Summary, part 1

What Is Reproductive Justice?

In the essay What is Reproductive Justice? by Loretta Ross, SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Health Collective, the authors begin by defining reproductive justice as “the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social, and economic well-being of women and girls, based on the full achievement and protection of women’s human rights” (p. 4).

This definition recognizes that, especially for Indigenous women and women of color, the right to have a child, not have a child, parent the child they have, and control their birthing options are equally important. It additionally focuses on whether or not governments and legislations provide women with the “enabling conditions” to make important reproductive decisions (p. 4). 

In contrast, the pro-choice movement often solely focuses on one issue: abortion. This alienates other social justice movements and activists, especially issues concerning communities of color, including economic justice, disability rights, racial and sexual orientation discrimination, immigrant rights, and more. Additionally, focusing solely on choice implies all women can make the “choice” to have an abortion, as if it does not depend on access and income. Intersectionality is essential to fully understand reproductive justice. Reproductive justice, on the other hand, views the right to reproduce safely with dignity as a basic human right, and this framework understands that community-based resources are integral, acknowledging that those without access to resources should not be prevented from or punished for becoming mothers. 

The authors take a multifaceted approach to fighting the exploitation of reproductive oppression and advancing women and girls’ well-being with three primary frameworks: reproductive health (which is about service delivery), reproductive rights (which is about legal issues), and reproductive justice (which is about movement building).

The reproductive justice framework focuses on creating a comprehensive solution that is consistent among many social justice movements, the reproductive justice analysis can be used to integrate multi-racial, multi-generational, and multi-class issues into a “more powerful and relevant grassroots movement” (p. 4).

According to the authors of this essay, there are two key strategies for achieving reproductive justice’s vision. The first strategy is “supporting the leadership and power of the most excluded groups of women, girls and individuals within a culturally relevant context” (p. 5). The authors state that we must hold ourselves and allies accountable to remain in alignment with the Reproductive Justice movement’s vision, address inequitable allocation of resources and power within the movement, and create collaborative relationships and thus, end exploitation and competition in the movement.

The second strategy for achieving Reproductive Justice is to “build the social, political and economic power of low-income women, Indigenous women, women of color, and their communities so that they are full participating partners in building this new movement” (p. 5). This includes the integration of grassroots issues across many class, generational, and racial lines into the organizations representing the movement.

The reproductive justice movement recognizes that women have a fundamental right to reproduce, and the authors provide readers with a list of conditions that must be met for reproductive justice to come to fruition. Here are some of the conditions: 

Women must have the right to manage their reproductive capacity. This includes…

• “The right to decide whether or not to become a mother and when; 

• The right to primary culturally competent preventive health care; 

• The right to accurate information about sexuality and reproduction; 

• The right to accurate contraceptive information; 

• The right and access to safe, respectful, and affordable contraceptive materials and services” (p. 42)

Women must have the right to adequate resources, information, services, and personal safety during pregnancy. This includes… 

• “The right and access to safe, respectful, and affordable medical care during and after pregnancy including treatment for HIV/AIDS, drug and alcohol addiction, and other chronic conditions, including the right to seek medical care during pregnancy without fear of criminal prosecution or medical interventions against the pregnant woman’s will; 

• The right of incarcerated women to safe and respectful care during and after pregnancy, including the right to give birth in a safe, respectful, medically-appropriate environment; 

• The right and access to economic security, including the right to earn a living wage; 

• The right to physical safety, including the right to adequate housing and structural protections against rape and sexual violence; 

• The right to practice religion or not, freely and safely, so that authorities cannot coerce women to undergo medical interventions that conflict with their religious convictions; 

• (p. 42)

Women must have the right to be the parents of their children. This includes… 

• “The right to economic resources sufficient to be a parent, including the right to earn a living wage; 

• The right to education and training in preparation for earning a living wage; 

• The right to parent in a physically and environmentally safe context; 

• The right to affordable, high-quality child care.” (p. 42)

What are Some Threats to Reproductive Justice?

There are several threats to reproductive justice. The following section is by no means a conclusive list of those threats, but are the threats mentioned in the briefing book. For one, there is the concept of a pharmacist’s refusal, which refers to the practice of some pharmacists to refuse the filling of prescriptions for contraception because of moral or religious objections. This originally began with pharmacists denying emergency contraceptives to patients because they were considered to be a drug that causes abortion, and then expanded to regular oral contraceptive prescriptions. All of this prevents a patient from accessing their reproductive rights.

This is a good example of how “the intersection of law, medicine and morality in the American health system poses a serious threat to reproductive justice” (p. 37). Not only is this seen in certain pharmacists, but it can also be seen in hospitals, health maintenance organizations, pharmacies, employers, and health care providers. For example, a woman who has just been raped may arrive at a hospital emergency room and ask for a way to prevent becoming pregnant, but the hospital may say “I’m sorry … it’s against the religious doctrine of our hospital” (p. 37). These objections on the basis of religious freedom continuously ignore and come at the expense of the patient’s religious freedom and right to reproductive health care, which is why groups committed to reproductive justice must fight these intrusions into medical care in the U.S. 

Another threat comes in the form of U.S. anti-reproductive justice groups making strides internationally. The U.S. Christian right seeks to restrict women’s reproductive rights, but they have expanded their vision to other countries, as well. Several anti-reproductive justice organizations, such as Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, and the National Right to Life Committee, “have been granted consultative status at the United Nations” (p. 35).

Abstinence-only education poses great ethical and human rights concerns when presented to young people as the only option and/or when education about other reproductive health options is restricted or misrepresented. In fact, access to accurate sexual health and HIV/AIDS information has been deemed a fundamental human right that is essential for the highest possible standards of health. The U.S.’ use of these programs has been highly criticized by many human rights groups for censorship and misinformation. The authors argue that abstinence-only programs withhold information regarding contraception and human sexuality, provide scientifically questionable information, do not provide teens with ways to protect themselves from STI’s or pregnancy, and overemphasize the risks of contraception. The authors argue that abstinence-only education “as a basis for health policy and programs should be abandoned” in place of programs that allow students to make informed, safe, and non-coerced sexual and reproductive decisions (p. 7).

Additionally, women of color’s rights to safe, voluntary sex, birth control, and motherhood have been increasingly restricted and criminalized. Coercive birth control programs often target low-income women and women of color for higher-risk contraceptives. For example, the Depo Provera shot—an injectable form of birth control with side effects including but not limited to nausea, depression, and delayed return of fertility—was tested on 14,000 women without their consent, with 50% of subjects being African American, low-income, and from rural locations. In 2007, this birth control method was still promoted by manufacturers, doctors, and policymakers to young and poor women of color, touted as a “foolproof method” (p. 8). Additionally, judges still mandated that some convicted women of color take Depo Provera as a form of punishment. In many cases like this, women are not given a choice regarding their birth control methods, and the government and reproductive technology industry devote large amounts of resources to find methods that limit the reproductive activity of women of color and poor women.