top of page

Texas Abortion Bill - The Struggle of Womens' Autonomy

Last month, the state of Texas put into effect a law that prohibits abortion around 6 weeks of development. This law was Senate Bill 8 (also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act) and was signed by Governor Greg Abbott on May 19, 2021 taking effect September 1, 2021. The Heartbeat Act allows any person to sue someone receiving an abortion, performing it, or suggesting the procedure after 6 weeks of impregnation. This has impacted millions of lives in Texas, and potentially millions of others across the country. Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Planned Parenthood are making attempts to repeal this law, but why so?


The long history of anti-abortion laws in the United States begins with the colonial period 1600-1900. In this period, laws surrounding abortion typically depended on the colonial power in control of the state. For example, in British colonies it was legal prior to quickening (first fetal movements felt), in French colonies it was illegal but practiced, and in Spanish and Portuguese colonies it was illegal (National Library of Medicine). In addition to surgical abortions, many tribal communities used natural remedies such as black root and cedar root to induce abortions (NLM). Even though abortion was illegal in most states, it was generally socially accepted.


Following the independence of the United States, these abortion laws began to change. In the mid-19th century, the public opinions about abortion shifted dramatically as a result of the arising women’s rights movement. Abortion was criminalized and banned at all stages of pregnancy as a retaliation. Physicians played a big part in its condemnation, arguing that there’s no distinction between abortion before quickening and after quickening. And logically, there was no determiner of quickening but the mother, so it became hard to prove the legitimacy of these cases.


For enslaved people of the period, the abortion laws were slightly different. Their ability to have abortions was determined by their enslaver’s rules, which was typically no. Enslaved people were typically to produce as many children as possible to make more laborers for their enslaver’s plantations. Also since the enslaver owned their slaves, the children of their slaves were also in their possession. Abortions were also out of reach for enslaved people due to the Fugitive Slave Act, a law allowing the capturing of fugitive slaves to sell. By bearing more children, more profit was gathered for the enslavers, creating a child-trafficking system. This goes to show that anti-abortion laws were not only used as a means to control women, but to exploit black women.


Subsequently, underground abortion services became highly popularized. Women sought abortions using varieties of herbs and drugs as well as suctioning devices, and many resorted to physicians who performed the procedure in secret. Even with the attempts by the women’s rights movement to legalize abortion, this continued until the late 1960’s. According to Mother Jones, an investigative news magazine, “...between 200,000 and 1.2 million illegal abortions were performed each year, about 200 deaths from botched abortions were reported annually.” Then, in 1967, Colorado became the first state to legalize abortions in cases of incest, rape, and disability or lethality to the mother. Hawaii legalized abortion on the request of the mother three years later, and New York, despite past laws, legalized abortion up until the 24th week of pregnancy. California also passed the California Therapeutic Abortion Act in the same year, leading to an influx of pregnant women traveling to California to seek abortions, if they could afford to do so. By 1972, 13 states had established abortion legalization laws similar to that of Colorado’s. This finally led to the judicial case of Roe v. Wade.


Roe v. Wade was an outlawing of a Texas abortion law by the United States Supreme Court ruling that abortion intervened by the government restriction is unconstitutional. The outlawing broke down many states’s federal abortion laws, and was justified by the Due Process Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution (right to privacy). The new system separated the legality of abortions into the three trimesters of pregnancy. During the first trimester, governments could not interfere at all, during the second, governments could make some health regulations, and abortion was forbidden during the third except in cases of saving the mother’s life. Although the law has been tried and tried again since its enforcement by other states, no state did it quite like Texas.


What makes the Texas Heartbeat Act different from others is that it operates on individual pursuits. According to National Public Radio, “Instead of requiring public officials to enforce the law, this law allows individuals to bring civil lawsuits against abortion providers or anyone else found to "aid or abet" illegal abortions.” This makes it much easier to criminalize someone else based on sole theories and ulterior motives.


The law is also scientifically flawed, with abortions only being allowed before six weeks, or when the unborn child’s heartbeat is first heard. Six weeks is by far the shortest span of time out of all the state’s abortion laws, and is a time before most people know they’re pregnant. Additionally, there is much flaw with the term “Heartbeat” in and of itself. A heartbeat cannot be detected at 6-weeks of gestation. During the embryonic stage, the fetus is just forming the tubes to make the heart, not a fully formed heart or heartbeat. According to Dr. Ted Anderson of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “What is interpreted as a heartbeat in these bills is actually electrically induced flickering of a portion of the fetal tissue that will become the heart as the embryo develops” (Ms. Magazine). The misinformation being spread just by the name of the bill is extremely dangerous to the field of gynecology. 6-weeks has no scientific significance to the health of the baby, and only shortens the period women have to make this decision. Texas is also infamous for having one of the highest maternal mortality rates, often glanced over by Texan public officials (Ms. Magazine). Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded in 2015 that a woman is less at risk by seeking an abortion than to carry the pregnancy full term. Texas should be more concerned with their high maternal death rates than to be obsessing over women’s menstrual and autonomy rights.


As mentioned before, the Fugitive Slave Act of the 19th century was essentially a method of child-trafficking used by white enslavers. This new Texan law has the potential to bring back that system. With the high numbers of systematic-racism deniers in the state, white-supremacists now have an ulterior motive for enforcing the law. This law may have a great impact on the health and safety of black women, and brings back much trauma for black mothers. Texan legislators overlooking history and proceeding with a racist law needs to be addressed and tackled.


Students at BV also have much conflict with the bill. Sophomore Camille Ducay says: “I think people are kind of enraged, and they should be” and “the fact that there were no women at the ping for Women’s Health is extremely terrifying.” Camille brings up a great point. The legislators having debates surrounding women’s sexual health are often men. How can we have civil, moral, and logical conversations around women’s, and anyone born female at birth’s autonomal rights with none of them present? She further explains, “What do they know about a woman's body, how are they able to talk about what we need health-wise? They don’t even know anything about that” (Camille Ducay, Sophomore).


Junior Vee Brockett also writes, “Most people find out on week 4, that’s two weeks to even make the decision and then follow through with it” (Vee Brockett, Junior). Many don’t realize how serious of a decision abortion is. It’s a grieving decision, and may take multiple weeks for someone to agree to commit. One may also have to have discussions with their partner about if it’s the right decision for them, and overall a time-consuming process. Vee elaborates, “There’s so many factors that could prevent them from getting an abortion in such little time, when they could seriously need one” (Vee Brockett, Junior). Six weeks is simply not enough time, and the male lawmakers in Texas surely should not be making that decision for anyone.


43 views0 comments
Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page