Here is the letter I just wrote to my so-called Representative Pete Stauber, after receiving his latest newsletter. Your readers are welcome to borrow the language when they write to their anti-choice politicians.
Dear Rep Stauber,
I was sickened by your celebration of the overturning of Roe v Wade by the extremist majority in the Supreme Court. Two justices lied in their confirmation hearings when they indicated that Roe was ’settled law’ and they did not intend to overturn it. Poll after poll shows that most Americans did NOT want Roe to be overturned, no matter what their personal preferences. The illegitimate SCOTUS is happy to overturn state laws regulating guns but give states total say about whether girls and women have the right to reproductive health care. Clarence Thomas, who also lied in his confirmation hearings, has indicated that birth control and marriage equality are next. These decisions fly in the face ‘majority rule,’ a bedrock of our faltering democracy.
You are in a very privileged position to be able to afford to have five children and have good health care coverage provided by US tax payers. Most people seeking abortions in the US today are low-income mothers. This decision is a blatant attack especially on low-income girls and women around the country. You are forcing incredible pain and hardship on the most vulnerable people, many of whom don’t have access to the health care they need to prevent unwanted pregnancies, thanks to Republican attacks on Planned Parenthood and Medicaid expansion. You are putting doctors at risk of imprisonment for providing essential health care.
If you think all life has value, then why do you and your fellow Republicans consistently cut aid to low income families? You force girls and women to bear children they do not want and cannot afford, then make it even harder for them to bear and raise these children. Adoption is NOT the answer for most of them. Even intended pregnancies take a toll on our health and our bodies.
Your version of the ’sanctity of life’ clearly does not apply to living, breathing, conscious people. You well know that the vast majority of abortions take place within the first three months of pregnancy, long before fetal viability and consciousness. The tiny minority of abortions taking place later involve very hard decisions that should be made by women and their doctors, not distant elites in gerrymandered districts in their comfortable offices, pretending to care. The US will soon have stories like those that have emerged recently in anti-choice Poland, such as the death of a healthy mother of four who died this year of septic shock after doctors refused to terminate her failing pregnancy with twins. The first fetus died in the womb on December 23, but doctors refused to remove it, due to abortion laws, and her health deteriorated. The hospital waited until the heartbeat of the second twin stopped a week later, and waited a further two days before terminating the pregnancy on December 31. The woman, Agneiszka, died on January 25. Don’t forget her name, or the names of Americans that will soon follow, thanks to a minority of Republican extremists like you. Already, American women in some states are being prosecuted after having miscarriages. Young teens are exhausting family savings by having to travel hundreds of miles and spend thousands of dollars for a safe abortion.
Shame on you. Your hypocrisy and cruelty will not be forgotten this November. You are ignoring what most Minnesotans, and most Americans, want: for abortion to be safe, legal and rare.
Dobbs will prompt a much needed re-examination of the role of the Supreme Court in our society and government. The people will not tolerate a Court that destroys our rights to vindicate the theological goals of a minority. I don’t think the Court will survive this in its current form.
Is the thirteenth amendment a potential protection of a woman’s right to choice on reproductive healthcare?
Roe v. Wade, now a precedent case overturned by the recent Supreme Court decision on Dobbs v.Jackson Women’s Healthcare relied on the protection to the right of privacy interpreted to exist in the Roe decision. Now that this privacy protection of the fourteenth amendment has been abandoned by the Supreme Court is there another Constitutional provision that might restore women’s rights? Some have suggested the thirteenth amendment may offer this option.
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
I propose pulling the Thirteenth Amendment from the shelf of history, dusting it off, and putting it to work — in particular as to the “involuntary servitude” of laws restricting women’s choice in abortion.
I invite all to read in full this argument for the use of the thirteenth amendment as a justification to support allowing women reproductive choice. This approach has been suggested by Professor Tribe and others and I believe has merit. Though it is perhaps doubtful to be deemed by the present SCOTUS Conservative majority to be available, I believe it should be pursued.
I hope this suggestion will be introduced in every state legislature and possibly at the federal level.
“ I am borrowing this from Robert Veitch of Richfield. His suggestion is spot on.
