+
“A balm for the soul”
  review on Goodreads
GOOD PEOPLE Book
upworthy

abortion

Sally Field took to Instagram to recall her 'horrific' illegal abortion at 17.

Sally Field, two-time Oscar winner and pretty universally beloved celebrity, took to Instagram on October 6, 2024 to share a harrowing story of being 17 and pregnant just before landing her breakout role as Gidget.

Field, 77, recalled living in a time before the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that affirmed the right to abortion in the United States (which, as we know, has since been overturned) .

"I had no choices in my life, I didn't have a lot of family support or finances…And then I found out I was pregnant,” she said, adding that "I still feel very shamed about it because I was raised in the '50s, and it's ingrained in me."

Without any safe, legal abortion options, 17-year-old Field relied on the help of a doctor who was a friend of her family to take her to get an illegal abortion.


“He drove me and his wife and my mother, in their brand-new Cadillac, to Tijuana." This experience would end up being "beyond hideous and life-altering," for Field and her family.

“We parked on a really scroungy-looking street, it was scary and he parked about three blocks away and said, 'See that building down there?' And he gave me an envelope with cash and I was to walk into that building and give them the cash and then come right back to him," she said.

Field received "no anesthetic" during the procedure. However, "There was a technician giving me a few puffs of ether but he would then take it away, so it just made my arms and legs feel numb weird, but I felt everything — how much pain I was in.”

This is when “the situation turned darker,” Field shared. “I realized that the technician was actually molesting me, so I had to figure out, how can I make my arms move to push him away? So it was just this absolute pit of shame. And then, when it was finished, they said, 'Go go go go go!', like the building was on fire. And they didn't want me there, you know, it was illegal!"

This all happened before Field’s life had begun, so to speak. "I'd never been out of the state, I'd never been on an airplane,” she said. And while she commended the doctor who helped her for his "generosity" and "bravery," as "he would've lost his license if anyone had found out,” she suffered nonetheless.

Still, after that, “fate, you know, something glorious outside of ourselves, whatever you believe, reached in," Field recalled. "And a few months after that, I began auditions. I didn't have an agent; I wasn't really an actor. I'd been doing it in high school constantly. And I began auditioning. And by the end of that year, I was Gidget. I was the quintessential, all-American girl next door."

sally field, sally field abortion, abortion laws, won't go back, kamala harris, election 2024A Sally Field with Don Porter and Betty Conner, 1965. upload.wikimedia.org

And here Fields really drove the point home, saying, "in reality, I was the quintessential, all-American girl next door, because so many young women, my generation of women, were going through this."

"And these are the things that women are going through now — when they're trying to get to another state, they don't have the money, they don't have the means, they don't know where they're going," she added. "And it's beyond, how you can go back to that and do that to our little girls and our young women, and not have respect and regard for their health and their own decisions about whether they feel they're able to give birth to a child at that time."

"We can't go back. We have to all stand up and fight,” she concluded, quipping, “and that was that lovely story."

The video quickly received a flood of comments from people thanking her for her honesty.

“Sally, thank you for sharing. As Brené Brown says, shame dies when stories are told in safe spaces. I see you, I honor you. Thank you for your voice in a time such as this,” one person wrote.

Another added, “Wow. It takes incredible courage to share something so intimate & painful.”

Many were compelled to share their own similar stories.

“I know my Mom had to go through something similar and her husband, my Dad took her. They could not afford another child. Reminds me of the Muriel Rukeyser quote, ‘What would happen if one woman told the truth of her life? The world would crack open. Thank you for being one of those women who tell the truth.”

“I can’t believe I’m still telling my mother’s story! She’s been gone more than 20 years now, and would be appalled that we are fighting for this again! My mother, Mary Elizabeth Eyre-Letts, had an illegal back alley abortion in 1940s in Chicago. The guy would not marry her or pay, and the procedure was several hundred dollars – a lot at that time. To add another layer, she was legally blind and came to Chicago from a farm to attend a blind school. She said she ate scrambled eggs for weeks for lack of money to eat; and became anemic for loss of blood.”

