Gutierrezromine teaches a class about laws and policies regard ago bor regarding abortion. She tracks Public Opinion through court cases and newspaper kofrncoverage. She also describes costs and health risks in different time periods and states. All right. Everyone, welcome back. This week were looking at the topic of abortion. And in class on tuesday we watched the film abortions stories womens health. That is looking at the more current debates about abortion now. It was looking at abortion in states that had begun to legislate abortion restriction. So today were actually going to go back in time a little bit. Were going to give some Historical Context and do a historical overview of the topic of abortion and were going to start nationally and then were going to look at california specifically, specifically on the topics of specialized abortion or abortion specialists and decriminalization. And then were going to go back to the National Context to look at roe v. Wade and then the legislation that has happened since then and in the more recent years. So if you recall from around, you know, week one or two, we had a very brief introduction to the topic of abortion in the colonial period. We talked about sarah grassmanner and her abortion in the 1740s. So we had had a very brief introduction to it. But today were actually going to pick up around the tomb of the comstock act. Do you remember the comstock act from a week ago . Can you remind us . [ inaudible ] information on planned parenthood. No advertising of contraseptives and the stock of the male. So good. The act effectively made it criminal to advertise these things beginning around 1873. Now we showed you guys the political cartoon if you recall, comstock was carrying a woman and the caption was she gave birth to a naked baby. You know. The punch line is that comstock is prude. I doesnt oppose all methods of Birth Control. Does encourage couples to use methods of Birth Control he considers dignified or ethical. Those include abstinence. They also include the rhythm method where you avoid sexual intercourse at moments when 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 condoms, diagrams or abortion because of their connection to the vice trade. Now we mentioned when we were talking about the progressive era and womens reform movements that 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 need to continue working. So when were putting this again back in the context, this is a refresher, of the 19th century, were looking at gender ideology, separate spheres 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. Again if, youre married. And at worst, theyre immoral. And if youre a sickle womngle attempting to usive in te any o methods, youre considered immoral. So lets look at an example of a 19th century abortionist. Now this is the example of madame restell. Her name was first ann troe. She was born in 1812. She is the woman you went to if you wanted an abortion in new york city. In 1836, she married a man named charles lowman. And thats when she began to embark on this career as a professor of womens medicine, a midwife, but also an abortionist and supporter of contraceptives. Her husband supported her and in this together. So the patent medicines that may have been effective, they made the most money providing abortions, illegal abortions. The she became very well known. 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 foremaning performing an abortion on a woman and resulting in her death. She has several various subsequent brushes with the law. But some of the critics against her cited the fact that 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 settled out of court. So in the one trial after which shes found guilty and actually does have to serve time in prison, that was her trial in 1847, she receives such special treatment in prison that the city council actually investigated and the warden of the president 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 her stepdaughter got married in 1854, she 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 four story brown stone on fifth avenue which is very prime real estate in new york city. So theyre not slumming it over there. After charles died, it looked like ann was going to retire. But in 1878, Anthony Comstock disguised himself as a potential customer. He approached her and pretended to need contraceptive materials. He made a bunch 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 legal maneuvering. She had her attorney try to help her out. But it was all to no avail. She was actually really going to do hard time for this trial. And so on april 1st, 1878, the day her trial was going to begin, she slit her throat with a carving knife in her bathtub. Of thats what this artist renditioning is trying to show. Now some people did criticize comstock for entrapment. He was nonchalant about it. He called it a bloody end to a bloody life. Her estate was valued at 1 million which is valued at 25 million today. Questions so far . Okay. Comstock is not the only person who was opposed to abortion at this time. And its important to note that the 19th century is an era of transition when were looking at the abortion business. The 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 material, the wide dissemiconductzemation material 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 state actually beginning to implement some of the first abortion laws. And most of these legislators imagine that these laws are a form of consumer protection. That theyre creating the 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, 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 long kind of spoon like device. You cant tell but it is serrated. And so this would be used to perform an abortion. And you would dilate the cervix. You would insert the device and scrape the uterine walls. So if you have someone who is unskilled or who is not a qualified medical professional this could be potentially dangerous and deadly to a woman. So to an extent these laws do function to protect women because theyre trying to keep the wrong people from performing these procedures. This doctor believed that medical men were the guardians of women and children. He is the example of an American Medical Association member in the 19th century. He is from new england. He went to harvard. And he was really religious. He was a member of one of the first generations of, you know, gynecologists who are basically moving into the sprabrand new f. He is a contemporary of jay marian sims who we read about in medical bondage. He is most well known for the efforts to irrad indicate the practice of abortion. He is responsible for make ago borgs a moral issue for the first time. That previously no one was really interested or invested in the moral implications of abortion. No one talked about abortion in a moral way before. At least not in relation to it being a potential person. But he and others like him began to refer to abortion as prenatal or even murder. They emphasized their own education and specialization to basically argue that they were the people who were best in the position to lobby the government to basically ir basically