Overturning Roe requires another law to be passed that ensures men bear equal responsibility for pregnancies. Call it the “Personal Responsibility Act”.
Using DNA as a verification, paternity for every embryo should be established and the male responsible obliged by law to support the woman and the child through the child’s (life) including medical costs, living costs, education-all the costs a father normally assumes for his child. In addition, the child should have a full share of the father’s estate if and when the father dies.
If women cannot decide whether or not to carry a child, fathers should not be able to decide whether or not to support the woman and the child. It’s about time men assume responsibility for the consequences of their pleasure.”
Thanks for this cogent explanation, Robert. One key difference between today and 1973 is that we have abortion medication and the internet. We need to move the pills around not women. However, for the last 22 years the FDA has kept the pills in the most restricted category with medications like thalidomide. For no medical reason. Please sign and share my petition urging the FDA to lift the restrictions: https://chng.it/yrnDnmzv
Dobbs will be spoken of with the same derision and disgust as Dred Scott in our history books. This decision is an utter betrayal of our Constitutional history and tradition, and among the most consequential violations of human rights in America in our lifetimes.
Thanks for laying out many of the issues with this heinous miscarriage of the law. We simply MUST rise up and give POTUS a FIRM Democratically controlled House & Senate so that the court can be expanded, the filibuster can be modified, progress can be made. Be angry and grieve, yes, but turn that grief into action!!
As a young medical student in the late 60’s I witnessed the bleeding infected women as they filed into our hospital after botched “garage type” abortions. It was always Friday nite -after pay day. As a young Ob/Gyn I leaned the safe techniques of pregnancy termination. I performed the procedure on young women and saw the relief on their faces to have the burden of an unwanted pregnancy lifted from their souls.
A woman’s right to chose has always been a litmus test for my voting.
Now I feel deflated and sad, scared for the next woman who might lose her life or have a new burden turn her dreams into ashes.
I pray that as we once rose to defeat enemies of democracy, we shall arise to defeat a right wing portion of our country that feel they have the right to take away a woman’s rights.
As Robert Hubbell has lifted our heavy hearts in the past with action based strategies we look forward to his leadership and guidance.
I spent my life caring for women. Let us now rise to protect their health and their rights to control their own bodies.
I greatly appreciate your newsletter. I am a woman, and I have a legal question. Let us assume that I am a perfect match to donate a kidney or liver to someone, and that such a donation would save the person's life. I believe I cannot be forced to do so under current law. I also believe it is true that my organs cannot be harvested after my death without my permission. Why is my womb not under my control in the same way? Even if a person truly believed that life began at conception, shouldn't the same rules apply?Why should a woman be forced to use her organs or, at the risk of her life, her very body, for the sake of another human? Could anti-abortion laws be challenged in this way, since privacy or separation of church and state do not seem to be sufficiently "originalist" concepts for this cult. (As a Jew, I am also eager to see how the court wriggles out of the challenge from the synagogue in Florida.)
Thank you for your always thoughtful comments, Mr. Hubbell. I am too grief stricken, outraged, angry, and sad all at once to be able to comment coherently. What I keep thinking of is my three granddaughters, and how we have failed them. We must right this grievance wrong, though at the moment it is difficult to see how we wrest control from the tyrannical and hyper radical minority.
And where in this ruling about unwanted pregnancy (which it takes two to make) does it order anything other than 100% of the impact falling upon women. The four male justices you mentioned who ignore the burdens and risks placed upon the pregnant women have made sure they are forced to carry a pregnancy they did not want or expect, perhaps for one of a variety of reasons. And this does not at all impact the other person who caused the pregnancy. No legal support required. The woman is left out there on her own. That is true oppression by those justices. Neither the father not the state will be ordered to help support the unwanted child. How does that help anybody? And oh, yeah, a fetus less than 16 weeks is not a child. It’s just not. And oh, yeah, it’s not always or even mostly, an easy decision to “just go have an abortion.” These are many burdens placed on the one without the [“rhymes with Venus”].
I only want to share the words of my 26-year-old daughter, a Nicu nurse, and now a pediatric nurse who sees many many unfit parents.
