'Maternity Homes' Treating Women Like Criminals
9.25.24
Click to skip ahead: Anti-Abortion Strategy: Post-Dobbs Deaths looks at a noxious campaign that blames pro-choicers for the deaths of two Georgia women and the increase in Texas maternal mortality. Attacks on Democracy has the latest nonsense in Florida. In the States, news from Washington, Florida, and Missouri. In Stats & Studies, the increase in post-Dobbs pregnancy criminalization. In 2024 news, some quick hits. In the Nation, Republican men are exposing themselves. Finally, the nightmare Rise of Maternity Homes.
Anti-Abortion Strategy: Post-Dobbs Deaths
Just when you think they can’t get any lower: Anti-abortion powerhouse Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America (SBA-PLA) is launching a half million dollar ad campaign to blame pro-choicers for the deaths of two Georgia women. That’s right, the group that helped to pass the laws that killed Candi Miller and Amber Nicole Thurman are doubling down on their horror show.
In one of the most grotesque displays I’ve ever seen in the over twenty years I’ve been doing this work, SBA-PLA’s ad claims that “Democrats’ abortion lies put women at risk” and that abortion bans protect women. But it was the final line of the TV spot that made me feel physically ill: “Candi and Amber should be alive. The Left’s scare tactics are deadly.”
Honestly, how dare they. How dare they use these women’s names; how dare they use their pictures. It’s just beyond the pale.
If you can manage to set aside the fury for a moment, SBA-PLA’s ad and accompanying release reveal a lot about their strategy for handling post-Dobbs deaths. The ad insists, for example, that “no Georgia law blocks life-saving care for women.” Please notice the language there. They don’t say the law allows for life-saving abortions, just ‘care.’ There’s a reason for that.
These groups don’t want abortion to be legal for any reason, even to save a person’s life; that’s why they will never, ever say abortion is permitted. I pointed out this language trick earlier this week when analyzing the responses to Miller and Thurman’s deaths from SBA-PLA, Christina Francis, president of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), and Michael New of the Charlotte Lozier Institute: Instead of saying that doctors can legally provide life-saving abortions, all said that doctors are allowed “to intervene” or “to act.”
And remember, these are the groups that are so intent on divorcing abortion from healthcare that they want to force women with life-threatening pregnancies into vaginal labor and c-sections, even before fetal viability.
The other thing that’s important to note is that despite SBA-PLA’s insistence that the law allows doctors to save women’s lives, this group fought hard in at least one state to stop an exception for women’s lives.
Long-time readers will remember this: Back in 2022, ProPublica published leaked audio of a strategy session between Republican lawmakers in Tennessee and anti-abortion activists, including leaders at SBA-PLA. At the time, Tennessee law didn’t have an abortion ban ‘exception’ for women’s lives; instead, they had an “affirmative defense mandate.” That means doctors had to break the law to save women’s lives with abortion and then retroactively defend their decision. Republican lawmakers, worried about the political backlash, wanted to add a ‘life’ exception. SBA-PLA lobbied them not to.
In fact, Katie Glenn, SBA-PLA’s state policy director, complimented legislators for their lack of an exceptions for women’s lives, urging them to wait for voters’ anger to calm down and to “please have confidence in your work.”
Well, now we know what all that work looks like. The least they could do is accept credit for it.
For more on SBA-PLA and how they’ve been feeding Donald Trump his ‘post-birth’ abortion talking points, read yesterday’s newsletter:
Instead of running ads from SBA-PLA, I wish networks would run interviews with Amber Nicole Thurman’s mom—like this one below from CNN. I don’t think I’ll get ever get over seeing this poor woman cradle her daughter’s photograph.
I wish I was done talking about post-Dobbs deaths, but we’re not quite there yet. A new analysis from the Gender Equity Policy Institute (GEPI) found that maternal mortality in Texas skyrocketed by 56% after the state’s abortion ban went into effect. Fifty-six percent. The nationwide rise in maternal mortality was 11% in the same time period. From Nancy L. Cohen, president of the GEPI:
“There’s only one explanation for this staggering difference in maternal mortality. All the research points to Texas’ abortion ban as the primary driver of this alarming increase. Texas, I fear, is a harbinger of what’s to come in other states.”