irrads practice. This is part of that as well. Because its usually mid wives and physicians of color who were most likely to perform abortions. So its not just about the moral thing. Its about suggesting that these other people should not be qualified to practice medicine. We are. We medical Association Members are. Mu as a result of this campaign, good doctors did not perform abortions unless it was absolutely necessary to protect the life of a woman. By 1880, all states have laws against abortion. Questions . Yeah . Before the moral element was added, what was the reasons they had against abortion . It was more about, you know, sex being for pro creation and that it should be within the confines of marriage. So it was less about the fact that this was a person and more about this meant you were having, you know, immoral sex practices. Did they get a bunch of doctors that say hey were the authority now . Its a bunch of physicians that organize themselves and saying were creating standards. Were its not backed by the government. They form their own lobbying group. Were going to define the standards of professional medicine and we are we are going to kind of be gatekeepers for this purpose. We have mainline position on things and we basically become a lobbying group after that. Other questions . Okay. So you have dr. Storer and other people putting forth this kind of moral and Educational Campaign but another thing that is adding fuel to this movement to get rid of abortion was the proliferation of abortion stories in the press. Now most women who acquire abortions in the late 19th and early 20th century, they do so quietly using referrals from friends, sisters, coworkers, maybe even trusted physicians and many of these women secretly have successful abortions and we dont know anything about them. But these arent the women who become topics of conversation in popular culture. But you have this sensationalism of publicized abortion related deaths that provide 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 abortions. Undercover reporters actually ended up releasing a 25part expose called infanticide to talk about the dangers of illegal abortion and the providers in new york city. So in this vision, theinvestiga journalists went undercover. They pretended to be a couple. And in this long form expose, they transported readers of their newspaper to the abortion underworld and exposed physicians, mid wives and Police Officers who were basically receiving bribeos or were somehw involved in this trade. So use ago borgs storiing abortd the newspapers to profit because can you spread the stories out for days at a time. You can give a little bit one day and drag the story out for a week or two weeks if you wanted. Now if you recall, a couple weeks ago we saw short clip from the 1934 film road to ruin. If you remember they were having a party and even they were taken away by a female Police Officer and then they were medically inspected. And then eve had syphilis and she reforms and change hers life and ann finds out shes pregnant. And so when i turned off the clip i told you, you know, anns boyfriend tells her hes not going to marry and he takes her to have an illegal abortion and she dies. That was a filming sample. You have the stories of sex and of jilted lovers, coverups and death. Its really titillating for whoever is reading or watching them. But its important to note that they also fit within the larger framework. Its not just about stopping abortion. Its also fitting within other attempts to regulate sexuality. So make sure that sexuality was conforming with heterosexual practices, repressing homosexuality, preventing abortion, policing prostitution, and preventing the dem natiissen of obscene material. Womens sexuality fits within a certain framework and that framework is marital reproductive sex. Every else should be shamed. So these women who die from these procedures, they cant conceal their identity or their practices anymore. They kind of serve as Cautionary Tales for everyone else. Questions . Even though there is this policing, abortions dont disappear. And by the 1920s, the campaign, the a many. Ama campaign created a hostile environment for women seeking the 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 you know the physicians are cracking down on other providers. But even if Law Enforcement is also 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 that the procedure is not banned in and of itself. Rather, the circumstances around a borgs indicate whether the procedure is legal or illegal. So this means that an abortion can be legal for one woman and illegal for another. Or even legal for one womans pregnancy and illegal for the 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. But if a woman is 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 there is no 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 in abortion was medically necessary and this is considered illegal abortion. If they believe their patient has a condition that will threaten her life, he or she can schedule the procedure and thats it. But if physicians are hard line ama members like storer, they may be less inclined to provide the procedure. Yeah . What if they went to another city . Were they able to get an abortion . The states vary in every single state. And they may not even have to go to another state. They can maybe find another physician who they can convince that they should have a legal abortion. Thats a really interesting and good point that bianca brought up because by the 1950s and 1960s, this legal distinction is important. By the time we get to the 1950s and 1960s, 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 the committee. So its no longer your individual physician who says, yep, i think that this is necessary. Its now three to five physicians you never met to determine whether or not they think you should have an abortion or not. Well get there in a little bit though. But what is interesting also is that for some women this creates a space for and if we want this fogs to continue working for me and my family, youll find a reason to justify this abortion. So its legally amorphis. So as they circumscribe what constitutes legal abortions, in the 1920s, its only an exception for life. It was only an exception for a womans life being in danger. So as this is a pretty hard line stance, there are other people who take advantage of this. You get the emergence of the abortion specialist in the 1930s. And the abortion specialist is strictly performing illegal abortions. But theyre taking advantage of new technologies, perhaps, maybe even antibiotics and they are trying to kind of fill this market niche for them. So were going to talk about one of these abortion specialists in california. Its not just one. Its like 30 of them. In 1934, reginald renkin approached doctor george watts and proposed to him for an idea of an illegal Abortion Syndicate that would span the entire west coast from seattle to the u. S. Mexico border. And watts 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 40 years. And he stayed under the radar. It reduced the risk of sexist and infection because it basically removed