Transcripts For CSPAN3 Lectures In History History Of Abortion Legislation 20240712

Of abortion. Were going to start nationally and look at california specifically on the topics of specialized and go back through the National Context to look at roe v. Wade and some that has happened since then in more recent years. We did have a very brief introduction to the topic of abortion in the colonial period. We talked about sarah and her abortion in the 1740s, so we had have a very brief introduction to it. But today were actually going to pick up around the time of the comstock can someone remind us what the com stock app does . Information on planned parenthood. Yeah, so no advertising of contraceptives and especially the dissemination of stuff in the mail. The act made it criminal toadsvertise these things beginning in 1873. We showed you guys the political cartoon if you recall. The caption was she gave birth to a naked baby, you know, so the joke or punch line is that comstock was really prude. Its important to know he doesnt approve all methods of Birth Control. He does encourage couples to use methods of Birth Control he considers dignified or ethical. So those methods include abstinence, also include the rhythm method where you avoid sexual intercourse at moments where a woman is more fertile, but also sleeping in different beds. So these are things that hes okay with. But he doesnt like other types of Birth Control. He doesnt like condemns, doubts, diaphragms or abortions. We talked these types of Birth Control had been linked to Vice Industries simply as a matter of vocation that sometimes women who were prostitutes and employed these different methods just because they needed to continue working. So when were putting this, again, back into the context of the 1th century and look at gender ideology, separate sphere and race suicide if you are an educated middle and upper class white woman and you want to use these types of methods theyre at best frowned upon and again if youre married, and at worst theyre immoral. And if youre a single one attempting to use any of these methods you are considered immoral. Lets look at an example of an 19th century abortionist. This is an example of madame restell. She was the with the woman you went to if you wanted an abortion in new york city from 1837 to 1878. Now, in 1836 she married a man named charles and thats when she began to embark on this career as a professor of womens medicine, a midwife but also an abortionist and purveyor of contraceptives and her husband supported her in this. They were in this together. So they sold patent medicines that may or may not have been effective but they made most of their money providing abortions, illegal abortions. She became very wellknown, and she often came under scrutiny from various different religious and moral reform groups in new york city. 1841 was the year of her first trial and she was charged with performing an abortion on a woman resulting in her death. She does have several various subsequent brushes with the law. But some of the critics against her cited the fact she donated to political campaigns, that she had the Police Department on her payroll. She always seemed to get off easy, and sometimes she even just settled out of court. So in the one trial after which shes found guilty and does have to serve time in prison, that was her trial in 1847, she received such special treatment in prison that the city council actually investigate asked the warden of the prison ended up getting fired. So upon her release from prison in 1847 they continued their work and they were so profitable in this that when their when her stepdaughter got married in 1854 shes actually is rumored to have given them a 50,000 wedding gift. 50,000 in 1854 and paid for their european honeymoon. So they were doing quite well. They also managed to buy a fourth story brownstone on Fourth Avenue which is prime real estate in new york city. So theyre not slumming it over there. After charles died it looked like anne was going to retire, but in 1878 Anthony Comstock disguised himself as a potential customer. He approached her and he pretended to need contraceptive materials. He made a punch of purchases and he used those to collect a search warrant and then he had her raided. And she was brought to trial for violation of the comstock act. She did try to do some illegal maneuvering. She had her attorney try to help her out but it was all to no avail. It seemed she was actually going to do hard time for this trial. April 1, 1878 the day her trial was supposed to begin she slit her throat with a carving knife inside her bathtub. So thats what this artist renditioning is trying to show. Some people did criticize comstock for entrapment but he was nonchallant about it. When she actually died her estate was valued at over a Million Dollars which is around 25 million today. Questions so far . Comstock wasnt the only person opposed to abortion at this time. And its important to note the 1940s is an era of transition when were looking at the abortion business. There had been earlier arguments against abortion before this. But when you couple this with mass media, you couple this with the spread of print materials, the dissemination of ideas and advertisements it affords greater opportunity for this previously taboo subject to become open and wellknown in the public, and people can discuss and talk about it a little bit more. So in the 1820s and 1830s we begin to see some territories and states actually begin to implement some of the first abortion laws. And most of these legislators imagined these laws are a form of consumer protection, that theyre creating these laws in order to protect women. Now, since there is increased medical and Technological Advancements thats going on in this era you do have new methods of Birth Control and new methods of abortion that are untested, and that can be really crude if performed in the wrong hands. So this image, for example, is of a suerated a long kind of spoon like device. You cant tell but it is suerated. So this would be used to perform an abortion, and you mind dilate the scervix, insert this device and scrape the uterine walls. So if you have someone who is unskilled or not a qualified medical professional this could be potentially dangerous and deadly to a woman. So to an extent these laws do funk to protect women because theyre trying to keep the wrong people from performing these procedures. So he would become the preeminent face of the Antiabortion Movement in the 19th century, and he believed that medical men were the guardians of women and children. He is the quintessential example of a medical Association Member in the 19th century. Hes from new england, he went to harvard and he was really religious. He was a member of one of these first generations of, you know, gynecologists who are basically moving into this brand new field. He is a contemporary of people like sims who we read about. But hes most wellknown for his effort to eradicate abortion. That previously no one was really interested or invested in the moral implications of abortion. No one talked about abortion in a moral way for it, at least not in relation to it being to a potential person. But he and others like him began to refer to abortion as and they emphasized their own education to basically argue they were the best people in a position to lobby the government to basically eradicate this practice. Now, we talked previously about the development of the medical field and how it worked in tandem with basically delegitimizing