Now you know why Republicans are putting anti-abortion activists like Ingrid Skop on Texas’ maternal mortality review committee. They are desperate to hide these numbers. I’ve been writing for a while now on the various ways that Republicans are trying to cover up maternal deaths—whether it’s what they’re doing in Texas, or how they’re sowing distrust in credible data across the country. I think it’s fair to say we’re going to see a massive ramping up of those efforts.
Attacks on Democracy
Okay, let’s talk about what’s happening in Florida, because it is a total shit show.
In a continuation of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ absolutely wild behavior, the Republican has ordered over $15 million in taxpayer-funded advertising in opposition to Amendment 4. Lauren Brenzel, campaign director for Amendment 4, says, “This isn’t just a violation of state campaign finance laws; it is an insult to Floridians and our democratic process.”
Brenzel points out that the state could be using that money to deal “with the potential catastrophic destruction that could come from Hurricane Beryl” or “for substantive support of Florida mothers and children.” Instead it’s going to anti-abortion propaganda.
Perhaps most incredibly, the move comes as the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) is being sued for campaigning against the abortion rights amendment. That’s because it’s illegal to use taxpayer dollars to oppose a citizen led initiative! But that hasn’t stopped DeSantis from weaponizing the AHCA by releasing ads and a ‘public awareness’ campaign that claims Amendment 4 endangers women.
A judge is hearing the case today, and you’re not going to believe what DeSantis’ argument is: Florida’s Republican Attorney General Ashley Moody is claiming that she, DeSantis, and the AHCA are exempt from the law prohibiting them from using their state power to interfere with an election. I wish I was joking.
This is what I mean when I say abortion rights are a democracy issue.
Meanwhile, this bit of news from The Bulwark has me livid: They found that Comcast just sent $50,000 to DeSantis’ PAC that’s dedicated to block Amendment 4. What makes this extra infuriating is that Comcast has tried to ride the wave of public support for abortion rights by announcing that it would help employees in anti-choice states to travel for care when necessary. So while they’re publicly backing abortion, they’re quietly giving money to one of the worst anti-abortion offenders.
Sarah Parker, executive director for Voices of Florida, tells me the move makes clear that “they are and will always be pro-profit and do not care about the people’s right to abortion.”
“As I watch the outpouring of public empathy for women who have had certain types of abortions, I wish the American public would recognize the humanity in all women who terminate a pregnancy.”
- Sarah Harrison, “Both My Abortions Were Necessary. Only One Gets Sympathy,” The New York Times
In the States
Since I’m already ranting about Florida, I might as well stick with it: The Orlando Sentinel reports that Republican leaders are directing school districts not to teach teenagers about birth control, domestic violence or sexual consent. Instead, they’ll teach abstinence-only education, which lies to young people about their health.
Elissa Barr, a public health professor at the University of North Florida, told the Orlando Sentinel that she’s been keeping a list of words and phrases that school districts have been told to remove from their lesson plans. They include: abuse, consent, domestic violence, fluids, gender identity and LGBTQ.
This is awful enough on its own, but when taken with the whole of what’s happening in Florida, it paints a really bleak picture for young people. They’re going to grow up in a place that doesn’t teach them anything about their bodies or birth control, and then won’t let them have an abortion if they get pregnant.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle: You may remember that Washington started a stockpile of abortion medication to have on hand in case the Supreme Court ruled against mifepristone. This week, Gov. Jay Inslee said that the state is going to hold onto those 30,000 doses in case Donald Trump wins the presidency. “You just can’t trust him when it comes to women’s reproductive health,” he said.
