The court case of Dobbs v. Jackson is a monumental moment in American memory and history. With the resurgence of abortions around 2020 and a social experience that is extremely focused on the issue, this decision came as a shock to many and had a rippling effect all over the United States. To give an excerpt from the court documents to explain the case, “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision”[1].
When it comes to access to safe abortions, it is a right that was enacted by Roe v. Wade, which said that the constitution provides grounds for individual liberty to induce abortion, and thus we saw a fairly steady rate in the United States. Now that this has been overturned, we have seen a rapid change from many states, mainly in the south. To quote Coverdale et. al in their article Access to Abortion After Dobbs… “As of August 25, 2022, nine states have banned abortion, four states have banned abortion at 6 weeks after the last menstrual period, and one state has banned abortion at 20 weeks after the last menstrual period”[2]. This makes it very difficult for women who previously had the means to abortion to get the care they need.
Because of this lack of access to safe abortions, an unfortunate alternative enters the narrative; unsafe and technically illegal abortion strategies. Although this concept is nothing new to the rest of the world, especially developing countries, as seen in The Lancet, “Every year, about 19–20 million abortions are done by individuals without the requisite skills, or in environments below minimum medical standards, or both.”[3], it is new to the US. Women that used to be able to go to their local planned parenthood or reliable medical provider, are now turning to strategies that not only of course endanger the safety of the fetus, they endanger themselves. “An estimated 68 000 women die as a result, and millions more have complications, many permanent. Important causes of death include hemorrhage, infection, and poisoning”[3]. This legislation is providing a barrier to health for the women in our country. This is a situation where we know that abortion is going to happen whether legal or not, and it is safer to provide legal access for all.
In terms of the memory of this topic and the social and human context surrounding abortion, there lies an extreme variance. There are many polarizing views ranging from avid supporters of anti abortion and abortion, which creates a very interesting social dynamic. Additionally, within the two respective groups there is even more dissonance with differing opinions on how long abortion should be allowed, to who, in what environment, etc. These layers of disagreement create a very foggy memory of the topic. However, all will agree that these sets of court cases will remain vivid in the way that in extreme moments of conflict, politically and socially, memories tend to grow strong and hold a very profound and biased place in the minds of the affected.
William Johnston
Works Cited
[1]Jackson Women’s Health Organization et al. v. Dobbs et al. (2022). 999 F.3d 530.
[2] Coverdale, J., Gordon, M.R., Beresin, E.V. et al. Access to Abortion After Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization: Advocacy and a Call to Action for the Profession of Psychiatry. Acad Psychiatry 47, 1–6 (2023).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-022-01729-7
[3] Murray, C. J., & Lopez, A. D. (2006). Evidence-based health policy – Lessons from the Global Burden of Disease Study. The Lancet, 368(9549), 761-766. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69565-4