midwives and other class doctors. This is part of that as well because its usually midwives and physicians of color who were the most likely to perform abortions. So its not just about this moral thing. Its also about suggesting that these other people should not be qualified to practice medicine. We are. We American Medical Association ama members are. So basically as a result of this Campaign Good reputable doctors did not perform an abortion unless it was absolutely necessary to protect the life of a woman. Other than that, abortions were immoral because fetuses were a potential person. And eventually by 1880 all states have laws against abortion. Any questions . Yeah . What was the reasons they had against abortion . It was more about, you know, sex being for procreation and that it should be within the confines of the marriage. So it was less about the fact this was a person and more about, well, this meant you were having, you know, immoral sex practices. Yeah, mark . Were they actually backed by the government or just doctors that said, hey, look were the authority now . Its a bunch of physicians who organize themselves and say we are creating standards. We are its not backed by the government. Rather they kind of form their own lobbying group to say were going to define the standards of professional medicine, and we are we are going to kind of be gate keepers for this practice to make sure that everyone meet these standards, that we have a main line position on things, and they basically become a lobbying group after that. Other questions . So you have the doctor and other people putting forth this moral and Educational Campaign but the other thing adding fuel to this movement to get rid of abortion was the proliferation of abortion stories in the press. Now, most women who acquired abortions in the late 19th and early 20th century they do so quietly using referrals from friends, sisters, coworkers even maybe trusted physicians and many of these women secretly have successful abortions and we dont know anything about them. But these are the women who become topics of conversation in popular culture, that you have this sensationallism of publicized abortion related deaths that provides fodder for reformers, for physicians and other moralists who believe that legalized abortion is gradually going to erode americas moral fabric. And in typical yellow journalism fashion newspapers of the 19th and early 20th century broadcasted story after story of young, pretty girls who were dying as a result of illegal abortion. Now, undercover reporters at one time for the New York Times actually ended up releasing a 25part expose to basically talk about the dangers of illegal abortion and its villainous providers in new york city. So in this investigation there were two journalists who went undercover. They were pretending to be a couple, and then in this, you know, long form expose they transported readers of their newspapers to the abortion underworld and they exposed physicians, midwives and Police Officers who were basically receiving bribes or who were somehow involved with this trade. And so using abortion stories as kind of seedy Human Interest stories helped the newspapers to profit because you could spread these stories out for days at a time. You can give a little bit one day and then just drag the story out for a week or two weeks if you wanted. Now, if you recall a couple of weeks ago we saw a short clip from the 1934 film road to ruin. If you remember they were having a party and then eve and anne were taken away by a female police officer, and then they were medically inspected. And then eve had syphilis, and then she reforms and changes her life and anne finds out shes pregnant. So when i turned off the clip i told you annes boyfriend tells her hes not going to marry her and he takes her to have an illegal abortion and she died. Thats the same kind of thing except it was a film example. You have these stories of sex and jilted lovers, cover ups and death and its really titillating for whoever is reading or watching them. Its important to note they also fit within this larger framework. Its not just about stopping abortion. Its also fitting within other attempts to regulate sexuality, to make sure that sexuality was conforming with heterosexual normative practices, repressing homosexuality, preventing abortions, policing prostitution and preventing the dissemination of other obscene material. Its making sure that womens sexuality fits within a certain framework, and that that framework is marital reproductive sex. Everyone else should be shamed. So these women who died from these procedures, they cant conseal their identity or practices anymore. They kind of serve as Cautionary Tales for everyone else. Questions . So even though there was this policing abortions dont disappear. And by the 1920s the campaign that the ama campaign against abortion had created a hostile environment for women seeking these procedures. Women may have felt harassed by their physicians. Their physicians might have given them sermons and some women might have felt guilty to go speak to their doctor about this. And its also harder to get an abortion if physicians are cracking down on other providers through their internal regulation but even Law Enforcement is helping with that as well. Abortion is a legally ambiguous procedure in the United States. I mention that by 1880 all states have laws against it. But its important to note the procedure is not banned in and of itself. Rather the circumstances around abortion indicate whether the procedure is legal or illegal. So this means that an abortion could be legal for one woman and illegal for another. Or even legal for one womans pregnancy and illegal for her next pregnancy, the same woman. This is because every state with an abortion statute has a clause that provides exceptions for when a womans life is in danger. That if a woman is likely going to die from this pregnancy then the physician has the right and has the authority to perform an abortion in that instance. But there are no clear criteria to assess whether or not a womans life is at risk. So theres no kind of checklist to determine what actually constitutes a risk to a womans life. Now, since physicians typically practiced independently it was acceptable for them to come to their own conclusions and assess whether or not they believed an abortion was medically necessary. And this is considered illegal abortion. If a physician thinks that their patient has a condition that will threaten her life with this pregnancy he or she can just schedule the procedure and thats it. But if physicians are hard lined ame members they may be less inclined to provide the procedure. Yeah . What if they went so the states vary in every single state and they may not have to go to another state. They can maybe find another physician who they can convince that they should have a legal abortion, and thats a really interesting and good point that bianca just brought up. Because by the 1950s and 60s and well get there in a second, this legal distinction becomes incredibly amorphous. By the time we get to the 1950s and 60s we have an abuse of this trust that professional ama members have given individual physicians that leads to that decision being removed from the individual physician and placed in the hands of a committee. So its no longer your individual physician who says, yeah, i think this is necessary. Its now 25 physicians who youve never met who determine whether or not they think you should have an abortion or not. Well get