It’s so important that media outlets are being mindful of their language on abortion. Take this piece in the Springfield News-Leader that outlines the Missouri U.S. Senate candidates’ stances on abortion. The piece claims that Sen. Josh Hawley opposes a national abortion ban. But what Hawley actually said was, “I don’t support a nationwide ban, I do support reasonable federal restrictions.”
As you know, that’s the same thing. We can’t let Republicans trick voters with slick language; I really hope reporters get on this.
Quick hits:
Jezebel on the ruling that blocked Tennessee’s ‘anti-trafficking’ law;
A group of Iowa faith leaders have written an op-ed for the Des Moines Register about supporting abortion rights, joining the 64% of Iowans who believe the same;
And Wisconsin Public Radio on how abortion rights is playing out in the state as we speed towards November.
Stats & Studies
Pregnancy Justice has published a vital new report highlighting how fetal personhood laws and the end of Roe sparked an increase in pregnancy criminalization. Lourdes A. Rivera, president of Pregnancy Justice, says, “the Dobbs decision emboldened prosecutors to develop ever more aggressive strategies to prosecute pregnancy, leading to the most pregnancy-related criminal cases on record.”
The report found that since Dobbs, at least 210 people faced criminal charges related to their pregnancies across 12 states, with Alabama making up half of the cases. Other top contenders? Oklahoma, South Carolina and Ohio.
“[I]n post-Dobbs America, being pregnant places people at increased risk, not only of dire health outcomes, but of arrest,” Rivera said.
If you’re a regular reader, you know that I think Pregnancy Justice is doing some of the most important and cutting-edge work in the field, so I really do recommend you read the full report. But here are some highlights in case you don’t have the time: Criminalization continues to follow a specific pattern in which law enforcement relies on health care providers to turn patients in, and prosecutors pursue charges that are seemingly unrelated to abortion—like child endangerment and neglect.
Some of the most troubling findings, however, were trends around what prosecutors considered ‘evidence’ of a crime. Anything from having a home birth to researching the possibility of an abortion was used by law enforcement to make a case against patients. Even not accessing prenatal care was seen as proof of a crime.
An absolute nightmare. To support Pregnancy Justice’s important work, click here.
2024
Vice President Kamala Harris said in an interview yesterday that she would like to eliminate the filibuster in order to bring back federal protections for abortion rights;
Vox has a really good piece about Trump’s connection to Project 2025, with a particular focus on anti-abortion attacks;
Planned Parenthood president Alexis McGill Johnson responds to Trump’s latest abortion/women tirade;
Reuters looks at on the voters the Harris campaign is reaching with their Reproductive Freedom bus tour;
And actor Jennifer Lawrence has endorsed Harris, saying, “I know that she will do whatever she can to protect reproductive rights.”
I joined Busy Phillips’ podcast to talk about my new book! Listen below and pre-order here.
In the Nation
When they tell you who they are, believe them. Bernie Moreno, the Republican running for U.S. Senate in Ohio, let what he really thinks about women slip last week. In a Warren County town hall, Moreno blasted women for being “crazy” for caring about abortion rights and said that older women shouldn’t have to worry about that. You know, because of our dusty uteruses.
“You know, the left has a lot of single issue voters. Sadly, by the way, there’s a lot of suburban women, a lot of suburban women that are like, ‘Listen, abortion is it. If I can’t have an abortion in this country whenever I want, I will vote for anybody else.’ …OK. It’s a little crazy by the way, but—especially for women that are like past 50—I’m thinking to myself, ‘I don’t think that’s an issue for you.' Thank God my wife didn’t hear that one.”
You would think that if you’re trying to win an election, you could keep your misogyny in check for a few minutes when you’re on stage—but apparently not. These guys have such a hard time not making sexist comments because it’s just who they are. (And if you watch a video of Moreno when he said this, you can hear in his voice just how proud he is of the jab at older women.)
After an understandable backlash, Moreno’s campaign released a statement calling the Republican’s comments a “tongue-in-cheek joke” about how Democrats “treat all women as if they’re automatically single issue voters on abortion.” Sure, Jan.
