the protests played in the government’s decision?
What do you think will happen next? Why?
Option 2: Share your opinion.
The recent addition of Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court has increased the chances that Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that established a woman’s right to an abortion, will be weakened or overturned.
After reading the featured article and considering abortion laws in Poland, read these two excerpts from The New York Times Opinion section, written by people in the United States with different views on abortion.
In a 2019 Op-Ed, “I Am Pro-Life. Don’t Call Me Anti-Abortion.,” Charles C. Camosy, a board member of Democrats for Life of America, writes:
The New York Times editorial board, for instance, recently used the phrase “clusters of cells that have not yet developed into viable human beings,” in a discussion of rights being extended to a fetus in the womb, or what I call a prenatal child.
Language like this ignores the fact that each of us once existed as “clusters of cells that have not yet developed into viable human beings.” It seeks to hide the fact that by the time most surgical abortions take place, a prenatal child has electrical activity in the brain and a beating heart.
Other words and phrases used in the discussion about abortion seek to obscure this reality as well: “tissue,” “part of the mother,” “parasite,” “potential life.” Even the term “fetus” is dehumanizing.
Outside of an abortion context, an obstetrician-gynecologist doesn’t generally speak to a mother about her fetus. She talks to her about her baby. Family and friends organize baby showers, not fetus showers. A mother-to-be has a baby bump, not a fetus bump. She is “with child,” not “with fetus.” It is not unusual for major news outlets, such as the BBC, to use the phrase “unborn babies” when they report on new prenatal surgical techniques.
We have shifted our language in ways that hide the dignity of the vulnerable, in this instance and on issues far from the abortion debate as well. This is part of what Pope Francis calls “throwaway culture.”
Mr. Camosy’s Op-Ed continues:
A genuine concern for justice for the most vulnerable — one directed at something other than advancing a particular political agenda — must resist throwaway culture across issues that transcend our crumbling right-left politics. People who are committed to justice for the most vulnerable will be on the alert for dehumanizing language intended to confirm biases and serve the interests of those who hold power over the weak.
Doing so is particularly important at this moment. We are likely to see a newly intense debate over abortion at our newly constituted Supreme Court. If we are to avoid the hopelessly stale culture-war debates of the 1970s, then we must refuse the false choice between supporting vulnerable women and protecting vulnerable prenatal children. It will mean genuinely wrestling with the complexity of doing both. And it will mean engaging the arguments of our perceived opponents in good faith.
Next, read an excerpt from the Op-Ed “I’ll Never Be Ashamed of My Abortion,” written in January by Ylonda Gault, an executive at Planned Parenthood:
If our constitutional right to safe, legal abortion is not upheld, more than 25 million Americans of reproductive age could lose the freedom to decide when and if to have a child. What I took for granted — the freedom to have agency over my body and life choices — is a right my daughters and their daughters may well be denied.
Roe has never been perfect. The right to safe, legal abortion didn’t mean equal access to it. In communities where people have low incomes and in many areas where Black and brown people live, the cost of abortion often makes it out of reach.
So this anniversary should be about protecting and expanding the health and freedom of all people — regardless of their race, income, gender identity, sexual orientation, abilities or immigration status.
In a new short documentary film, “Ours to Tell,” which will be shown at the Sundance Film Festival next week, we see how access to abortion should play out. The movie depicts four people: myself, another Black woman, a nonbinary trans person and a Latina. It celebrates the full and empowered lives each of us is now able to live because we had agency.
This is not complicated or political. When you have bodily autonomy and the freedom to get the health care you want, need and deserve, your whole world changes and you are able to thrive.
Nearly 15 years after my abortion, I am at peace. I now have three children, ages 12 to 20. The most important gift I can give them is the best me I can be. My daughters and my son know I had an abortion just as they know I have a mole on one side of my face, and dimples.
My abortion is a part of me, my story. And I have no shame that I made the best decision for myself, my family and our future.
Whether they yell it from the rooftops or not, many other people have experiences like mine. Research shows the most common post-abortion feeling is relief. Ninety-five percent of us do not regret our decision.
After reading both excerpts, or the two Op-Eds in their entirety, reflect on the following questions in writing or in class discussion:
What is your reaction to the two excerpts that you read? Do you connect with one opinion more than the other? Why?
How do you think your identity — including your race, gender, class, sexuality, religion — affects what you think and believe about the issue of abortion?
What do you know about abortion laws in your country? If you live in the United States, what are the laws in your particular state? If you don’t know the laws in your state, you can look at this chart created by the Guttmacher Institute.
To what extent do you think the law in your state or country should protect a woman’s access to abortion? What evidence can you use to support your opinion?