all fetal tissue from the uterus and thats why his method worked. So renken approached watts. Watts came onboard and between 1934 and 1936, renkin brought in several other abortion specialists and even some physicians. He created new offices and by 1936, he had over 30 abortion specialists working for him. To most women who sought the services of renkin or any of the physicians working for him, he was not an abortionist or a specialist. He was the genius or the master behind mastermind behind all of this. But if any woman went to one of the clinics, it would seem just like any other visit to another medical clinic. Except a woman might be blindfolded. She might not see the person who is providing the procedure to her. Or she might have several doctors in the room with her at a time so that she can 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 determine the cost. So the further along she was, the more it would cost. Now ideally they would like 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, yes the governments calculator goes up to 100. Again again, this is only if in the first six to eight weeks. If he had is 12 weeks along, they charge 50 to 75, maybe 100. Beyond 12 weeks, the clinic was supposed to collect as much money as possible. 200, 250, or even 300. And i put some of the values here for you. So 250 would be about 4700 today. Now once the staff had collected forms and fees, they would escort the patient to the operating room and then she would have her procedure. This is actually one of the physicians. Yeah . So this was an underground ring . Yes, its illegal. Was it mostly for wealthy people . So if were looking at like the values, for example, 660, its obviously a lot of money if were looking at the modern day equivalent of that. You get a lot of young working women who get these procedures. So maybe they saved some money. Maybe they taken a loan or borrowed money from friends. We see later that some women actually turned in fur coats or Engagement Rings instead because they might have been insured and they can say someone stole it or lost it and then they can kind of use those valuable possessions as a way to cover this cost. I dont cover this in the lecture. But they were actually so organized they created their own credit arm so they helped to finance women who couldnt afford it up front. They charged more for it. But it created a payment plan for some of the women who could not pay for it up front. They were very innovative. Yeah. This ring, theyre in operation for a few years, after many tips, there is a series of raids. Its eventually brought down by giant task force of the lapd, San Francisco Police Department andal meeta county sheriffs. Will all members of the ring were arrested. Its incredibly profitable though. I dont think i can stress that enough. If were just look teg Downtown Los Angeles office, they netted the equivalent of about 85,000 per month. Thats after all of their fees, commissions, everything. That is their profit, 85,000 per month, just from the downtown l. A. Office. They also had offices in san diego, 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 rirngs t ring, the success was because they were able to provide safe illegal abortions and it also contributed to their demise. That in contrast to almost every other prosecution, every other prosecuted case before this, they didnt have any fatalities. No women died in their clinics. They did not lose a single woman. 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 abortion stories in the newspapers from the 1920s. That for the first time, it appears that illegal abortions could be safe. That you might not end up in one of these newspaper stories about a young dead pretty girl. Questions . So far . Yeah . Because the women are going to these illegal clinics, were they also facing any consequences as well . Thats a good question. So technically they could be charged. But they the District Attorney often said i wont charge you if you testify against them. So they were coerced. They were encouraged or urged. They were basically told they could avoid criminal penalties if they were open and vocal and told about the procedure. Yeah. This is reginald renkin and thats his mug shot. Before the renkin case, before people of the state of california verse reginold rankin, successful abortions were invisible. But with scores of living witnesses, there is a mountain of evidence against these people. And so what this case does, i argue, is that it opened for stricter enforcement for the statutes in california. Fewer risk performing the procedure unless theyre sure the patient has a clear, justifiable reason. Furthermore, on top of this, in the 1930s we begin to see more labor, deliver and other services moving into the hospital and abortions, legal abortions as well. So if legal abortions are moving into hospitals, whereas before they might have been performed in doctor offices, then the need for some of the clinics or even their visibility comes under great scrutiny. So now there is effectively a lower burden of proof that is necessary to bring an illegal abortionist to prison. If legal abortions are taking place in hospitals, then clinics dont need speculums or operating tables because abortions, legal abortions, should be taking place in a hospital. And if women are surviving the illegal abortions because of antibiotics, they could be coerced into testifying against their abortionist. And in court, when these women are forced to testify, the attorneys doenl really make any effort to try to understand why these women wanted to obtain these procedures. Most of the time they asked did you have a illness or defect making you uncapable of carrying this pregnancy to term and they responded no, they didnt have a disease or defect. They were tired or previously had a difficult pregnancy or werent ready for another child. And so few of the women were given the opportunities to speak for themselves or to explain themselves outside of the narrative that the d. A. Was trying to lean them towards. Some try to speak for themselves and said they were appreciative of rankin and the other doctors but that was it. Now under examination in court these women wore on forced to divulge details of their private lives, the sex lives and procedures and even their bodies. Prosecutors asked them about what positions they assumed on the table, whether they were naked, draped, if they felt the speculums being inserted into them. So when grace peterson, for example, took the stand she started crying and she said i told you had it done, isnt that enough . You also have this Movement Toward surveillance. And that is what these two pictures are showing. These are women going in and out of court to testify against their abortionists. Theyre trying to hide their face. And these are actually two different surveillance operations. So this is actually in redlands and then this is in l. A. So you have Police Officers parked across the street in cars taking pictures and watching the office of a presumed abortionist and just keeping track of who goes in and who comes out and how they assess their condition to be as they enter and exit. So you see a woman in this