there in a little bit, though. Whats interesting also for some women this creates a space. If i want this physician to continue working for me or my family youll find a reason to justify this abortion. So its legally amorphous. Eventually, and again well talk about this in a second, it goes out of the physicians hands. So as professional medicine strictly s strictly circumscribed what was an abortion it was only an exception for a womans life being in danger. So as this sapretis a pretty hae stance there are people who take advantage of this. You get the emergence of the abortion specialist in the 1930s and its strictly performing illegal abortions, but theyre taking advantage of new technologies perhaps, maybe even antibotics and theyre trying to fill this market niche for them. Were going to talk about the aborti abortion specialists. He proposed to him an idea for an organized criminal Abortion Syndicate that would span the entire west coast from seattle to the u. S. Mexico border. And what he he approached watts specifically because watts was an abortion specialist. He had developed this new method for performing an abortion called the vacuum aspiration technique, which sounds incredibly scary, but it meant that his abortions were safe. He was able to practice for years and he stayed under the radar. It reduced the risk of sepsis and infection because it basically removed all fetal tissue from the uterus, and thats why his method worked. So he approached watts. Watts came onboard, and between 1934 and 1936 rankin brought in several other abortion specialists and even some physicians. She created new offices, and by 1936 he had over 30 abortion specialists working for him. To most women who sought the services of rankin or any of the physicians working for him he himself was not an abortionist or specialist. He was the genius or the mastermind behind all of this. But if any woman went to one of their clinics it would seem just like any other visit to a Medical Clinic except a woman might be blindfolded, she might not see the person whos providing the procedure to her. Or she might have several doctors in the room with her at a time show she cant actually identify which one performed the procedure. But once the woman arrived for treatment she would tell the nurse or the receptionist how far along with her pregnancy and that would actually determine the cost. So the further along she was the more it would cost. Now, ideally they liked to charge between 30 and 50 for a procedure. And this was only in the first 6 to 8 weeks. If you were to put that into modern values, the gumps inflation calculator only goes up to 2019 right now. But if you were to put 35 to 50 in 2019 values that would be between 650 and 950. Now, again, this is only if shes in her first 6 to 8 weeks. If she was 12 weeks along the clinic could charge between 50 and 75 and beyond 12 weeks the clinic was supposed to collect as much as possible. 200, 250 and even 300. 250 would be about 4,700 today. Now, once the staff had collected forms and fees they would escort the patient to the operating room, then she would have her procedure. This is actually one of the physicians from this ring. If you want to read more about it read my book. Yes, it is illegal. So if were looking at, like, the values for example 660 is obviously a lot of money if were look at the modern day equivalent of that. You get a lot of young, working women who get these procedures. So maybe theyve saved some money. Maybe theyve taken a loan or borrowed some money from friends. We do see later some women actually turned in their fur coats or Engagement Rings instead because they might have been insured and they could say someone stole it or i lost it and they can use those valuable possessions as a way to cover this cost. I dont cover this in the lecture but they were actually they created their own credit arm so they helped to finance women who couldnt afford it up front. They charged more for it, but they created a payment plan for some of these women who couldnt pay for it up front. So they were very innovative. This ring was in operation for a few years. After some tips theres a series of raids and its eventually brought down by a joint task force of the lapd, the San Francisco Police Department and the Alameda County sheriffs. And all of the members of the ring were arrested. It was incredibly profitable, though. I dont think i can stress that enough. If were just looking at their Downtown Los Angeles office they netted the equivalent of about 85,000 per month. Thats lfr a all of their fees, commission, everything. That is their profit, 85,000 per month just from their downtown laufs. They also had offices in long beach, seattle, San Francisco, oakland and more. So theyre not doing too bad. The District Attorney when theyre doing the raids they find a wealth of paperwork and documentation. They found the names of patients and coerced them to testify on the stand. So this actually results in guilty verdicts for most of the conspirators. And in many respects this Pacific Coast abortion ring, their success was namely because they were provide space for illegal with abortions and also contributed to their demise. That in contrust to almost every other prosecuted case before this they didnt have any fatalities. No woman died in one of their clinics. They did not lose a single wop. And even though women were dying from illegal abortions elsewhere, they were not receiving their abortions from this clinic or any of their clinics. So this is really the antithesis of those abortion stories in the newspapers in the 1940s. For the first time it appears that illegal abortions could be safe, that you up in one of these newspaper stories about a young dead pretty girl. Questions . Yes. inaudible were they also facing consequences as well . Thats a good question. So technically they could be charged, but the District Attorney often said i wont charge you if you testify against them. So they work worst, they were told you can avoid criminal penalties if they were open and vocal and told about the procedure. This is Reginald Rankin and thats his mugshot. Before the case, successful abortions were basically invisible from the public, but with scores of living witnesses there are many it opens first richter enforcement of the statutes in california. Fewer physicians risk the procedure, unless theyre sure their client has a justifiable reason. On top of this, in the 1930s we begin to see more labor delivery and other Services Like this moving into the hospital, and legal abortions as well. So if legal abortions are moving into hospitals, whereas before they might have been performed in doctors offices, then the need for some of these clinics, or even their visibility comes under greater scrutiny. So now, theres effectively a lunar burden of truth necessary to bring illegal abortions to prison. If illegal abortions are taking place in hospitals, that clinics dont need spectrums, they dont need operating tables, they dont need any of those things because legal abortion should be taking place in the hospital. And if women are surviving their illegal abortions because of antibiotics and sterilized equipments, then they are coerced into testify against their abortionist. And in court, when these women are forced to testify, the attorneys dont really make any effort to try to understand why these women wanted to obtain these procedures. Most of the time they just ask did you have a illness or defect that would make you incapable of carrying this pregnancy to term . To this most women say