“I went with a few friends to get legal abortions when we were younger. The young men that got them pregnant did not go with them. I, their gay friend, went with them. I see so many women sharing their stories of abortion, and I see zero men talking about how abortion saved their lives; The boys that got to go to university and pursue their dreams without being young fathers, the young men who didn’t have to pay child support payments to the woman that they were sexually active with, but not emotionally invested in. So many men are able to have the lives that they dreamed of because the woman they impregnated had access to a safe and legal abortion. And I want them to start talking about it.”

In a lengthy caption, Fields admitted she was at first “hesitant” to share her experience, but finally came to the conclusion that, “so many women of my generation went through similar, traumatic events and I feel stronger when I think of them. I believe, like me, they must want to fight for their grandchildren and all the young women of this country."

Clearly, her intuition was spot on.

Celebrity

Chrissy Teigen just learned her 2020 miscarriage was an abortion. She's not alone.

'I remember reading "spontaneous abortion" in my medical records after a very much wanted pregnancy that ended in miscarriage. It was devastating to read that.'

Chrissy Teigen learned her miscarriage was an abortion.

Having a miscarriage is a devastating experience for most people that have experienced one. No one goes into a wanted pregnancy expecting this sad outcome, and for Chrissy Teigen and others like her, having a miscarriage later in pregnancy is beyond what most people can imagine. But two years ago, Teigen lost her son Jack at 20 weeks, after a complicated pregnancy that landed her in the hospital. Eventually, it was determined that to save Teigen's life, the hospital would need to deliver the baby only halfway through her pregnancy. After some time processing the loss of her son, Teigen came to understand that what she had was, in fact, an abortion.


Since she shared the news recently at a summit called "A Day of Unreasonable Conversation," people have been lambasting the expectant mom wondering how she couldn't know. When I first heard about the criticism of her sharing her discovery, it knocked the wind out of me. One in four women experience a miscarriage and I happen to be one of them. Most people know someone who has experienced a miscarriage and they've hopefully treated them with care and compassion, but few people know what comes next for those of us who have miscarried babies.

After getting through the tears, depression and haze of having had this experience, insurance paperwork shows up in your mailbox or you happen to look over the discharge papers from the hospital and you read the words "spontaneous abortion" in the diagnosis section. If you've had a D&C (dilation and curettage) or D&E (dilation and evacuation), the paperwork may only read "abortion." It reads this way because it's a medical term, even though it's a term that has become emotionally charged.

There are women like Teigen who may have been told something much less harsh when they miscarried. Doctors do their best to not cause extra duress on the person losing a child, so sentences like "we have to induce" or "we have to deliver" are used when they can, instead of words like "terminate" or "abortion."

No matter the situation, oftentimes seeing the word "abortion" on your paperwork when the child you lost was very wanted can knock you off kilter. So many people have been where Teigen is, having the realization the procedure they had was classified as an abortion, even if their bodies completed the miscarriage on its own.

On a post about how Teigen may not have realized she had an abortion, hundreds of people shared their stories about learning what was written in their charts. One commenter, Jennifer, wrote, "I remember reading 'habitual aborter' in my medical record. It was horrible and anxiety inducing. I had three miscarriages back to back while trying very hard to have a baby. I was dealing with a lot. I was not ready to read that in my records."

Another commenter, Julie, said "I remember reading 'spontaneous abortion' in my medical records after a very much wanted pregnancy that ended in miscarriage. It was devastating to read that. There's a reason doctors and nurses don't use that term with women going through that."

Stephanie shared, "I had a D&E because I was bleeding so bad they were afraid I was going to bleed to death. Heartbeat was gone. 3 weeks later I opened the mail and opened up a report with the word ABORTION on it. I screamed and cried for two hours."

The comments go on and on full of people who had no idea what they had was considered an abortion. It's heartbreaking to know Teigen is facing such harsh criticism over her discovery. No one wants to become one in four and no one wants their experience invalidated by people who have never experienced the pain.

Medical terminology doesn't care about the political atmosphere. It doesn't care about how emotionally charged people get around seeing or hearing the word. Medical terminology is there so other doctors and insurance carriers know what's going on and doctors do their best to shield grieving parents from terms that may make things worse.