one and theyre just watching in that one. So for some of the women, instead of tolerating an invasive line of questioning after what was probably an invasive abortion, other women kind of see this and began to look for other options. How could they escape this torment and shame brought on by a public criminal trial. So what are the options for these women then after that . You could try to acquire a legal abortion in a more strict environment. Or you could continue to try to take your chances with an illegal provider. Questions . Im just curious, so during that time, what was the reason behind the abortion being illegal . Did it have anything to do with past movement that is a really great point. And well mention the eugeneix movement in a couple of moments but i frame it in a different way in the next couple of slides. So it could be about ensuring that certain people are continuing to reproduce at a higher level. Im sure that sentiment is there. It could also just be concerns about morality. They think it is an immore thing to do because now the a. M. A. Is saying these are babies and these are bad women. Right. And if they are married women and trying to abort their pregnancies, then theyre failing at what is supposed to define a proper womans role. And this is something that i dont talk about now, but about 80 of all of the women in the period of study that i look at in Los Angeles County, 80 were married women. So were primarily looking at women considered deviant because of their choice to have an abortion even though she should fit under the umbrella of normal sexuality. So this is deviant behavior for these women. So i would stress that it is ideology and it is less about safety in some instances as you have sterilization of instruments and antibiotics that become available widely in the 1940s. So i think gender ideology plays a prominent role. [ inaudible question ]. Husbands were a patch work. In some instances husbands are brought to court to testify as well. In the examples of like courtroom testimony that ive looked at, it is one of two things. Either the husband knew and he was aware and drove her there personally or the husband is like i dont know, i thought she was going to the market and i didnt see her for hours. So it is the husbands are either part of it and part of the decisionmaking process or their oblivious. And that is the only two extremes i found in the Court Records that i looked at. It was either a couples decision to do this, maybe the husband wasnt there but he was consulted and husbands for the 80 of them, or i dont know what she was doing, i just thought she was a little sick. Other questions . Okay. So moving into like the 1940s and 1950s and maybe the 1960s. And going back to these exceptions that remain for maternal life. Now, though these exceptions for maternal life existed, advances in medical Technology Made it exceedingly 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 global context as well. In 1938 there is an english came, rex speedborn, were not going to talk about it, but this drew global attention from the entire medical community. Publications in american medical journals were reported on this case just about every issue. And what the results from that case were, they basically open the door to therapeutic exceptions when the health of a woman was at risk. So it no longer had to be her life. She didnt have to be on deaths door in order for an abortion to be legal but rather look at her health at large. Whether that was mental health, physical health, not something manifesting in her death. So in that context, this therapeutic designation that had already existed becomes a little bit more amorphus 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 often was coupled with a hospital stay. So Therapeutic Abortions then become a class issue. They become a race issue. That this effectively precludes all physicians of color. Because most physicians of color do not have hospital privileges unless its an open hospital, unless its an interracial hospital. So private hospitals overwhelmingly have restrictions on physicians of color. This also means, because of cost, because of the fact that is a hospital stay and a physician, most were native born white women of means, that they have some ability to be able to afford this procedure and all of the care that went with it. And these women have some space to negotiate with their physicians. Once this moves from life to health, it becomes much more open to interpretation. At one point excessive vomiting is considered an appropriate reason for a Therapeutic Abortion. Or tiredness, or suicidal concerns. It becomes this bigger animal that people could kind of wrestle with. By the 1950s, and especially by the 1960s, 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 50s and 60s wanted a Therapeutic Abortion she would go to her regular physician and then her physician would have to present her case before this committee and then that committee will deliberate and return a decision. So under this new regime, the rate of Therapeutic Abortion declined dramatically. County and state officials in california recorded the numbers of abortions that were 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 their interpretation of what they thought constituted an acceptable reason for a Therapeutic Abortion. Dr. He had mand overstreet was an ob gyn at the u. C. San Francisco Medical Center and he stated that even though the number of applications for Therapeutic Abortions have increased tenfold, they have a strict limit of five abortions a week. It didnt matter how many people were applying, they only performed five abortions a week. Things push back against the blanket restrictions, though. Questions . One of the things that begins to push for better abortion legislation is the fillid mied disaster and that is described as one of the darkest episodes in pharmaceutical history. It was developed in the 1950s by a west german pharmaceutical company. It was an anticonvulsive drug and made people feel sleepy and relaxed. During the patenting and testing of this drug, no one looked at the potential side effects on pregnant woman and instead they just said it was safe for anyone even during pregnancy. The reason they said it was safe was that they could not find a lethal dose. They couldnt find a dose so high that it even killed a rat. So they just assumed that that metropolitan it was safe. This drug was licensed in 1956 for prescription and over the counter sale in germany and other parts of europe. And doctors later found out that it helped some of the patients reduce morning sickness so it became a very popular drug among pregnant woman but doctors in germany and other parts of europe began to notice an increase in children born with birth defects and it was not until 1961 they recognize the link was thalidomide. And now im referencing the National Library and the center foro Technical Information so im going to explain in laymans terms what the effects are of this drug. So thalidomide enterfears with Fetal Development in the first eight weeks of pregnancy and this is when pregnant women experience morning sickness. Thalidomide interfered