no, they were maybe tired, or they previously had a difficult pregnancy, or they were not ready for another child, and so few of these women were given the opportunities to speak for themselves, or to explain themselves outside of the narrative that the District Attorney was trying to lean them towards. Some women do try to speak for themselves, and say that they were appreciative of rankin, and some of the other doctors. But that was it. Now under examination in court, these women were often forced to divulge details of their private lives, their six lives, the procedures, and even their bodies. Prosecutors ask them about what position they assumed on the, table whether they were naked, whether they felt the material inserted into them. She started crying, she said i had it, done is that not enough . You also have this Movement Towards surveillance. Thats what these two pictures are actually showing. These are women who are going in and out of court to testify against their abortionist. They are trying to hide their face. These are two surveillance operations. This is in los angeles. Police officers are parked across the street in cars, taking pictures, and washing watching the courthouse, watching who goes in and who goes out. Assessing their condition as they enter and exit. You see a woman in this one, just watching that one. So, for some of these women, instead of tolerating and invasive light of questioning, after what was probably a invasive abortion, other women can see this and started to look at their options. How can they escape this torment and shame thats been brought on by a public criminal trial . So what are the options for these women than after that . You can try to acquire and illegal abortion in this strict environment or you can seek out illegal provider. Im curious, so what was the reason behind the abortion being illegal . Did it have anything to do with their Womens Movement . Thats a very good point. Well mention the Eugenics Movement in a couple of slides. I frame it i guess in a different way in the next few slides. So it could be about ensuring that certain people are continuing to reproduce at a higher level. I am sure that the sentiment is there. It could also be concerns about morality. That they think its an immoral thing to do, because now the ama has been so successful in saying that these are, babies and that these are bad women. Especially if they are married women, and theyre trying to abort their pregnancies, then they are failing at what is supposed to define a proper womens rule. And this is something that i am talking about now, but about 80 of all the women in the period of study that i look at in los angeles county, about 80 of them were women. So were primarily looking at women consider deviant because of their choice to have an abortion, even though they should fit under this umbrella of normative sexuality. So this is deviant behavior for these women. I would stress that its ideologies about gender and reproduction that are important. Its obviously less about safety in some instances. Especially as you have sterilization of instruments, and antibiotics that become widely available in the 1940s. So i think gender ideologies play a prominent role. inaudible did it make it okay to have an abortion . Husbands were its a patchwork for that. In some instances husbands are brought to court to testify as well. In the examples of courtroom testimony ive looked at, its either one of two things. The husband was aware or the husband was like oh i didnt know, i thought she went to the market. So either the husband are part of it and part of the dishes and making process or theyre completely of live. Yes either it was a couples decision to do this, maybe the has been wasnt there and insulted. Or, you know, i dont know what she was doing, i just thought she was a little sick. Any other questions . Okay. So moving into the 19 forties and 19 fifties, and going back to these exceptions that remain for maternal life, now those these expectations for maternal life existed, advances in medical Technology Made it very rare to find a disease in a pregnant woman that would prevent her from carrying a pregnancy to term. Now there is a little bit of a global context as well. In 1938 there is a english case, but this drew global attention from the entire medical community. Publications in american medical journals reporting on this case just about every issue. And what the results of the case were, was they opened the door to therapeutic exceptions when the health of a woman was at risk. So it no longer had to be her life, shouldnt have to be deaths door for an abortion to be legal, but rather they could look at her health at large, whether that was medical health, mental health, physical health, not necessarily something that would manifest in her death. So in that context, the therapeutic designation that had already existed, becomes more amorphous in the 1940s. It becomes this valuable loophole for women seeking legal abortions. These Therapeutic Abortions required a private physician with hospital privileges, and it was a hospital procedure that was often coupled with a hospital state. So Therapeutic Abortions then become a class issue. It also becomes a race issue. This effectively precludes all physicians of color, because most physicians of color dont have hospital privileges, unless its an open hospital, so private hospitals overwhelmingly, a lot of those have restrictions on physicians of color. This also means right because of cost, because of the fact that its a hospital stay at a private physician, it means the typical recipients of this would be white women of means. They had the ability to afford this procedure, and all the care that went with it. And these women have some space to negotiate with their physicians, once this moves from life to health and becomes much more open to interpretation. At one point excessive vomiting is considered a appropriate reason for a Therapeutic Abortion. Or tired this. Or suicidal concerns. It becomes this bigger animal that people can kind of wrestle with. By the 19 fifties, especially the sixties, this flexibility is considered abuse. Exploitation of this loophole leads to the control of these decisions to hospital Therapeutic Abortion committees. So if a woman in the fifties and sixties wanted a legal abortion, a Therapeutic Abortion, then she would go to a regular physician. Then her physician would have to present her case before this committee. And then that committee will deliberate and return with a decision. So under this new regime, the rate of Therapeutic Abortion declines dramatically. County and state officials in california recorded the numbers of abortion cases brought before their committee. They recorded the number of cases that they approved, they kept track of all of these numbers, and they were particularly strict in the interpretations of what they thought constituted a acceptable reason for a Therapeutic Abortion. This doctor was a ob gyn and professor at the San Francisco medical center, and he stated that even though the number of applications for abortions had increased tenfold, they had a strict limit of five a week. There were things that began to push back against some of these blanket restrictions. Questions . One of these things that begins to push for better abortion legislation is the thalidomide disaster. The biggest manmade medical disaster. Ever it came out of a german company. It made people feel sleepy and relaxed. During the patent ink and testing of the drug, no one looked at the potential