Due to several recent legislative and economic changes in the form of limits on abortions and higher birth control prices, graduating female Jumbos will be heading out into the world during a time of transformation for women's health.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court reversed its course on abortion by upholding the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act in a 5-4 decision. According to The New York Times, this bans a rare type of abortion that occurs in the second trimester, and it is unclear what will happen in cases in which the woman's health may be compromised.
The decision was the first major abortion-related ruling of the Supreme Court since conservative Justice Samuel Alito was appointed to the court. While it affects only a very small percentage of abortions, the decision was seen by some students and officials as a reflection of the direction in which women's reproductive rights are headed as a whole.
Senior Andrea Cote, who is co-president of Tufts Voices for Choice (VOX), a women's organization and Planned Parenthood affiliate group, expressed the fears that she experienced after learning the supreme court decision.
"It's pretty scary because there's so much going on ... [there has been a] general shift in mentality [about abortions]," she said.
Sophomore Amy Rabinowitz believed that the ban was less important than the attention it brought to abortion. "Whether you think that abortion is right or wrong, I think that most liberals and most conservatives think that abortion is a sad reality," she said. "My biggest concern is why are there so many women each year who are forced into that situation?"
Freshman Abigail Marion, like Cote, saw the decision as a step backwards in women's rights. "I feel that Roe v. Wade was an integral component in the women's movement," she said. "Any infringement on the precedent it has set denotes grave dangers for women's issues."
Senior and outgoing Tufts Republicans president Jordan Greene disagreed, saying that the decision should be debated based on its legal reasoning, not its policy implications. "The pro-choice left is very quick to criticize [abortion] decisions based on policy implications and not the legal reasoning," he said.
"Congress passed a law that the courts upheld. To me, that's a much bigger event than the Supreme Court upholding the ban," he added.
The controversial Supreme Court decision came after another change in women's reproductive rights: a rise in the price of birth control pills, particularly on college campuses. Until very recently, birth control had been available for female students at extremely reduced costs. As a result of legislation passed to encourage insuranace companies to cover the pills, many colleges, including Tufts, are no longer able to offer them at such low prices.
Freshman Andrea Shadick, who is prescribed to a particularly expensive brand of birth control, is concerned about the price of contraception for women. "It's ridiculously expensive," she said. "Mine is $45 a month."
Cote directly linked the Supreme Court's support of the Partial-Birth Abortion Act to the rising costs of preventative contraception. "For me, the increase in price of birth control is very much related to the slow and subtle shutting down of access to reproductive resources at many levels."
Greene disagreed, saying he believed that the decision was probably more budgetary than political in nature.
"Birth control isn't a right," he added.
Cotes was also discouraged by the choice of many companies to cover pills like Viagra as opposed to preventative contraception.
"On March 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Union Pacific when they decided to cover Viagra and not birth control," Cote said. "This ruling has interesting and somewhat disturbing implications about how women are viewed by their employers and the courts."
Marion, who is prescribed to birth control for skin treatment, was unaffected by the changes because her insurance company covers it, citing dermatological reasons. "It's an interesting loophole," she said.
Lisa Dacey, Media Relations Coordinator for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said that Planned Parenthood is working to combat such changes.
"Planned Parenthood is concerned about any barrier to access [to contraception], including cost," she said in an e-mail to the Daily. "Planned Parenthood works to ensure that birth control is accessible and affordable for all people, including college students. We offer a wide range of affordable birth control options at our Planhealth center in Davis Square."
Rabinowitz didn't see a problem with the cuts, calling the price change "a difference in convenience."
"If you want to be having sex, then I think you should be responsible for the consequences that come with having sex," she said.
The controversy and debates regarding women's reproductive rights is making its mark even in the classroom, according to freshman John Subranni. Subranni said that in his "Ethics" Philosophy course, students worked to argue the merits and negatives associated with abortion, forcing male and female students alike to consider the issues.
"If you believe in the sanctity of human life, you have you be against all forms of abortion at every level ... killing a fetus [would be] the same as killing an adult," he said.
Cote said that the price of birth control is not a heavily discussed topic within VOX meetings at Tufts, where most students are covered by their insurance or can afford the higher cost. Instead, the group dedicates itself to educating college-aged women about the different types of birth control.
"I think for a lot of women at Tufts, an increase of 15 or 25 dollars is annoying," she said. "But it's not the end of the world. Obviously it's going to affect a low-income woman more. [But] even though it's not a huge financial burden, it's still a problem."
Rabinowitz saw the recent changes as a step in the right direction. "Our culture has become so sexually driven that we don't feel that sex has any consequences; we feel that sex does not equate a baby, that sex does not equate a relationship," she said. "I think that we do need to find a way back to the modesty of women's sexuality."
For pro-choice activists, recent changes present a double-edged sword - as they have caused both anger and confusion on a national level, they similarly have the potential to spark greater amounts of interest and activism.
Cote is hopeful that the recent changes will make Americans more aware and passionate about the topic.
"The only positive aspect of it is that all these little jabs at women's reproductive rights encourage more people to stand up and say, 'No, I can't let this happen,'" she said. "It's easy to get complacent - you feel so comfortable with your access to all these things; you're not pressured. A lot of people don't think there's much you can do."
Dacey also saw the changes as a chance for political involvement. "This is a critical time for people to get active," Dacey said "It starts with voting in every election for candidates who share your values on these issues."