with antigen sis or the development of new blood vessels and if the nirs eight weeks of pregnancy is when things like limbs are beginning to develop so the blood vessels in these limbs are relatively new and more acceptable to toxicity of areas that could relate to structural and functional defects. The specific type associated with thalidomide is which you have a con jen shall mal formation where the hands and feet are attached to shorter limbs. So globally about 10,000 children with born with thalidomiderelated disabilities and 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 their test lacked s lacked sufficient evidence and so they would thank her for that. There are still american women who get their hands on the drug but it was never legally on the American Market so we dont see it to the extent that the european nations do 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 con genital rubella syndrome. Now it is a syndrome when babies with born with it but rubella or german measles in an adult, itself has very minimal effects that at most it might be a rash, and some people exhibit no symptoms at all. B but if a woman is pregnant when she has rubella it manifested into defects in the baby or these anone om illy could include blindness, intellectual disabilities and more. And 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 to figure out what to do, a lot of physicians are encouraging women who are exposed to rubella to get an borgs which is pushing on the limits that most states have for illegal abortion because the disease does not affect the life of the woman or even her Health Except just the health of her fetus. So the thalidomide tragedy and 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 who is named cherry chessen. Shes often referred to as sherry fink fein that is her husbands last name but i remember a oral history she was so mad because she didnt use fink fein and she used chessen and i changed all of my notes because she preferred chessen. She was a host of the public tv show called the rom per room and a teacher and there were first grade and kindergarten kids and they did the pledge of allegiance and played little games and shes just like their teacher. Now in 1962 she sought a legal abortion in a hospital because she had taken thalidomide. Her husband was a pilot and found thalidomide when he was in europe sorry, not a pilot but in the military and when he was in europe had he gotten ahold of thalidomide and he gave it to his wife at some point during her pregnancy. And so she was concerned, she was aware of what was going on. And concerned that her child would be deformed. So they scheduled this abortion. But she was also concerned about other women. If she was able to get ahold of this drug, she knew there were probably other women in america who have gotten ahold of it too. So she spoke to the press on the condition of anonymity and she wanted to make the dangers of thalidomide known to american women but somehow, someone, got ahold of the hospital and 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 a legal abortion in her state of arizona. So they was able to fly to sweden, where abortion was legal. And she had the procedure there. After the abortion was completed, they did verify that the fetus had been affected by the thalidomide. It only had one arm and had no legs. When she returned, she lost her job at the rom per room. The mother of five was no longer thought to be safe around children. And her family received Death Threats. People were threatening her children who were alive and even put Death Threats on their dog. So this 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 of the other things into consideration as well. Now, sherry chessen and her husband werent the wealthiest but they did have connections and that is how they were able to get in abortion in sweden. Had sherry 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 and especially looking at poor women and women of color, if these women do not have physician acting as their advocate, then they are perhaps more at risk. If were looking at th the 30s, 40s and the rankin. Because were not done with him yet. After he served time in san quentin, he tries to create a new abortion ring in reno, nevada and then goes to prison for that one too. And they eventually makes his way back to california and meets up with dr. Royal buffum. They had initially met in the 1930s. They tried to get him to join the Pacific Coast abortion ring and buff um refused but they do become reacquainted sometime after 1950. And 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 who were seeking abortions. Now, once a woman approached them, they would take their phone number, they would call them and then they would make a designating Meeting Place where they would meet up. From that designating Meeting Place buffum or rankin would transport the women in a Station Wagon to tijuana, mexico, where another man performed the procedure. After the procedure, the women were driven back and they all went their separate ways. Now in the specific case that brought about their arrest, three of the four women they transported required hospitalization after their procedures. The men were initially convicted and found guilty of violating californias abortion law. But things got really interesting upon appeal. Because this involved conspiracy to commit a crime in another place. The crime did not take place in california. So you cant assume that the California Supreme Court stated that the California Legislature attempted to regulate behavior taking place outside of the geographic bounds of the state. So the court recognized the limits of its power and their conviction was overturned. So this decision basically opens the flood gate of american abortion tourism to nearby border cities. That because they won their appeal they effectively singlehandedly became responsible for the abortion Tourism Industry in the 1950s and 60s. Particularly in the 60s in tijuana and ensenada, you have a thriving black market in Mexican Border cities n. Tijuana they are maybe even illegal in the u. S. And you dont need a plane ticket. You dont need to stay for a week. If youre a california woman, using our highways and automobiles, you could take care of an abortion within a matter of a day trip. So mexican abortions enter the American Culture mainstream. Theyre even the basis of the story line of the author poet richard brodiggan historical romance. And women are taking advantage of this opportunity. Women, College Students in Berkeley Charter a bus and get a group of women to go to the border to have abortions over the course of a weekend. You have other women who meet people in parking lots and are transported and you have other women who simply rent a car and go over the border by themselves and take care of this. So this decision creates this legal void and Law Enforcement officials were trying desperately to fill it. At one point the san diego District Attorney don keller said that Law Enforcement officials recognized that this case prohibited prosecution of any case even if they made arrangements in california and even paid for it in california. He said, it