said facts are pregnant woman. Instead they just said it was safe, say for everyone, even during pregnancy. The reason they said it was safe as they could not find a dose of thalidomide so high that it could kill a rat. They assumed that meant it was safe. This drug was issued from 1957 in germany and other parts of europe, doctors later found out that it helped some of their patients reduce morning sickness. It became a very popular drug among pregnant women. But doctors in germany and other parts of europe began to notice an increase in kids born with birth defects. It wasnt until 1961 that they recognized that the link was thalidomide. Now im referencing information from the center of Bio Technical information. So im going to explain in laymans terms as best i can what the effects are of this drug. So thalidomide interferes with fetal development, especially when its taken in the first eight weeks of pregnancy. This is usually when pregnant women experience morning sickness. Thalidomide interferes with and tio genesis, the development of new blood vessels. In the first eight weeks of pregnancy is when things like limbs are beginning to develop. So the blood vessels that are in these limbs are relatively new, and more susceptible to toxicity of the areas that can relate to structural and functional defects. The specific type of this occurrence is a congenital malformation where the hands and feet are attached to shorter limbs. So globally, about 10,000 children are born with thalidomide related disabilities. By 1962 this drug was banned. Now the u. S. Doesnt see very much of this at all. The drug examiner in charge of the fda, a woman by the name of Francis Kelsey rejected their application for going on to the american market. She believed that test lacked sufficient proof of safety. We can thank her for that. There are still american women that get their hands on the drug. But it was never legally on the american market. We dont see it to the extent that some european nations see it. Questions . Now what we do see in the u. S. Though is the rubella or german measles outbreak. By the middle of the 1960s, about 20,000 babies were born with congenital rubella syndrome. Now congenital rubella syndrome is one babies are born with it. But rubella or german nozzles in an adult itself has very minimal effects, that utmost might be a rash, and some people exhibit no symptoms at all. But if a woman is pregnant when she has rubella, it manifest into great effect on the fetus. These defects or anomalies include deafness, blindness near muscular tightness, intellectual disability, and more. So this does happen in the United States. And we do see this in greater numbers in the United States. The vaccine for this wasnt developed until about 1970. So as physicians and scientists are scrambling, trying to figure out what to do, a lot of positions are encouraging people exposed to rubella to get an abortion, which is pushing on the limits that most states have for legal abortion. Because the disease itself does not affect the life of the women, or even her health, except for the life of her fetus. So the thalidomide tragedy and the german measles outbreak, they do manifest into calls for the relaxation of existing abortion laws in the United States and in europe. One of the most visible cases regarding abortion and these tragedies involves this woman, Sherri Chessen i remember hearing a oral history where she said that she was upset about what names was referred to. She preferred chessen. She was the host of a Public Access television show. She was a teacher in this television show. There were first grade kindergarten kids, they did the pledge of allegiance, they play little games in the tv show. She was the teacher. Now in 1962 she sought a legal abortion in a hospital, because she had taken thalidomide. He was aware of whats going. On she was concerned her child would be the. Formed she scheduled this abortion, but she was also concerned about other women. If she was able to get a hold of the drug, she knew that there were probably other women in america who got a hold of it to. So she spoke to the press under the condition of anonymity. She wanted to make the dangers of thalidomide known to american women. But somehow, someone got a hold of the hospital, found out about her procedure, and her Hospital Physician basically contacted her to let her know that the abortion was canceled. And this story became a sensation. She soon realized she had no prospect of getting illegal abortion in her state of arizona, so she was able to fly to sweden, where abortion was legal, and she had the procedure there. After the abortion was completed, it only had one arm, no. Legs it was affected by the thalidomide. When she returned she lost her job at the rubber. Room the mother of five was no longer thought to be safe around children. Her family received Death Threats. People were threatening her children who are alive. The even put Death Threats on their dog. So this was something that actually generated a lot of public attention. But there were other people who said we need common sense abortion legislation. We cant just have a blanket ban. We need to take some other things into consideration as well. Now Sherri Chessen and her husband worth the wealthiest people, but they had connections, and thats how they were able to get the abortion in sweden. Had Sherri Chessen not talked to the press, her abortion likely would have been carried out without a problem, legally in this arizona hospital. But if were looking at the experiences of other women, especially looking at poor women and women of color, if these movement dont have a physician acting as their advocate, than they are perhaps more at risk. If were looking at the, thirties forties, and through the sixties looking at things like the war on poverty. If these women had a condition that permitted a Therapeutic Abortion, they were likely to be sterilized as well. Well talk more about sterilization in the sixties and seventies when we look at the right to parent. But just understand that this is going on in the background as well. That if a womans heredity or genetics dictate eight abortion for this unborn child then why not prevent other future children from being born as well after tactics are the problem. So if a woman wants an abortion, but does not want to risk her odds that the committee, or if she does not have a condition, or if she maybe wants children in the future, that her odds are still likely to be in the hands of a legal abortionist. Thats where her best odds are for getting illegal. Abortion for many women in 1953 that legal abortion would be across the border in mexico. Now women of means have been traveling for abortions for years, going to places like mexico, city japan, and sweden. The laws there were more relaxed. Now again that precludes a lot of other women. You need to be able to afford a plane, ticket you need to be able to afford a week stay and all these other things. But an important transformation takes place in california with suburban is a, shun Highway Infrastructure development, the automobile becomes a important facet of california life. More americans in the 20th century, more californians in the 20th century begin to travel and use their cars to go to places like mexico, to maybe have some fun, to maybe engage in drinking, in prohibition america, or maybe engage in other behavior thats somehow considered improper in american society. So as these inroads and travel roads develop, they are using freeway roads and personal vehicles and theyre