”This morning when I heard the news I initially performed a quick but worried eye roll and continued on with my day. Not because I didn’t care, but because we unfortunately were all acutely aware this news was on the horizon. As the day went on I got angry, so very angry. I crafted many indignant, expletive filled posts, but none seemed to capture the true outrage I was feeling. I went on to search for answers; ways to support women, looked for signs of hope. And now, I weep. I weep for the women who will die not only from unsafe abortions but also from forcefully carrying out pregnancies that threaten a mother’s health. I weep for marginalized women, who will be affected by and die from these laws at a disproportionate rate. I weep for women who will now have motherhood forced upon them, despite not being ready, willing, or able to care for a child. I weep for the rape and incest victims, who will now be forced for carry and birth their abusers children in many states. I weep for the female babies that will be born, unknowingly coming into a world that stops advocating for their rights the moment they take their first breaths. Abortion is healthcare, and I weep for the loss of such an essential right. I weep because I fear this is not the end, but the beginning of rights being stripped in this country. I weep for those who came before, and fought so fervently for these rights, and for those who will come after, and have to fight the same fight again. I weep for America. We cannot accept this. We will not accept this. While I weep, I unequivocally dissent.”
As a retired obstetrician/gynecologist, I am old enough to have seen what happens to women whose only choice is to have an abortion performed by someone who is not licensed or qualified. I have seen what happens to the lives of women who have children they cannot afford or support because it takes everything they have just to keep themselves moving forward, and the courage and strength it takes for individuals to end a much-wanted pregnancy in order to save their genetically or physically compromised child from suffering and certain death. And sadly, I have seen what happens to children who are born into homes where they are unwanted, abandoned or worse. I feel I no longer know the country in which I live, a place where wearing a mask during a global pandemic or being prevented from carrying a gun in public places is considered an infringement of personal freedoms, while being forced to carry a pregnancy you cannot afford or did not desire is considered just fine. I am heartbroken that we will have to try to fight this fight again.
Why do we disagree at such length and so fervently about abortion? The answer is simple: there’s no way to irrefutably determine who is right and wrong about the issue. To some, humans have souls that bestow sanctity. The non-religious laugh at the concept, yet know that there is indeed something special about the embryo at some point. Some believe that life begins at conception, others disagree and feel that there is no real sentience until much later. Some believe that the unborn have rights, and others believe that the rights accrue to the host until birth. As varied and contradictory as these ideas are, they are all somehow based in one’s religion, personal philosophy, education, or upbringing, and hence, each person will have their own (usually strong) opinions on the issue. But in the end, it all boils down to opinion – not provable fact. And as a result, considerable latitude must be given when judging the viewpoints of others in this matter.
Earlier this week the Supreme Court decided that decisions on abortion should be relegated to the States instead of the Federal Government, the purported rationale being that such decisions should be made by the voters, and closer to home. Well that’s a good start, but how about extending that line of thought a little further? Why not place abortion decisions even closer to those affected – say, instead to the State, the County, or town, or – how about this – the home or family of the concerned individual? Certainly they know their particular circumstances and the impacts of their decisions better than any governmental body, and are therefore best suited to make them in a manner that best aligns with their adopted, yet ultimately unprovable beliefs.
when there is no way out of poverty; my grandma had 14 pregnancies living in poverty -- on the death certificate for her twins is recorded "malnutrition." Only 5 of her children survived the conditions of poverty that attended the pregnancy and birth. My mom had 8 children; my father was disabled after World War One.. living through the depression of the 30s and the war of the 40s again concentrated poverty. My sister's husband died at age 36 (after his service in the Korean War) leaving her with 6 children to raise in poverty. If it had not been for abortion , my wall of family would not have my earned doctorate; it took 3 generations to get out of poverty (no thanks, to the many wars that took fathers out of the homes to save somewhere in the world..)... Now we have "shock and awe" on our own children with military weapons and we have state laws that will force births. This is nothing except creating cannon fodder from the youngsters, the "Workforce" that the corporatists and trying to own ; and the continuation of poverty throughout our cities and towns. So sad we never learned this lesson and we are heading back to Dickensian conditions.
Here is the letter I just wrote to my so-called Representative Pete Stauber, after receiving his latest newsletter. Your readers are welcome to borrow the language when they write to their anti-choice politicians.