appears as long as the buffum case stands the wholesale abortion mills will continue to operate in mexico. Yes. So the office is set up in california, that is where they made all of the negotiations and then they would travel with the females to mexico and perform the procedures . Yep. And that is how they got away with it. Yep. Because the actual abortion took place outside of california. Wow and that is some 20s later after rankin has been found guilty. The buff um case is 1953 and the state of california was in the 30s. So he did time for that and then did some time in nevada because were skipping over that. But then he goes back to the abortion business in california in the 50s. Hes a really interestk character that we cant spend too much time on. Other questions . So why was he so adamant about, is it just for the money . For rankin, why does he keep going back abortions . Yeah. I think he was always looking for a getrichquick scheme from what ive seen. I dont know whether hes interested in womens rights or simply motivated by profit. Before this he did some nefarious tax dealings and real estate and property dealings before, and then im not sure whether he realized that abortion was really lucrative and this might be the better option. But he obviously made very good connections in the 30s that he decides to spent basically the rest of his life, he dies around 1955, he spends basically the rest of his life trying to figure out abortion businesses. I had a very brief exchange with his daughter at one point and she said he was a man ahead of his time. And so 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 guy or a bad guy. Instead, i say, you know, he was an astute businessman at his prime and he did provide countless women with safe procedures. And how i feel about his motivations, i suppose, is irrelevant to what actually happened from that. Other questions . So, after the buffum case, legislators in california did try to close this loophole. They did pass other legislation but it didnt do anything to stop what had already begun in california and in these Mexican Border towns. And as concerns about tijuana abortions grow and i say tijuana abortions as a blanket term, this is often the term used to define abortions that take place in mexico border towns regardless of what city they actually take place in. But as concerns about tijuana abortions grow, the border also becomes more visible to americans in the 1950s and 60s through increased regulation specifically in the context of the cold war period a lot of americans feel that border towns were particularly susceptible to vice or evil or corruption or danger. So, its also important to know, ive been kind of rankin, none of the people died. It is important to know that as this abortion industry on the border grows, there are more opportunities for unskilled providers to offer their services. That sometimes you do have desperate women who cross the border and they simply accept the services of the first person that they find. They dont research and do search 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 botching these procedures. Now, it is also important to note that just because an abortion is botched does not mean that it is deadly or fatal. It could also just mean that women arent getting hygienic procedures, that theyre instruments arent being properly sterilized or getting pain relievers, theyre not getting antibiotics and so for some of the women who have these unhygienic procedures, when they return to the United States they often have to go to an american emergency room to either help themselves to complete the abortion, sometimes the abortions arent are only partial abortions on the border or even to save their life. So as these county hospitals and the Los Angeles County hospitals especially, as theyre treating these women theyre performing dilation and curation for those performed in mexico. So these tijuana abortions were come to known as particularly crude. And our last physician in our long line of physicians, when he referred a woman to an abortionist, he did so because he feared she would turn to butchery in tijuana. Yeah. Some women were able to [ inaudible question ]. I would imagine. To smr women and especially if they have some kind of infection in the most grave instances, organs are take out to stop an infection or spread of some kind of bacteria. So there are those instances. Or if someone slipped and an instrument punctured a uterus, that happens as well. So there are instances where that happens. I dont have and not because they dont exist, but i dont have as many examples off of the top of my head. But they do happen. In 1966 dr. Leon fallas was found guilty of abortion and conspiracy to commit abortion. He appeals. He defended his action claiming that he feared his patient would resort to butchery in tijuana. And rather than see her mutilated in the hand of a greedy opportunist, he referred her to an illegal abortionist for the procedure. He referred her to an illegal abortionist that he trusted for this procedure. He recognized her desperation. The court of appeals affirmed the lower courts decision in 1967. So he ends up taking his case to the California Supreme Court where it is decided in 1969. And in his appeal at the California Supreme Court he is challenging the constitutionality of californias abortion law. The potential butchery that he feared, he believed was sufficient to say that her life was in danger. And according to Court Records, dr. Bellous was familiar with the abhorortion in tijuana and w they wering their lives in their own hands. And in fact weeks after the abortion of the client he referred to, there was a wife of a Woodland Hills dentist who died from an illegal abortion in mexico even though this was a physician in mexico that performed the procedure. So dr. Bellous concern that his patient was going to seek an abortion in tijuana under substandard conditions and he said that Mexican Border towns offered abortions and that illegal abortions in mexico were more dangerous or worse than illegal or any abortions in the United States. So when this case was before the California Supreme Court, they debated tirelessly over some of the legal questions that were put forth. Courts had already rejected the interpretation of abortion laws that required certainty or immediate death. Two cases established that requiring certainty of death would abridge a womans right to prooift privacy and her right to life. And furthermore the court did recognize that abortion laws doesnt reduce the number of abortions, just reduced the number of safe abortions that took place. And if we look at evident from 1969, heightin eck abortions resulted in minimal risk to women while illegal abortions were the greatest cause of Maternal Death in california. While not all illegal abortions ended in death, the rate of infection from illegal abortions was significantly higher than that of legal abortions. And in an ameekous brief they said the reality was that the statute that had been designed in 1850 to protect women had in modern times become a scourge. So the California Supreme Court ultimately reversed dr. Bellous conviction and stated