going across the border as well. Question so far . Okay. So lets go back to Reginald Rankin, because were not done with him yet. After he serves time in san clinton, he tries to create a new abortion rang, and he goes to prison for that one as well. He eventually makes his way back to california. He meets up with this doctor. Reagan actually try to get buffum to join the abortion ring. They become reacquainted sometime after 1950. Together, these two men decided to create a new abortion business. They opened up an office in long beach california, and they would help make arrangements for women seeking abortions. Now once a woman approached them, they would take their phone number, call them, and decide on a designated Meeting Place. From that designated Meeting Place either, buffum or rankin would send the woman to new mexico where the procedure was performed. After the women were driven back and they went their separate ways. In a specific case that brought about their arrest, three of the four women the transported required hospitalization after their procedures. The men were initially convicted, and found guilty of violating californias abortion. La things got interesting upon appeal. This involves conspiracy to commit a crime in another place. The crime didnt take place in california. You cant assume this Supreme State that the legislator attempted to regulate behavior that took place outside the geographic bounce of the state. So the court effectively recommended the movements, power and their convictions were overturned. So this decision basically opens the floodgates of american abortion tourism to nearby cities. Because they won their appeal, they effectively singlehandedly became responsible for the development of this abortion Tourism Industry in the 19 fifties and sixties. Particularly in the sixties in tijuana you have american womens demands that are basically creating a opportunity for this thriving black market in backs mexico border cities. Tijuana and some of these other places are cheaper than legal but maybe cost prohibitive abortions in the u. S. , and maybe even illegal abortions in the u. S. And you dont need a plane ticket. You dont need to stay for a week. If you are california woman, using our highways and automobiles, you can take care of an abortion within a matter of a dccc. So mexican abortions effectively enter the cultural mainstream. There even the basis of the storyline of the famous historical romance of 1960. Six women start to take advantage of this opportunity now. There are instances where women, College Students charter a bus, they get a group of women to basically go to the border, to have their abortions over the course of a weekend. You have other women who meet people in parking lots, and are transported. And youve other women who simply rent a car and go over the border themselves and hair care of this. So this decision creates a legal void, and Law Enforcement officials were trying desperately to fill it. At one point the san diego District Attorney said that law officials recognize that this law prohibited prosecution of any, case even if they meet arrangements in california and paid for it in california. He said it appears as long as the buffum cases stands the abortion mills will continue to operate in mexico. Yes. So the office was set up, and thats where he made all the negotiations. And then they would travel with the patients to mexico . And thats how they got away with that. The actual abortion took place outside of california. Well, and this was some 20 years after rankin had been found guilty. Yes that was in 53, the other case was in the thirties. He did time for, that and then he did sometime in nevada, skipping over. That then he goes back to the abortion business in california. He is a very interesting character, that we cant spend too much time on, but any other questions . So im trying to understand, why was he so adamant about is it just for the money . For rankin, what is he could going back to abortion . I think he was always looking for a get rich quick scheme from what ive seen. I dont know if he was interested in womens rights, or if he was just motivated by profits. Before this he did some nefarious taxi dealings in real estate and property real estates. Im not sure if he realized that abortion was very lucrative and this could be a better option, but he obviously made very good connections in the thirties that he decides to spend basically the rest of his life, he dies in 30, five he spent the rest of his life trying to figure out his abortion business. I had a brief exchange with his daughter at one point, and she said he was a man ahead of his time. I dont know if she has this complicated feeling about him, so i choose maybe not to look at the moral aspect, was he a good or bad guy. Instead i say, he was an astute businessman at his prime, and he did provide congresswoman with safe procedures. How i feel about his motivations i suppose is irrelevant to what actually happened. Other questions . Okay. So after the buffum, case, california legislators try to pass the loophole, they didnt do anything to stop what had already begun in california and the Mexican Border towns. The concern about the tijuana abortions grow, i use it as a blanket term. Its often used as a term to refer to abortions that take place at the mexico border, regardless of where they actually occur. The problem becomes more apparent in the fifties and sixties through increased regulation. Specifically Senate Committees on, vice operation what back, drug smuggling at crime happily debated in public, and in context of the period, a lot of americans felt that border towns were particularly susceptible to vice or evil or corruption or danger. So, its also important to note, ive kind of been like rankin, none of the people died. Its important to know as the Abortion Ministry on the border grows, there are more opportunities for people to provide their services. There are desperate woman sometimes at the border to accept the services of the first person they. Find they dont research for the most qualified person. They just take the first abortion that they have. So you do have scores of unqualified abortionists who are able to operate, and they are pushing these procedures. Its also important to note that just because a abortion is bought doesnt mean that its deadly or fatal. It could also mean that women arent getting hygienics procedures, the instruments are not carefully sanitize, not getting pain relievers, so for some of these over that get these identity procedures, when they get to the United States they have to go to a emergency room to either help themselves, to complete the abortions, sometimes the abortions are partial, or even to save their life. So as these county hospitals in los angeles especially, as theyre treating these women, theyre basically performing dilations to complete these procedures that have been botched in mexico. So tijuana portions come to be remembered as particularly crude. And when the last physician in the long line of positions referred a woman to a abortionist, he did so because he feared she would turn to buttery in tijuana. Yes. Are there cases of women who receive a abortion and then were able to have kids afterwards . I would imagine. For someone, especially if it had a infection, in the most grave instances, organs are taken out to stop infection or stop spread of some kind of bacteria, so there are those instances. Or if someone slipped, and a instrument pictured a uterus, that happened as. Well so there are instances