Dear Rep Stauber,
I was sickened by your celebration of the overturning of Roe v Wade by the extremist majority in the Supreme Court. Two justices lied in their confirmation hearings when they indicated that Roe was ’settled law’ and they did not intend to overturn it. Poll after poll shows that most Americans did NOT want Roe to be overturned, no matter what their personal preferences. The illegitimate SCOTUS is happy to overturn state laws regulating guns but give states total say about whether girls and women have the right to reproductive health care. Clarence Thomas, who also lied in his confirmation hearings, has indicated that birth control and marriage equality are next. These decisions fly in the face ‘majority rule,’ a bedrock of our faltering democracy.
You are in a very privileged position to be able to afford to have five children and have good health care coverage provided by US tax payers. Most people seeking abortions in the US today are low-income mothers. This decision is a blatant attack especially on low-income girls and women around the country. You are forcing incredible pain and hardship on the most vulnerable people, many of whom don’t have access to the health care they need to prevent unwanted pregnancies, thanks to Republican attacks on Planned Parenthood and Medicaid expansion. You are putting doctors at risk of imprisonment for providing essential health care.
If you think all life has value, then why do you and your fellow Republicans consistently cut aid to low income families? You force girls and women to bear children they do not want and cannot afford, then make it even harder for them to bear and raise these children. Adoption is NOT the answer for most of them. Even intended pregnancies take a toll on our health and our bodies.
Your version of the ’sanctity of life’ clearly does not apply to living, breathing, conscious people. You well know that the vast majority of abortions take place within the first three months of pregnancy, long before fetal viability and consciousness. The tiny minority of abortions taking place later involve very hard decisions that should be made by women and their doctors, not distant elites in gerrymandered districts in their comfortable offices, pretending to care. The US will soon have stories like those that have emerged recently in anti-choice Poland, such as the death of a healthy mother of four who died this year of septic shock after doctors refused to terminate her failing pregnancy with twins. The first fetus died in the womb on December 23, but doctors refused to remove it, due to abortion laws, and her health deteriorated. The hospital waited until the heartbeat of the second twin stopped a week later, and waited a further two days before terminating the pregnancy on December 31. The woman, Agneiszka, died on January 25. Don’t forget her name, or the names of Americans that will soon follow, thanks to a minority of Republican extremists like you. Already, American women in some states are being prosecuted after having miscarriages. Young teens are exhausting family savings by having to travel hundreds of miles and spend thousands of dollars for a safe abortion.
Shame on you. Your hypocrisy and cruelty will not be forgotten this November. You are ignoring what most Minnesotans, and most Americans, want: for abortion to be safe, legal and rare.
Dobbs will prompt a much needed re-examination of the role of the Supreme Court in our society and government. The people will not tolerate a Court that destroys our rights to vindicate the theological goals of a minority. I don’t think the Court will survive this in its current form.
Is the thirteenth amendment a potential protection of a woman’s right to choice on reproductive healthcare?
Roe v. Wade, now a precedent case overturned by the recent Supreme Court decision on Dobbs v.Jackson Women’s Healthcare relied on the protection to the right of privacy interpreted to exist in the Roe decision. Now that this privacy protection of the fourteenth amendment has been abandoned by the Supreme Court is there another Constitutional provision that might restore women’s rights? Some have suggested the thirteenth amendment may offer this option.
https://qcp.medium.com/resurrecting-the-thirteenth-amendment-to-save-womens-control-over-their-bodies-their-labor-8246da5afb17
The thirteenth amendment reads as follows:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
I propose pulling the Thirteenth Amendment from the shelf of history, dusting it off, and putting it to work — in particular as to the “involuntary servitude” of laws restricting women’s choice in abortion.
I invite all to read in full this argument for the use of the thirteenth amendment as a justification to support allowing women reproductive choice. This approach has been suggested by Professor Tribe and others and I believe has merit. Though it is perhaps doubtful to be deemed by the present SCOTUS Conservative majority to be available, I believe it should be pursued.
I hope this suggestion will be introduced in every state legislature and possibly at the federal level.
“ I am borrowing this from Robert Veitch of Richfield. His suggestion is spot on.
