Lost Victim, Miscellaneous, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Miscellaneous

Lost Victim

Lost Victim In this semester of Women Studies 101, we have attempted many times to understand that the female experience of one group can be very much different from another group's experience. These experiences all vary by gaps of generations, race, class, and even sub-cultural. I have come to the realization that I am an example of "Duh Feminism" as discussed early on in the semester. My female experience has been very sheltered. I am young and white, and have been raised by liberal middle-class parents in communities with very little diversity. How do I relate to the fights and strife for women's rights and autonomy? It has all been handed to me. There is a sad part to being white and middle-class, it makes you a bit naive. I have been placed under the impression that all three branches of government and the surges of technology are working for "my" benefit. What one has to realize is that these benefits were not catered to myself, or anyone like myself, and not every woman has the same benefits as myself. There is an unwritten hierarchy of rights devised by class, which partially inadvertently includes race. I receive the benefits I have due to my parents income. It is a reality that women's reproductive rights and legislation remain in a hostile environment and are continuously subject to change for the good or the bad. The fact alone that out reproductive rights lie in the hands of others (i.e., government, technology, and profit) questions our autonomy, let alone if they were further restricted or overturned. These changes that could potentially harm the rights of women like myself, would exponentially destroy the rights of lower class women. I have never questioned my reproductive rights, I am on birth control paid for by my parent's insurance. I have had friends who had abortions, which were covered by their parents' health insurance. I live down the street from a Planned Parenthood clinic, and I have a good friend who is a nurse practitioner for a clinic. I was under the impression that the nation had gotten over the controversy. These reproductive rights that I assumed were given are still in question every day as more and more cases walk through the Supreme Court, and as more power is handed over to the states. Our rights are also in question during every election period. The pro-life movement and the "new right" are still very aggressively opposed to Roe v. Wade and abortion rights. Members of congress are under intense pressure over their votes on abortion legislation. Anti-abortion groups have been successful at restricting abortions even though most Americans are pro-choice. In 1978 and 1980 elections, the anti-abortion lobby helped defeat four pro-choice Democratic senators (Carver, Nelson 747). We are also seeing a trend towards a conservative platform with more power handed over to the states, along with middle of the road, back and forth politicians. I can foresee these combinations as being detrimental to the security of our reproductive rights in this upcoming election. Several pieces of legislation and Supreme Court decisions have led up to, and have chiseled away at Roe v. Wade, ultimately making abortions more difficult to obtain. Here are some important cases: 1965, Griswold v. Connecticut upheld the right to privacy and ended the ban on birth control. Griswold was the first major breakthrough of the establishment of women's constitutional rights. The ruling remains controversial today because the Supreme Court engaged in judicial activism using a "zone of privacy" within the penumbras of the constitution (Jarvis 160). The point should be raised is women, minorities, and other socially oppressed groups have been dependent on judicial activism to gain equality. With more and more power placed in the hands of the state, many of our fundamental rights become malleable. Eight years later, 1973, the Supreme Court ruled the right to privacy included abortions. Roe v. Wade was based upon this case. This case supported a woman's control over her own body and reproductive system. Justice William Brennan stated: "If the right to privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwanted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision to bear or beget a child." (Carver, Nelson 747). The ruling of Roe v. Wade was a landmark victory for the reproductive liberties of women. As Sonia Jarvis stated in her article Women and the Law: Learning Form the Past to Protect the Future, "giving women the freedom to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy fundamentally altered the legal status of women in ways that are still being explored," (Jarvis 161). One would expect the ruling of Roe v. Wade to act as a spring board, and would advance reproductive rights, but rather it still faces persistent challenges. There have been many abortion related court cases and legislation following Roe v. Wade. In many of these cases the Court gave states new powers to restrict access to abortions. Many states are now allowed to restrict "partial-birth" or late-term abortions, or require parental permission for minors. Not only have these restrictions been placed on terms of abortion but also federally financing that targets the poor. For example the Hyde Amendment was passed in 1977, which withdrew federal funding for abortion. Since surgical sterilization remained funded by the Department of Health, more and more poor woman opted for permanent birth control (Davis 205). The court case Harris v. McRae eliminated public payments for abortion for poor women with government financed health care, even though they cover prenatal care for those mothers who carry to term (Carver, Nelson 749). Therefore, many women are faced to have children they can not afford, or do not want. This makes the mother even further dependent on the welfare system. In the late 1980's the court case Webster v. Reproductive Health Services upheld Missouri law that life begins at conception. The ruling prohibited the use of public funds and facilities for abortions, except to save the life of the mother. After Webster "they suddenly realized how tenuous their rights were and how seriously they must fight for them," (Evans 94). But the populations that these restrictions target the poor, have very little power, influence, and opportunity to fight for their reproductive rights. They are also the ones who need to depend on reproductive rights such as abortion and birth control to maintain some sense of economic stability. The