Commentary Abortion

Eliminating Abortion Stigma: Playing Offense Starts With You

Jessica Griffin

At Netroots Nation congressional candidate Darcy Burner encouraged the Left to being playing offense on the War of Women by supporting women who tell their abortion stories, but challenging the cultural narrative about abortion shouldn't be a burden that rests solely on the sholders of women who have had them. 

A year and a half ago I joined two other women in telling my abortion story on MTV’s 16 and Pregnant. Though we were certainly not the first women to speak out publicly about our abortion experiences, doing so on a television show about teen mothers quickly sparked a heated debate. Bill O’Reilly even went so far as to condemn the show as “glorifying abortion” because host Dr. Drew dared to call us “brave” for sharing our experiences. Since then, many others have come forward. 16 and Pregnant recently featured the abortion experience of Brittany DeJesus in an episode about her younger sister’s unplanned pregnancy, and the 1 in 3 campaign has provided a platform for many other women to begin speaking out.

Though no woman should ever feel required to “come out” about her abortion, the War on Women seems to have sparked a trend, and I have been contacted by many women who seek to come out in some capacity – either to friends and family members privately, or on Facebook, Youtube, or other social media. Our discussions always center around one theme – how do you tell your story honestly without seeming proud or happy? How do you say, “I had an abortion” with confidence, but with sensitivity to the diversity of experiences and feelings surrounding that phrase? And finally, does it matter?

Until recently, I’ve struggled with the answers to these questions. On the one hand, I have urged women to remain true to their own feelings. On the other, I have understood that the tone of our narratives could hold political consequences. For so long the rhetoric of the pro-choice Democrat’s position has focused on “safe, legal and rare” – with the “rare” reinforcing the idea that abortion, though permissible, should be shameful and undesirable. Nobody wants to have an abortion, after all.

And so the debate continues – online in the comments of our stories and nationally in our social conscience: is speaking about our abortion experiences brave and necessary or promotional? And can you support women who have had abortions without supporting abortion itself?

Appreciate our work?

Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:


While I certainly understand the impulse of even the most well-intentioned to suggest that nobody wants an abortion, I can’t help but feel that it is an incorrect and dangerous sentiment to hold. A more correct statement would be that nobody wants to have an unplanned pregnancy. Sometimes those of us who find ourselves facing one really do want an abortion. Winning the moral, cultural, and political debate surrounding abortion rights means that we must not give the other side the upper hand on any aspect. Suggesting that nobody wants an abortion or that nobody should be willing and happy to talk about her experience reinforces the idea that it is shameful – and it gives the other side the moral advantage.

Which is why congressional candidate Darcy Burner’s speech at Netroots Nation last week was so refreshing.  In it she outlines how the Left can begin playing offense in the War on Women. Central to her proposed strategy is challenging the “stories that people play in their heads” about women and abortion.

First, I want to thank Darcy Burner for recognizing this, and for being willing to support those of us who do chose to use our personal lives to protect the political rights of others.

Second, I want to suggest that the burden of changing the stories that people play in their heads about abortion is not just the responsibly of those who have had them. Ms. Burner goes on to say that “we need to make it okay for women to come out about the choices that we’ve made.” While I am confident that our stories can make a difference, the burden cannot be on those of us who have had abortions alone.

So what will it take? I want to suggest that support for the individuals who share their stories and support for abortion as an option, as a medical procedure, cannot be divorced – to do so places far too much of a burden on the women sharing their stories. Women who have abortions are good women. Abortion, when desired by a woman, is a good procedure. Abortion itself holds no moral weigh except in the context of its usage. Therefore, in order to change to stories in our heads we must resist forces that tell us that abortion as a procedure is bad, shameful, or not to be supported.

If we want women to come forward, to use their stories to change the narrative about abortion, then we must first create a culture in which women who have had an abortion can feel supported in having done so. That starts with challenging the myths in our own heads about abortion and women who have them. It means that each and every one of us needs to stop apologizing for abortion.

Roundups Law and Policy

Gavel Drop: The Fight Over Voter ID Laws Heats Up in the Courts

Jessica Mason Pieklo & Imani Gandy

Texas and North Carolina both have cases that could bring the constitutionality of Voter ID laws back before the U.S. Supreme Court as soon as this term.

Welcome to Gavel Drop, our roundup of legal news, headlines, and head-shaking moments in the courts

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton intends to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate the state’s voter ID law.

Meanwhile, according to Politifact, North Carolina attorney general and gubernatorial challenger Roy Cooper is actually saving taxpayers money by refusing to appeal the Fourth Circuit’s ruling on the state’s voter ID law, so Gov. Pat McCrory (R) should stop complaining about it.

And in other North Carolina news, Ian Millhiser writes that the state has hired high-powered conservative attorney Paul Clement to defend its indefensible voter ID law.

Appreciate our work?

Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:


Alex Thompson writes in Vice that the Zika virus is about to hit states with the most restrictive abortion laws in the United States, including Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. So if you’re pregnant, stay away. No one has yet offered advice for those pregnant people who can’t leave Zika-prone areas.

Robin Marty writes on Care2 about Americans United for Life’s (AUL) latest Mad Lib-style model bill, the “National Abortion Data Reporting Law.” Attacking abortion rights: It’s what AUL does.

The Washington Post profiled Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Given this Congress, that will likely spur another round of hearings. (It did get a response from Richards herself.)

Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson writes in Bloomberg BNA that Stanford Law Professor Pamela Karlan thinks the Supreme Court’s clarification of the undue burden standard in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt will have ramifications for voting rights cases.

This must-read New York Times piece reminds us that we still have a long way to go in accommodating breastfeeding parents on the job.

Analysis Politics

Timeline: Donald Trump’s Shifting Position on Abortion Rights

Ally Boguhn

Trump’s murky position on abortion has caused an uproar this election season as conservatives grapple with a Republican nominee whose stance on the issue has varied over time. Join Rewire for a look back at the business mogul's changing views on abortion.

For much of the 2016 election cycle, Donald Trump’s seemingly ever-changing position on reproductive health care and abortion rights has continued to draw scrutiny.

Trump was “totally pro-choice” in 1999, but “pro-life” by 2011. He wanted to shut down the government to defund Planned Parenthood in August 2015, but claimed “you can’t go around and say that” about such measures two months later. He thinks Planned Parenthood does “very good work” but wants to see it lose all of its funding as long as it offers abortion care. And, perhaps most notoriously, in late March of this year Trump took multiple stances over the course of just a few hours on whether those who have abortions should be punished if it became illegal.

With the hesitancy of anti-choice groups to fully embrace Trump—and with pro-choice organizations like Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and EMILY’s List all backing his opponent, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton—it is likely his stance on abortion will remain a key election issue moving into November.

Join Rewire for a look back at the business mogul’s changing views on abortion.

Appreciate our work?

Vote now! And help Rewire earn a bigger grant from CREDO:



Vote for Rewire and Help Us Earn Money

Rewire is in the running for a CREDO Mobile grant. More votes for Rewire means more CREDO grant money to support our work. Please take a few seconds to help us out!


Thank you for supporting our work!