that california abortion law was unreasonably vague and therefore void. So california ended up de criminalizing abortion before other states legalized it. While other states would have followed whether or not california was the first. Californias ruling in bellous represents the end of this era of criminalization. In the con sext of civil rights moving and shifting sentiment on the issue of abortion, the California Supreme Court abandoned efforts to criminalize this procedure and by 1970 states have begun to push for repeals of abortion laws including hawaii, alaska, new york and washington. But this had not yet been decided at the federal level. Questions . So california decriminalized in 1969. And it based on the rules of dr. Bellous. Yes. He was acquitted. Or his conviction was overturned, yes. Other questions . So, in 1969, norma mcconservatory discovered that she was pregnant and in order to secure legal aboorrtion, she claimed that the pregnancy was the result of a rape. Since there were no Police Reports documenting the rape. She was unable to secure a legal abortion. The day she was supposed to go in, she found the police had shut down the clinic. Sh she reached out to two people. Mccore vieh took the alien jane roe and this is several years after the decision and she took the alias and they said that the law violated her constitutional rights. Roe claimed that her life was not in danger. Which was a requirement for abhorgss in texas and she couldnt afford to leave the state but she had a right to have an abortion under safe clinical conditions. So like the argument in bellous, roe and her attorneys claimed that the texas abortion statute was unconstitutionally vague and violated several of her rights including her first, fourth, ninth and 14th amendment rights. In the end of this case, were skipping over a few things but in the end the court does agree to an imperfect trimester system. According to the Supreme Court justices, since the medical community argued that fetuses could be viable after six months then the state had the right or the interest to protect fetal life after that point. Of course providing an exception for maternal life. But before viability, before six months, the state doesnt really have enough of a conflicted interest in the fetus or the embryo to stop a woman from getting an abortion. And so it is with roe v. Wade cited in 1973 that abortions become legal and protected in the United States. Now, there have been challenges to roe. Basically almost immediately. Since the roe decision the u. S. Supreme court has affirmed the right to an abortion and stated that states cannot ban abortions outright before viable and any restrictions put in place ma contain exceptions to protect a womans life. An opposition to roe began immediately once the case was decided but it was relatively quiet. In 1977 the Hyde Amendment was passed and it essentially banned the use of federal dollars for abortion coverage for women who are on medicaid. And Rosie Jimenez is often cited as the first victim of the Hyde Amendment. It was passed in september of 1976 and went into effect of august of 1977. She was a student. She was trying to become a teacher to have a better life for herself and her daughter. Abortion was legal but it was costly where she lived. She approached one physician about a legal abortion and informed it would cost 400. And she reliedond welfare and that was cost prohibitive. She did have a Financial Aid check for 7 in her purchase but wanted to finish her studies so instead she consulted an unlicensed cheaper abortionist and she paid that person 75. And she quickly developed a bacterial infection. She was rushed to an emergency room but the infection spread and even though doctors attempted to stop it by giving her an emergency hysterectomy, it wasnt 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, of the American Civil Liberties union and the center for American Civil Rights filed a classaction on behalf of women on medicaid who wanted access to abortion and doctors who accepted medicaid who wanted to provide abortions. However the u. S. Supreme court ultimately decided that states were not required to pay for refund abortion for medicaid recipients and the Hyde Amendment did not violate Constitution Constitutional rights. As a result many other states followed this course and according to one report within a year of the Hyde Amendment, the number of federally funded abortions dropped from 290,000 to 2,000. The center for Disease Control even conducted an eightmonth study to determine the affects on restricting access for public funds for abortion and the study had some flaws and it was small and but they did find that medicaid women in nonfunded states who had complications averages about 1. 9 gestational and women had a 2. 4 week later mean gestational age than nonmedicaid women in the same state. So what that means is that women who were on medicaid who had to wait longer to save money to get abortions were at increased risk of death and complications. One women of delay for illegal abortion by 20 and the risk of death by about 40 . So these women were already at a disadvantage. More recently and this is related to a lot of what were seeing now, a lot of people often reference roe v. Wade and overturning roe. But some people would argue that a womans access to abortion is less protected by roe and more defined by planned parenthood versus casey. In 1989 pennsylvania governor bob casey signed the abortion control act. And this was one of the first attempts by an individual state to restrict Abortion Access after roe. Not the first but one of the first. There were several provisions in the act including informed consent, spousal and parental notification for unemancipated minors and waiting periods and clinics would be required to report all of the Demographic Data to the state. So when casey signed this act it was immediately challenged by a number of abortion providers and counselors and doctors and this turned into the classaction suit planned parenthood versus casey. It was 1992 by the time this case reached the Supreme Court and attorneys for at pell ats argued that the pennsylvania abortion control act effectively overturned roe since it imposed so many regulations on women who were trying to receive abortions and on the doctors who were providing them. On the other hand, the attorneys for the defendants argue that they werent overturned roe, she just wanted to be judged by an undue burden test. Now in prior challenges to roe, the Supreme Court had already decided two things. That the existence of a fundamental right and the enjoyment of a fundamental right were mutually exclusive. Because you have the right to do something doesnt mean you get to do something. And since states do have an interest in protecting potential life, they could favor pregnancy and child birth and adoption and not abortion. So the majority in planned parenthood versus casey held on to the fundamental tenants of rov. That women had a right before viability and that the state has an interest in protecting the life of the woman and potentially of the child. Nevertheless, in their opinions for this case, the majority