reproductive rights of poor, minority women have never been a high concern of the US Government. They have targeted this population in contradicting ways of forcing birth control, then later giving very little support for birth control. According to The New Our Bodies, Ourselves: a Book by Women, for Women, the population control establishment (i.e., US Government agencies such as Planned Parenthood) has dominated the development and distribution of contraception. Since the 1950's "these organizations typically have been more interested in limiting the size of certain groups, especially poor and minority populations, than in helping individual women control their fertility," (Simon and Schuster INC. 259). In many contexts, the birth control movement was created with racist intentions (Davis 214). But during the times of Griswold and Roe poor women also benefited from the courts' changing attitudes. With the New Deal and the Great Society programs of the 1960's , families could benefit from programs such as food stamps and Aid for Dependent Children. Because of these programs many women, especially minority women were able to move from poverty roles to working and middle class status (Jarvis 162). According to Jarvis many found: "The greater control women gained over their reproductive function enhanced their ability to manage their work schedule and career choices. Women began to successfully challenge restrictive and discriminating laws under the 14th Amendment that effected their status." (Jarvis 161) There was an opportunity that motherhood would not equate to life sentence of poverty, or poverty would not lead to motherhood. Reform after reform, this opportunity has been diminished. For feminist organizations and for most feminist, access to abortion is one component of full reproductive health care that would include sex education, safe contraception, prenatal care, maternal, infant and child health services, and universal available health insurance (Carver, Nelson 751). For any sort of access to the "given" reproductive rights one has to have health insurance and money. Birth control, abortions, prenatal, and infant care are all very expensive, especially for poor and minority women. According to the Bureau of the Census and the National Center for Health Statistics, in 1995 Blacks had a fertility rate of 71.8% percent, and Hispanics had a fertility rate of 103.7%, much higher than the White average of 64.5% (Costello, Miles, Stone 214). There is an inversely proportional relationship between minority fertility rates and the likelihood of these same minority groups receiving prenatal care. The National Center for Health Statistics reported in 1995 and 1996 that 9% of Black mothers receive late or no prenatal care, and 8.8% of Hispanic mothers receive late or no prenatal care. Again White mothers are better off, with only 3.9% receiving late or no prenatal care (Costello, Miles, Stone). Without a support system, such as health insurance (non-federally funded) or welfare assistance, many woman cannot afford these components. Women are more vulnerable than men in each sector of the health care financing system. Two thirds of Medicaid recipients are women, mostly poor mothers who get Medicaid and small public welfare grants from Aid to Families with Dependent Children (Carver, Nelson 751). As a result of welfare reform law, Congress now will no longer guarantee payment of welfare grants to aid women, children and the disabled. Welfare has been placed in the hands of the state, in which they can divvy out funds as they feel fit. For example New Jersey has established the "new child exclusion act" where a child born to a woman on welfare can be excluded from receiving benefits (Jarvis 174). These restrictions make it impossible for poor women to afford preventing a pregnancy, aborting a pregnancy, or even carrying a pregnancy to term, and then raising the child. What options do these women have, what support systems can they turn to? Not only are poor, and minority women losing their right not to have children, they are also being withheld from many opportunities to have children when they can not conceive them naturally. We now live in a time of great biological technologies. Now women who are infertile have the means of having babies, for the right price. There are several "new" techniques such as hormonal treatments, artificial insemination, superovulation and IVF (Hanmer 354). These technologies are very expensive, limited to those who can pay doctors qualified. These technologies also have an extremely high failure rate, often tripling the initial cost (Hanmer 358). According to Jalna Hanmer, "restricting access is damaging to women as a group, as it creates divisions between women and reaffirms the patriarchal rule" (357). Surrogacy is another conception method that exploits the poor. In essence, the family rents out a womb of another women, with a binding contract to produce a child. Surrogacy provides another way that the working-class woman served the higher social classes (Hanmer 568). If the surrogate later decides to keep the baby, she is generally at a lost, and the baby is handed over to the purchasing family. It is difficult to predict where our reproductive rights may lead. For the most part I am confident my reproductive right will be upheld because I have the means to afford them. Poor women on the other hand I believe will continue to suffer as the welfare system continues to be a target of reform. We have to be aware that we hold a responsibility in policy making by voting and participating in campaign movements. The participation rate of woman voters in 1994 was the lowest since 1974. As Sonia Jarvis so elegantly states, "This decline in female voter participation, at precisely the time that retrenchment on abortion, affirmative action, and welfare is occurring at the federal level, does not auger well for the ability of women to protect the gains of the past, (175)." ed. Costello, Miles, Stone. The American Woman 1999-2000. NY; Norton;1998 Carver, Kathryn. Nelson, Barbara. "Many Voices But Few Vehicles: The Consequences for Women of Weak Political Infrastructure in the United States." WS 101: Women in Contemporary Society Course Packet. 1999. Davis, Angela. "Racism, Birth Control and Reproductive Rights. "Women Race and Class. NY: Random House;1981. Hanmer, Jalna. "Women and Reproduction." Introducing Women's Studies. NY: New York University Press;1997. Jarvis, Sonia. "Women and the Law." The American Woman 1999-2000. ed. Costello, Miles, Stone. NY; Norton;1998. Bibliography:

Word Count: 2122