Overturning Roe requires another law to be passed that ensures men bear equal responsibility for pregnancies. Call it the “Personal Responsibility Act”.
Using DNA as a verification, paternity for every embryo should be established and the male responsible obliged by law to support the woman and the child through the child’s (life) including medical costs, living costs, education-all the costs a father normally assumes for his child. In addition, the child should have a full share of the father’s estate if and when the father dies.
If women cannot decide whether or not to carry a child, fathers should not be able to decide whether or not to support the woman and the child. It’s about time men assume responsibility for the consequences of their pleasure.”
Thanks for this cogent explanation, Robert. One key difference between today and 1973 is that we have abortion medication and the internet. We need to move the pills around not women. However, for the last 22 years the FDA has kept the pills in the most restricted category with medications like thalidomide. For no medical reason. Please sign and share my petition urging the FDA to lift the restrictions: https://chng.it/yrnDnmzv
Dobbs will be spoken of with the same derision and disgust as Dred Scott in our history books. This decision is an utter betrayal of our Constitutional history and tradition, and among the most consequential violations of human rights in America in our lifetimes.
Thanks for laying out many of the issues with this heinous miscarriage of the law. We simply MUST rise up and give POTUS a FIRM Democratically controlled House & Senate so that the court can be expanded, the filibuster can be modified, progress can be made. Be angry and grieve, yes, but turn that grief into action!!
As a young medical student in the late 60’s I witnessed the bleeding infected women as they filed into our hospital after botched “garage type” abortions. It was always Friday nite -after pay day. As a young Ob/Gyn I leaned the safe techniques of pregnancy termination. I performed the procedure on young women and saw the relief on their faces to have the burden of an unwanted pregnancy lifted from their souls.
A woman’s right to chose has always been a litmus test for my voting.
Now I feel deflated and sad, scared for the next woman who might lose her life or have a new burden turn her dreams into ashes.
I pray that as we once rose to defeat enemies of democracy, we shall arise to defeat a right wing portion of our country that feel they have the right to take away a woman’s rights.
As Robert Hubbell has lifted our heavy hearts in the past with action based strategies we look forward to his leadership and guidance.
I spent my life caring for women. Let us now rise to protect their health and their rights to control their own bodies.
I greatly appreciate your newsletter. I am a woman, and I have a legal question. Let us assume that I am a perfect match to donate a kidney or liver to someone, and that such a donation would save the person's life. I believe I cannot be forced to do so under current law. I also believe it is true that my organs cannot be harvested after my death without my permission. Why is my womb not under my control in the same way? Even if a person truly believed that life began at conception, shouldn't the same rules apply?Why should a woman be forced to use her organs or, at the risk of her life, her very body, for the sake of another human? Could anti-abortion laws be challenged in this way, since privacy or separation of church and state do not seem to be sufficiently "originalist" concepts for this cult. (As a Jew, I am also eager to see how the court wriggles out of the challenge from the synagogue in Florida.)
It is rather a question - is there a process which exists to impeach or remove a Supreme Court Justice?
Thank you for your always thoughtful comments, Mr. Hubbell. I am too grief stricken, outraged, angry, and sad all at once to be able to comment coherently. What I keep thinking of is my three granddaughters, and how we have failed them. We must right this grievance wrong, though at the moment it is difficult to see how we wrest control from the tyrannical and hyper radical minority.
And where in this ruling about unwanted pregnancy (which it takes two to make) does it order anything other than 100% of the impact falling upon women. The four male justices you mentioned who ignore the burdens and risks placed upon the pregnant women have made sure they are forced to carry a pregnancy they did not want or expect, perhaps for one of a variety of reasons. And this does not at all impact the other person who caused the pregnancy. No legal support required. The woman is left out there on her own. That is true oppression by those justices. Neither the father not the state will be ordered to help support the unwanted child. How does that help anybody? And oh, yeah, a fetus less than 16 weeks is not a child. It’s just not. And oh, yeah, it’s not always or even mostly, an easy decision to “just go have an abortion.” These are many burdens placed on the one without the [“rhymes with Venus”].
I only want to share the words of my 26-year-old daughter, a Nicu nurse, and now a pediatric nurse who sees many many unfit parents.