Teigen may never see the comments people leave, but family and friends will. I don't know if there will ever be a day where the word abortion doesn't elicit such a visceral reaction from people, but education around how the word is used could be a start.

Democracy

American Medical Association president explains how abortion laws are already causing harm

'These decisions turn out to be quite complicated in a lot of instances.'

Abortion is a part of reproductive healthcare.

The Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has created a ripple effect of confusion and frustration in the medical field as doctors struggle to navigate the nuances of providing lifesaving care to patients under new state laws prohibiting abortion.

Who would have guessed that legislators criminalizing reproductive medicine—especially when they have no medical training or expertise in what can impact a pregnancy—could backfire? Who would have thought that politicians making decisions about what healthcare a person can and can't receive could lead to increased risks for patients?

Dr. Jack Resneck Jr., the president of the American Medical Association (AMA), knows more than the vast majority of us about why medical care should be left to medical professionals and the harm that stringent abortion laws can lead to.

"These decisions turn out to be quite complicated in a lot of instances," Resneck told journalist Chris Hayes. "So trying to make hard and fast rules in legislative bodies that apply the same across the board is just incredibly dangerous for patients."


Since the enactment of trigger laws in several states after the Supreme Court ruling, we've seen story after story of vital healthcare being denied for patients, from prescription medicines for rheumatoid arthritis to potentially lifesaving interventions in pregnancies gone wrong. Doctors are unclear on what they can and can't do, and the criminalization of care that could fall under the abortion umbrella has created a stressful situation for doctors who end up stuck between providing the best evidence-based care and risking jail time or losing their career.

Resneck provided testimony on behalf of the AMA to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations as part of a hearing entitled “Roe Reversal: The Impacts of Taking Away the Constitutional Right to an Abortion.” In his statement, he explained how abortion laws put both doctors and patients in a dangerous position.

“The recent Dobbs decision overturned nearly a half century of precedent, ending patients’ rights to comprehensive reproductive health care, allowing government intrusion into the medical exam room, and criminalizing medical care," Dr. Resneck said in his statement. "And, now, physicians in many states are reporting chaos and confusion. Physicians have been placed in an impossible situation, trying to meet their ethical duties to place patients’ health and well-being first, while attempting to comply with vague, restrictive, complex, and conflicting state laws that interfere in the practice of medicine and jeopardize the health of our patients. Physicians are worried about prosecution of their patients and themselves in the midst of significant legal uncertainty and this is dangerous for our patients."

Resneck shared that the Dobbs decision is already limiting people's access to medications that treat chronic disease and explained how it will "worsen existing gaps in health disparities and outcomes, compounding the harm that under-resourced communities already experience."

"States that end legal abortion will not end abortion, they will end safe abortion, risking devastating consequences, including patients’ lives," he added.

Resneck wrote that the association has “only begun to assess the full impact of the Dobbs decision on our physicians and their patients," and that at this point there are "more questions than answers." However, he reiterated the AMA's commitment to opposing the criminalization of medical practice and challenging criminal or civil penalites on patients or health professionals who find themselves legally at risk from reproductive healthcare.

If the associations of our nation's top medical professionals—not just at the AMA, but also those that specialize in pregnancy and birth, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Nurse-Midwives, the Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses and more—oppose abortion legislation, we should listen to them. They're the ones who have dedicated their lives to pregnancy-related medical care. They're the ones who understand the medical implications of this ruling and the laws that it triggered. They're the ones who should have a say in patient care, not government officials with no expertise in medical research or practice.

The state governments that are banning abortion are egregiously overstepping. No one but a doctor and the person experiencing the pregnancy should have any say in their healthcare, period.

Democracy

Synagogue sues Florida over abortion ban, saying it violates freedom of religion for Jews

Advocating for abortion access is not the religious argument we usually hear, but it is no less valid than religious arguments against it.

Jewish leaders are explaining that abortion is a religious right.

Debate over legal access to abortion has long been a part of social and political discourse, but increasing state-level restrictions and a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that threatens to overturn five decades of legal precedent have propelled abortion directly into the spotlight once again.

