Reproductive rights in danger

Our reproductive rights are the most threatened they have ever been since before the 1973 Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade, that granted us the right to choose. Since 1995, there have been 335 laws passed limiting our access to birth control, abortions, and reproductive healthcare.

President Bush has so severely cut funding to family-planning clinics that they are now understaffed, underpaid, and without the supplies they need -- forcing many to close down. He supports an abstinence-only sexual education program in the U.S., meaning that middle- and high-school students will soon have no access to information on condoms, safer sex, and birth control.

Our president has cut funding to all international organizations that provide abortion services or distribute birth control in developing nations. This translates into millions of women giving birth to children whom they cannot feed, clothe, or immunize in countries where 700,000 women die a year due to pre-natal procedural mistakes.

Even Massachusetts, one of the most predominantly liberal states in the nation, became the fifth state to ratify a bill giving health insurance benefits to fetuses but not to the mothers who carry them.

The Supreme Court has the ability to overturn Roe v. Wade and deny women control over their reproductive destinies and their right to seek an abortion if they so choose. As we speak, the Supreme Court is strictly divided -- four on the liberal side, four on the conservative side -- with Sandra Day O'Connor swinging left and right, depending on the issue. Supreme Court justices sit on the bench for as long as they wish, usually until they decide to retire. Justices are being appointed at a younger and younger age, meaning that once appointed, they could easily sit on the bench for over forty years.

The next elected president will appoint at least one new justice, but as many as four are expected to step down in the next four years. Roe v. Wade currently hangs in the precarious balance of one Supreme Court Justice's vote, 5 in favor, 4 opposed. If Bush is re-elected, he will undoubtedly appoint an anti-choice justice, giving them that one needed vote to overturn the decision. As unbelievable as it sounds, it is possible for our control over our reproductive freedoms to be taken away by merely one vote from one appointment of one Supreme Court justice -- someone the people cannot even elect. This is how delicate the situation is.

And it doesn't stop at the Supreme Court. White men in suits in Washington are deciding for us what our reproductive freedoms should be from the floors of the Senate and the House of Representatives. While these self-righteous politicians cut government funding to day care programs, welfare, and sexual education, they want to deny women the right to choose the future of their families. Apparently, conservative politicians care more about fetuses than they care about children or mothers.

If Bush is re-elected, it is more than probable we will lose our right to choose. The women's movement worked tirelessly to give us, their daughters and granddaughters, protection over our reproductive freedoms. It is now our responsibility to mobilize, act, stand up, and fight for the right to choose during our lives and for the lives of our daughters.

Don't get me wrong: I am not saying abortion is a good thing. It is often the hardest decision a woman can make -- a burden that can be devastating to her, her family, and her partner. And by calling themselves pro-life, anti-choice activists make me sound as if I am anti-life. Let me clarify, they are not pro-life, they are anti-choice. I believe that every woman's situation is different, every woman has her own reasons to make her own decisions, and no one in Washington can decide that for her.

It is easy for us, born ten years after the passage of Roe v. Wade, to take our right to choose for granted. We do not understand what it was like before this victory. We do not remember the thousands of American women each year who died having illegal, "back-alley" abortions in absolute desperation. We are the post women's movement generation, blessed with many hard-fought freedoms, and burdened with a new sense of privileged apathy.

If you have read this far, I hope you are asking yourself what you can do to help. I have been the legislative intern at Planned Parenthood in Boston for five months, and I'm learning just how much work there is to be done. First of all, you can join Tufts VOX: Voices for Choice, a pro-choice activist group affiliated with Planned Parenthood, started on campus this year.

Secondly, march in Washington D.C. with us! The four largest pro-choice women's groups in the nation, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, NARAL Pro-Choice America, National Organization of Women, and the Feminist Majority are coming together for the first time to unite in the March for Choice, the largest pro-choice march in history, April 25, 2004 (it is not Spring Fling weekend).

We are sending the largest Tufts delegation we can (I mean busloads). They are expecting over one million women, men, mothers, fathers, children, grandparents, celebrities, students and activists to shut down the city in showing President Bush that this right cannot be taken away, that the women's movement has not lost momentum, and that we are mobilizing in huge numbers to support this cause.

Please help protect yourself and this right: march with us, register to vote, help elect a pro-choice president, educate yourself, come to Tufts VOX: Voices for Choice meetings (Thursdays, 8 p.m., Women's Center), and spread the word.

Dana Sussman is a Senior double majoring in International Relations and French.