also opted for an undue burden standard over the existing trimester standard. The undue burden standard is more flexible and reflects the state interest in protecting fetal life. The doctor the judges also held that pennsylvanias restrictions did not constitute an undue burden. So when the judges are moving away from a trimester system that said abortions are legal from here to here and you could put some restrictions here to here. When youre now moving toward an undue burden system is means that states could develop legislation and rules and put them into place and theyll exist in place until someone takes that to court to say it constitutes an undue burden. It moves away from the doctor patient relationship and puts abortion back into the courts. So abortion does remain legal. But this ruling creates opportunities for new regulations that at least limit abortions or makes them more inconvenient. Does that make sense . Okay. So, looking more recently, since 2010 the u. S. Abortion landscape has become increasingly restrictive as more states are becoming hostile to abortion rights. There were 338 abortion restrictions enacted between 2010 and 2016. 30 of the restrictions enacted since roe v. Wade were enacted in the last seven years. Now, more and more legislators are playing on vagueness and abortion laws, playing with viability but also this undue burden test. The number of abortion providing facilities continues to as well as the number of clinics that are providing abortion services. In or as of 2019, 58 of women of reproduction live in states that hostile to abortion while only 24 million live in states considered supportive of abortion rights. 25 abortion bans were introduced in 12 states in 2019. That is some of what is here. They vary. Alabama, for example, attempted to ban all abortions. Other states enact gestational age bands after fetal heartbeat detection or between eight and 12 weeks or eight and 18 weeks and some ban on certain types of procedures for abortion or reasons for abortions. Some states actually prohibit people from getting abortions if theyre doing it because of the child is the wrong sex or the child has down syndrome or some other kind of genetic anomaly. 27 states require a woman seeking abortion a specified waiting period between counseling and the procedure and these vary between 24 and 72 hours and sometimes this means that women have to make multiple trips to the clinics. If you recall from the documentary, some women are driving five hours to get to the procedure and theyre doing that to bypass the waiting period, they have to do that twice and 18 states require that a woman receive counseling before having an abortion. So who has abortions in the United States . As this graph ill states, the u. S. Abortion rate reaches a low in 2017, that is 13. 5 abortions per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44. When roe was decided that rate was about 16. 3 per 1,000 women. The follow statistics are from 2014 from the gut maucher institute but about one in four women will have an abortion by the age of 45. 34 of abortion recipients were aged 20 to 24 and 27 were between the ages of 25 and 29 meaning that more than half of the people who have abortions are in their 20s. 51 of the patients in 2014 were using some other method of Birth Control at time they became pregnant and 59 already had children or had previously given birth at some time. Approximately 75 of abortion recipients in 2014 were poor. Meaning that they made under the federal Poverty Level of 15,730 for a family of two or were low income meaning they made 199 of the federal Poverty Level. Globally concerns over zika virus in latin america have also reignited some of the discussions about Abortion Access in countries where the procedure was completely illegal. Again, we see that this potential for a baby be born with severe abnormalities have been sufficient to reignite discussion for easing of restriction in these predominantly catholic nations however as of yet this is not materialized into any policies. Abortion has remained a topic of public debate. But in recent years it has gained more attention through some of the restrictive legislation acts and overwhelmingly these new acts call for mandatory waiting times, parental notifications, spousal consent, vaginal ultra sounds and event preventing the dispensation of the antiabortion drugs. Or preventing that in clinics that dont have an operating room. And many of these regulations disproportionately affect young woman. Rural women and women of color and lowincome women. And these illustrate a failure to show that historically abortion restriction has done more harm than good. Abortion rates in the u. S. Continue to decline and some argue that that is because of better access to other forms of Birth Control like the pill, cond ums and iud and because of acceptance of single parenthood or the decreased significance of marriage. But even though abortion rates have fallen, it doesnt mean the procedure has lost significance. These laws do not discourage women from submitting them from toxins and they deny women access to safe medical procedures and they simply advance the notion that a womans body belongs to anybody but herself. Questions . Thats it. Every saturday night American History tv takes you to College Classrooms around the country for lectures in history. Why do you all know who lizzy borden is and raise your hand if you had ever heard of this murder, the jean harris murder trial before this class. A deepest cause for the true meaning of the revolution was in this transformation that took place in the minds of american people. So were going to talk about both sides of the story here. The tools an techniques of slave owner power and talk about the tools an techniques of powers that were practiced by enslaved people. Watch history professors lead discussions with their students on topics ranging from the American Revolution to september 11th. Lectures in history on cspan3 every saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on American History tv and lectures in history is available as a podcast. Find it where you listen to podcasts. Tonight on American History tv, a look at western history beginning at 8 00 p. M. Eastern with university of arkansas professorel west talking about the Environmental Impact of the california goefld rush and how 19th Century Mining left to deforestation and sendment clogged rivers. Tonight and over the weekend on cspan3. Cspan has unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house and the Supreme Court and Public Policy events. The president ial primaries through the impeachment process and now the federal response to the coronavirus. You could watch all of cspan Public Affairs programming, on television, online, on listen on our free radio app and be part of the daily Washington Journal Program or through our social media feeds. Cspan created by americas Public Television companies and brought to you today by your television provider. Next, on lectures in history. Baylor professor david smith talks about the International World view in 1890s world america. Ar
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.