”This morning when I heard the news I initially performed a quick but worried eye roll and continued on with my day. Not because I didn’t care, but because we unfortunately were all acutely aware this news was on the horizon. As the day went on I got angry, so very angry. I crafted many indignant, expletive filled posts, but none seemed to capture the true outrage I was feeling. I went on to search for answers; ways to support women, looked for signs of hope. And now, I weep. I weep for the women who will die not only from unsafe abortions but also from forcefully carrying out pregnancies that threaten a mother’s health. I weep for marginalized women, who will be affected by and die from these laws at a disproportionate rate. I weep for women who will now have motherhood forced upon them, despite not being ready, willing, or able to care for a child. I weep for the rape and incest victims, who will now be forced for carry and birth their abusers children in many states. I weep for the female babies that will be born, unknowingly coming into a world that stops advocating for their rights the moment they take their first breaths. Abortion is healthcare, and I weep for the loss of such an essential right. I weep because I fear this is not the end, but the beginning of rights being stripped in this country. I weep for those who came before, and fought so fervently for these rights, and for those who will come after, and have to fight the same fight again. I weep for America. We cannot accept this. We will not accept this. While I weep, I unequivocally dissent.”
As a retired obstetrician/gynecologist, I am old enough to have seen what happens to women whose only choice is to have an abortion performed by someone who is not licensed or qualified. I have seen what happens to the lives of women who have children they cannot afford or support because it takes everything they have just to keep themselves moving forward, and the courage and strength it takes for individuals to end a much-wanted pregnancy in order to save their genetically or physically compromised child from suffering and certain death. And sadly, I have seen what happens to children who are born into homes where they are unwanted, abandoned or worse. I feel I no longer know the country in which I live, a place where wearing a mask during a global pandemic or being prevented from carrying a gun in public places is considered an infringement of personal freedoms, while being forced to carry a pregnancy you cannot afford or did not desire is considered just fine. I am heartbroken that we will have to try to fight this fight again.
Why do we disagree at such length and so fervently about abortion? The answer is simple: there’s no way to irrefutably determine who is right and wrong about the issue. To some, humans have souls that bestow sanctity. The non-religious laugh at the concept, yet know that there is indeed something special about the embryo at some point. Some believe that life begins at conception, others disagree and feel that there is no real sentience until much later. Some believe that the unborn have rights, and others believe that the rights accrue to the host until birth. As varied and contradictory as these ideas are, they are all somehow based in one’s religion, personal philosophy, education, or upbringing, and hence, each person will have their own (usually strong) opinions on the issue. But in the end, it all boils down to opinion – not provable fact. And as a result, considerable latitude must be given when judging the viewpoints of others in this matter.
Earlier this week the Supreme Court decided that decisions on abortion should be relegated to the States instead of the Federal Government, the purported rationale being that such decisions should be made by the voters, and closer to home. Well that’s a good start, but how about extending that line of thought a little further? Why not place abortion decisions even closer to those affected – say, instead to the State, the County, or town, or – how about this – the home or family of the concerned individual? Certainly they know their particular circumstances and the impacts of their decisions better than any governmental body, and are therefore best suited to make them in a manner that best aligns with their adopted, yet ultimately unprovable beliefs.
That sounds like real liberty and freedom to me.
when there is no way out of poverty; my grandma had 14 pregnancies living in poverty -- on the death certificate for her twins is recorded "malnutrition." Only 5 of her children survived the conditions of poverty that attended the pregnancy and birth. My mom had 8 children; my father was disabled after World War One.. living through the depression of the 30s and the war of the 40s again concentrated poverty. My sister's husband died at age 36 (after his service in the Korean War) leaving her with 6 children to raise in poverty. If it had not been for abortion , my wall of family would not have my earned doctorate; it took 3 generations to get out of poverty (no thanks, to the many wars that took fathers out of the homes to save somewhere in the world..)... Now we have "shock and awe" on our own children with military weapons and we have state laws that will force births. This is nothing except creating cannon fodder from the youngsters, the "Workforce" that the corporatists and trying to own ; and the continuation of poverty throughout our cities and towns. So sad we never learned this lesson and we are heading back to Dickensian conditions.