where it happens. I dont have as many examples on the top of my head. In 1966, doctor leon was found guilty of abortion and conspiracy to commit abortion. He appealed. He claimed that he feared his patients would revert to butchering in tijuana. As agree opportunist, he referred her to an illegal abortionist procedure. He referred to an illegal abortionist that he trusted for this procedure. You recognize her desperation. The court of appeals affirmed the lower courts decision in 1967. He ends up taking this case to the California Supreme Court where it is decided in 1969. In his appeal at the California Supreme Court, he is challenging the constitutionality of the abortion law. The potential butchering that he feared, he believed was sufficient to save to say that her life was in danger. According to court records, doctor belous claimed he was very familiar with the abortion in tijuana. They were taking their lives in their own hands. In fact, just weeks after the abortion of the clients he referred, there was a wife of a Woodland Hills dentist who died from an illegal abortion in mexico. Specifically, doctor belous is concerned that his patient was going to seek abortion in tijuana under substandard medical conditions. The basis of his concerns relied on the fact that illegal abortions were dangerous, that Mexican Borders offered american women abortions. Illegal abortions in mexico or worse than any abortions in the United States. When this case went before the California Supreme Court, they debated tirelessly over legal questions that were put forth. Courts had already rejected the interpretation of abortion laws that require certainty or immediacy of death. Two prior cases in california had already established that requiring certainty of death with a bridge of womens Constitutional Rights, specifically her right to privacy and her right to life. Furthermore, the court didnt seem to recognize that abortion laws did not reduce the number of abortions, but the number of safe abortions that took place. If we look at contemporary evidence, hygienics abortions that were performed or early and pregnancy resulted in minimal risks, while illegal abortions where the greatest cause of Maternal Death in california. While not all illegal abortions and didnt death, the rate of infection from illegal abortions were significantly higher than that of legal abortions. In an amicus brief, submitted to the court on behalf of belous they said that the abort unfortunate reality was that the statutes that had been designed in 1850 to protect women had in modern times become a scourge. The California Supreme Court ultimately reversed doctor belouss conviction. Its stated that the law was vague. California ended up decriminalizing abortions. Other states would have followed whether or not california was the first, californias ruling and belous basically represents the end of this era of criminalization. In the context of the civil rights new movement and shifting public sentiment on the issue of abortion, the California Supreme Court abandon the efforts to continue criminalizing this procedure. By 1970, a number of states had begun to push forth the existing several abortion laws including hawaii, new york and washington. That this has not yet been decided at the federal level. Questions . California decriminalize is in 1969. And it was based on the ruling of doctor belous . Yes. His conviction was overturned. Other questions . In 1969, norma discovered that she was pregnant. In order to secure illegal abortion in texas where she lived, she claims that the pregnancy was the result of a rape however since there were no Police Reports documenting the rays rape, she was unable to secure legal abortion. She attempted to acquire an illegal abortion. When she went and she found out the police that already shut down the clinic. Out of options, she reached out to a law school graduate. Mccorvey who is pictured on the left took the alias jane roe. This is several years after the decision. She took the alias jane roe. The two young attorneys argued that the texas law violated her constitutional right. Row claimed that her life was not endanger. That there was another requirement for legal abortion in texas and that she could not afford to leave the state. But she had a right to be able to have an abortion under the same medical conditions. Like the argument in belous roe and her attorneys claim that the abortion statute was unconstitutionally vague and it violated several of her rights, including first, fourth, fifth and 14th amendment rights. In the end of this cake, we are skipping over a few things. In the end, the court does agree to an imperfect trimester system. Delineating when abortion is legal or illegal. According to the Supreme Court justices, since the medical community argued that fetuses could be viable after six months, then the state had the rights or interest to protect fetal life after that point. Of course, providing inception for maternal life. But before viability, before six months, the court does not have enough sorry, the state does not have enough of a conflicting interest in the fetus or embryo to stop a woman from getting an abortion. It is in roe v. Wade that abortions become legal and protected in the United States. Law there have been challenges to row, basically almost immediately. Since roe, the u. S. Supreme court has affirmed the right to an abortion and also stated that it cannot ban abortions outright for viability and any restrictions the state puts in place must make exceptions to protect the womens life. An opposition to roe began almost immediately once the court was decided, once the case was decided that it was relatively quiet. In 1977, the Hyde Amendment was passed. It was banned to use federal dollars for abortion coverage for women who were rosy, whose picture here is often cited as the victim of the height amendment. In 1976 and went into effect in august of 77. She was 27 years old in 1977. She was a student. She was trying to become a teacher so she could have a better life for herself and for her daughter. Abortion was legal where she lived it was costly. She had approached a physician about illegal abortion and was informed it would cost about 400 dollars. She relied on welfare and a legal abortion was cost for habited. She had a Financial Aid check for 700 dollars in her purse but she wanted to use that to finish her studies because she was so close. Instead, she consulted an unlicensed, cheaper abortionist and paid that person 75 dollars. He quickly developed a bacterial infection. She was rushed to an average and see room where the infection spread. And even though doctors attempted to stop it by getting her an emergency hysterectomies, it was not long before she had total organ failure and died. The Hyde Amendment was challenged in courts. You have attorneys for planned parenthood of new york city, the American Civil Liberties union at the center of the Constitutional Rights. They filed a class action suit on behalf of women on medicaid who wanted access to abortions and doctors who accepted medicaid who wanted to be able to provide abortions. However, the u. S. Supreme court ultimately decided that since states were not required to pay a refund abortions for medicaid recipients, and the Hyde Amendments did not violate the Constitutional Rights of women. Either results, many other individual states began to follow this course and according to one report, within a year of the implementation of the Hyde Amendment, the number of federally abortions drop from 290,000 to 2000. The center for disease control, even conducted an eight month longitudinal study to determine the effects on restricting access of public funds for abortion. The steady had some flaws. It was small. There were other issues that affected its interpretation, but they did find that medicaid women and non funded states who had complications after abortions, they averaged about 1. 