While we're accustomed to seeing religious arguments against abortion from Christian organizations, a synagogue in Florida is flipping the script, making the argument that banning abortion actually violates Jewish religious liberty.

In a lawsuit against the Florida government, Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor of Boynton Beach says that the state's pending abortion law, which prohibits abortion after 15 weeks with few exceptions, violates the Jewish teaching that abortion "is required if necessary to protect the health, mental or physical well-being of the woman.” Citing the constitutional right to freedom of religion, the lawsuit states that the act "prohibits Jewish women from practicing their faith free of government intrusion and this violates their privacy rights and religious freedom."

Wow.



The Florida 15-week abortion ban only grants exceptions if the mother's life is at risk, if she is at risk of "irreversible physical impairment" or if the fetus is found to have a fatal abnormality. There are no exceptions for rape, incest or human trafficking.

If Jewish law stipulates that access to abortion is required not only for a woman's physical well-being but also her mental well-being, then laws that criminalize such access are violating religious freedom, Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor contends.

Advocating for abortion access is not the religious argument we usually hear, but it is on equal footing with religious arguments against it. (It's worth pointing out that Governor Ron DeSantis signed the Florida abortion act into law not at his office, but rather at a church.)

The synagogue's lawsuit raises the question of which religion takes precedence when it comes to legislation. It also highlights the difference between "This is against my religion, therefore no one can do it" and "This is part of my religious tradition, therefore I legally have a right to access it." The former really has no place in U.S. law, as it violates the traditional separation of church and state, and the latter is a prime example of the purpose of the First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

Part of what makes legislating abortion so messy is that the questions at the heart of the debate are actually largely religious in nature. What is the true nature of human life and when does life begin? At what point is a zygote, an embryo, a fetus considered a full human being with the same rights as the rest of us? What is the relationship between a human (or potential human) in the womb and the person whose body is building it? What responsibilities does the person who is building it have toward that life, and what responsibility does society and/or the government have in holding the human accountable for those responsibilities?

These are all legitimate questions that don't have easy, straightforward answers, no matter how simplistic and undernuanced people try to make them. They may be simple questions for some people to answer individually, but collectively? No. We all make those determinations based on different criteria, different beliefs, different values and different understandings of the nature of life. There is no way for "we the people" as a whole to answer those questions definitively.

And the implications of those questions extend far beyond the abortion debate. The Cleveland Clinic states that one-third to a half of pregnancies end in miscarriage before a person even knows they're pregnant. For those who believe that life begins at conception or fertilization, should every death in the womb be considered a tragedy? Should we mourn the loss of lives we carried that we never even knew existed?

There are the slippery slopes that stem from those questions as well. Some religious people may see a miscarriage as God's will, but what if it was caused by something a woman did? What if a miscarriage occurred because of an action taken of her own free will? Is she culpable for that loss using the same logic we use to criminalize abortion? At what point do we start policing women's behaviors—what she eats or drinks, what medications she takes, whether she's around smokers, and so on—at all times in order to protect a life she may potentially be carrying? We're already seeing women being jailed for miscarriages. How far will we go with it?

What about things like child support payments and government benefits? Why we do not expect child support to be paid from the moment a pregnancy is detected? Why do we not give Social Security numbers to Americans in the womb? Why can we not claim a child on our taxes until they are born? If there is genuinely no difference between a life being grown inside a uterus at 12 or 15 or 20 weeks and a life outside a uterus, why does the law treat them differently?

How do we begin to answer these questions when the heart of them always circles back to individual beliefs?

The synagogue's religious freedom argument is compelling for sure, but the bottom line is we shouldn't be legislating on something based on religious beliefs in the first place. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…" That's literally the opening line of the First Amendment of the Constitution. Banning abortion is, in effect, establishing a particular religious belief as law and prohibiting the free exercise of religion for an entire group of people.

At a basic level, abortion is 1) a medical event that entails far too many individual factors that are not the business of the government to judge, and 2) a choice that is determined to be valid or invalid, right or wrong, based largely on individual religious beliefs. Both of those realities are reason enough for legislators, who are neither medical professionals nor religious leaders, to stay out of people's uteruses and leave these incredibly personal medical and religious decisions to the individual.