There’s a reason we’re watching Moreno closely: He’s running to unseat Sen. Sherrod Brown in a race that could have a massive impact on the makeup of the Senate. So here’s hoping these comments make a difference in November.
In other national news, a federal judge is exempting thousands of Catholic employers across the country from a government mandate to protect workers who have abortions. You may remember the controversy over the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act; earlier this year, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) said that the federal law requires employers to give workers “reasonable accommodations” (like unpaid time off) related to pregnancy, childbirth or abortion.
Conservatives were furious, and lawsuits ensued—including this one brought by the Catholic Benefits Association and the Diocese of Bismarck. U.S. District Judge Daniel Traynor in North Dakota ruled in favor of the groups, characterizing the EEOC’s guidance as a attack on religion and calling it “a precarious time for people of religious faith in America.” (Yes, he sounds straight out of the Handmaid’s Tale.)
Gillian Thomas with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project said the ruling “marks a dangerous new low in the weaponization of religion against civil rights.”
Traynor also ruled that the EEOC couldn’t force the groups to comply with harassment regulations that would “require them to speak or communicate in favor of abortion, fertility treatments, or gender transition.” Or as the Associated Press puts it: “The ruling targeted transgender employees who would be restricted from expressing parts of their gender identities.” Charming.
Quick hits:
Mother Jones on Big Tech’s role in abortion surveillance;
The Guardian on maternal mortality and abortion bans;
And The 19th looks at All Above All’s effort to mobilize men of color on abortion rights.
Rise of Maternity Homes
I’ve been waiting for a piece like this one to come out. A little over a year ago, I warned that the anti-abortion movement wanted to open a “national network” of maternity homes. And if you don’t know what maternity homes are, think about a crisis pregnancy center that you live in.
Indeed, these homes often are run by crisis pregnancy centers, and have relationships to evangelical adoption agencies. They target young women, those with substance issues and those without homes. In other words—the most vulnerable among us.
After I read this NPR piece about an Idaho maternity home that forced strict rules on women—like curfews and turning in their phones at night—I was hoping that someone would do a deep dive. So I was really glad to see The New York Times do just that in a piece about Florida maternity homes.
Reporter Laura C. Morel interviewed nearly 50 people—including current and former residents, volunteers and employees—to paint a stark picture of what anti-abortion “help” for pregnant women looks like.
These groups, which mostly operate without state oversight, dehumanize women who have no place else to go. On the tame end of the nightmare is religious indoctrination; the homes often require residents to attend church or prayer meetings. Homes will also prohibit cellphone use, visitors, and even romantic relationships. Two homes Morel wrote about required sexual abstinence.
Some of the mandates are likely illegal—like requiring women to “hand over their food stamps to pay for communal groceries.” One of the residences, Sunlight Home, would even withhold donated clothing items until women ‘earned’ “Sunlight coins” from the home’s management.
The overwhelming trend in these homes, however, is surveillance. In addition to having indoor security cameras, women are expected to ask permission to leave, endure “random searches of rooms and belongings,” and agree to install a tracking app on their phones—which would be locked in safes overnight.
This is what Republicans want for the women they force into pregnancy. This is what they mean they talk about supporting women and families. And remember, the umbrella groups that run these homes—like Heartbeat International—get millions in taxpayer dollars.
Thirty-three year old Kara Vanderhelm, who lived at a home for eight months, told the Times it felt dehumanizing, “almost like we were criminals, not single mothers.” I’m pretty sure that’s the point.
When reading about these so-called homes for vulnerable pregnant women, run by religious zealots, I couldn't help but think about the horrific ways the Catholic Church in Ireland treated unwed mothers, e.g., the Magdalene Laundries. Who would have thought a few decades later the US would be recreating similar situations. Keep reporting, Jessica, we need you.
“OK. It’s a little crazy by the way, but—especially for women that are like past 50—I’m thinking to myself, ‘I don’t think that’s an issue for you.'
But it’s an issue for a man?