9 weeks later gestational age and their counterparts in states that were medicaid eligible women and non had a 2. 4 later gestational age. The non medicaid women in the states. So what that basically means is that women who are on medicaid had to wait longer to get a safe abortion, and were at increased risk of death and complication. 20 for just a week of delay. So these women were already at a disadvantage. More recently, and this is related to a lot of what we are seeing now, a lot of people often reference roe v. Wade and overturning roe, but some people would accept argue that access to abortion is more defined by in 1989 bob casey signed the abortion control act. It was one of the first attempt by individual state to restrict Abortion Access after roe, not the first but one of the first. There were several provisions in the act that included informed consent, spousal notification, waiting periods, parental consent for minors, and clinics would be required to report all the Demographic Data to the state. So when d. C. Signed the act, it was challenged by many doctors. It turned into the class action suit planned versus casey. Attorneys for the appellate argued that the pennsylvania abortion control act overturned roe since it imposed so many regulations on women trying to receive abortions and the doctors trying to provide. Them on the other had the attorneys for the defendants argue they werent overturning roe, they just wanted to be judged on a undue burden test. In prior challenges to roe, the Supreme Court had already decided to. Things but the existence of a fundamental right, and the enjoyment of a fundamental right were mutually exclusive. Just because you have a right to do something doesnt mean you get to do something. And since states have a interest in protecting potential life, they could favor childhood and adoption, and not abortion. So the majority in planned parenthood versus casey held on to the tenets of roe, that the state has the right to restrict abortions after viability, and that the state has an interest in protecting the life of a woman and the potential child. Nevertheless, in their opinions for this case, the majority existing trimester standard. The undue burden standard is more flexible, and it reflects state interest in protecting fetal life. The judges also held that pennsylvanias restrictions did not constitute a undue burden. So when these judges are moving away from a trimester system that says abortions are legal from here to, here and were going to put restrictions from here to here. When you are now moving towards a undue burden system in recent states can develop rules and regulations that stay in place until someone takes them to court and says it constitutes a undue burden. It moves away from the doctor patient relationship, and it puts abortion back into the courts. So abortion remains legal, but this ruling creates opportunities for new regulation, that at least limit abortions or make some more inconvenient. Does that make sense . So looking more recently. Since 2010 the u. S. Abortion landscape has become increasingly restrictive. There were 338 abortion restrictions and acted between 2010 and 2016. 30 of the restrictions enacted since roe v. Wade were and acted in the last seven years. Now more and more legislatures are playing on abortion laws, played with liability and also this undue burden. Test the number of abortion providing facilities drops. As of 2019, 58 of women of reproductive age live in states that are considered hostile to abortion. When only about 24 Million People of reproductive age live in states that are supportive of reproductive abortion rights. That is what is here. They very. Alabama for example attempted to ban all abortions. Guess what some states focus specifically on banning certain types of procedures for a shin, or reasons for abortions. So since they actually prohibit from people from getting abortions, theyre doing it because the child is the wrong sex, has down syndrome, or some other anomaly. 21 states require a specified waiting period between mandated counseling and procedure. These usually very between 24 and 72 hours. Sometimes this means that women have to make multiple trips to the clinic. So if you recall from the documentary, some of these women are traveling five hours to get this procedure. And theyre doing that to bypass the waiting period, or imagine if they have to do that because of the weight. Period death to do it twice. 18 states require that a woman gets counseling before having an abortion. So who has abortions in the United States . As this graph illustrates, the u. S. Abortion rate actually reached a historic low in 2017. Thats about 13. 5 abortions per 1000, woman when roe was decided that number was 18. 3 . The statistics im going to indicate, now theyre from 2014, according to them, about one in four women will have an abortion by the age of 40. Five 34 of abortion recipients in 2014 range from 20 to 24. 27 of people between the ages of 25 and 29 mean that half of the people who get abortions are in the 20s. 51 of the patients who had abortions in 2018 were using some other method of Birth Control at the time that they became pregnant. 59 of them already had children, or had previously given birth at some time. Approximately 75 of abortion recipients and 2014 were poor, meaning that they made under the federal poverty level, or they were low income, meaning that they made 100 or 199 of the federal poverty level. Globally, concerns over zika virus in latin america have also reignited some discussions about Abortion Access in countries where the procedure was completely illegal. Again, we see that this potential for a baby being born with severe abnormalities have at least been sufficient for reigniting in these catholic nations. This has not materialized into any new policies. Abortion has remained a topic of public debate, but in recent years it has gained more attention through some of these restrictive legislation acts. Overwhelmingly these acts call for waiting times, spousal consent, that channel ultrasounds, and even preventing the dispensation of the anti abortion drugs, or preventing that in clinics that dont have an operating room. Many of these regulations disproportionally affect young women, rural women, women of color, and low income women. These acts illustrate a failure to recognize that historically, abortion restriction has done more harm than good. Despite increased attention, abortion in the u. S. To continue to decline, and some argue that this is because of better access to other forms of Birth Control like pills, condoms and ieds. Others argue it is because of increased societal acceptance of parenthood and marriage decreased significance. Even though it does not mean that this procedure has lost its significance. These laws do not discourage women from submitting to unimpressed petitioners devices. And theyre dissemination, these abortion restrictions deny women access to save hygienics medical procedures and they simply advance the notion that a womans body belongs to anybody but herself. Questions . Thats it. Tonight. What we are going to do today is start something very new and very distinct in