The phrase “#1in3Speaks” was trending on Twitter on Tuesday for the “1 in 3 Campaign,” something Teen Vogue called, in their profile, “a social justice movement that uses the power of storytelling to engage and inspire action and strengthen support for abortion access.” Both the campaign and the hashtag function under the guise of empathy for women who have had abortions, and in this particular case, champion undocumented teens as women who should have equal access to abortion.
Still, the campaign — hashtag and all — deflect from their flawed purpose which is to normalize and celebrate abortion as an equal right.
Abortion as a right for all is misguided
According to Teen Vogue, “The theme for this year’s 1 in 3 Abortion Speakout is ‘Justice for Jane,‘ and will be dedicated to the undocumented minors the Trump administration attempted to deny reproductive health care.” The speakout took place Tuesday, on Capitol Hill, and was live streamed. Of course, Planned Parenthood Action marketed the heck out of it.
TUNE IN: The 4th Annual #1in3Speaks Speakout: #JusticeforJane has began. Hear abortion stories from people of all ages, races, and circumstances. You don’t want to miss this! https://t.co/vwruCtNPqq pic.twitter.com/cIfsogqFVS
— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) February 27, 2018
The speakout featured “activists, advocates, and storytellers” sharing their abortion stories with the goal that “sharing such personal stories will set the record straight about abortion and shatter the stigma by putting real faces on an issue that affects millions of people across the country.” This year’s focus, #JusticeforJane, refers to the undocumented teen, Jane Moe, who came to the United States last year, illegally, and tried to obtain an abortion. Her story made waves when the Trump administration originally prohibited the 17-year-old from having an abortion, only to “return her to her sponsor,” when she subsequently had an abortion.
Although legal scholars and politicians weighed in, it’s still unclear how a woman who came to the United States illegally, and pregnant, should receive an abortion, as well, with no questions asked. Last fall, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed an amicus brief in the case, noting “no federal court has ever declared that unlawfully-present aliens with no substantial ties to this country have a constitutional right to abortion on demand. The Court should decline to break that new ground.” Indeed, fighting for a teen who came here, illegally, to have an abortion, legally, is as misguided as tweeting a hashtag that feigns abortion is a cause for celebration, rather than hesitation — to say the least.
The campaign is lying about abortion
On top of promoting a propagandic approach to abortion in this country — Free abortions! Anytime! Anywhere! — the 1 in 3 Campaign is essentially lying about the reality of abortion. As the piece in Teen Vogue states:
Julia Reticker-Flynn, campaign director for 1 in 3, told Teen Vogue, “States like Texas and Kansas mandate doctors provide medically inaccurate information to patients seeking abortion care. Twenty-seven states require patients to wait between 24 and 72 hours after counseling to access an abortion. Meanwhile, Trump administration officials are directly intervening in the health care of undocumented minors who need abortion care, blocking that care with no regard for the law or the young people’s health and lives.”
None of those statements are wholly true and most of them don’t even make sense. How would it even be ethical for a state to mandate doctors “provide medically inaccurate information to patients seeking abortion care?” Women have every right to know what having an abortion is actually like, including the aftereffects and how she might feel — the booklets distributed in places like Texas and Kansas are factual, accurate, and helpful to a woman making a life-altering decision.
Research has repeatedly shown waiting periods for abortions are healthy and often increase the risk of a mom making a choice for life. While Trump administration officials did intervene “in the healthcare of undocumented minors who need abortion care,” they had every right to, and frankly, the end result in the case of Jane Moe — an abortion — was still discouraging.
The entire premise of the 1 in 3 Campaign is false
Though the campaign advertises itself, on its website, as one built on empathy, conversation, and understanding surrounding the issue of abortion, it’s a bit like critics saying “Band of Brothers” is about a bunch of guys playing boy soldiers — there’s quite a bit more to both. Their website says,
The 1 in 3 Campaign is a grassroots movement to start a new conversation about abortion—telling our stories, on our own terms. Together, we can end the stigma and shame women are made to feel about abortion. As we share our stories we begin to build a culture of compassion, empathy, and support for access to basic health care. It’s time for us to come out in support of each other and in support of access to legal and safe abortion care in our communities.
To approach abortion as if it’s simply an issue that needs a public relations makeover is like telling a diabetic who gorges on Oreos every day she just needs to tweet about it more and she’ll stop feeling guilty and avoid worsening her symptoms. There is plenty of research that shows why women often feel inherently guilty about abortion, which directly correlates into why there is still a “stigma” around the procedure — because abortion kills an unborn child.
The fact that the 1 in 3 Campaign features undocumented teens who have a “right” to abortions, via a trending hashtag and a speakout on Capitol Hill, merely overshadows the fact that there is a campaign at all which solely exists to essentially praise abortions. It’s not that pro-life advocates would prefer women feel shame, loneliness, or depressed following an abortion — the opposite is true. In fact, pro-life advocates feel so strongly about this that they would rather a woman receive accurate information about an abortion — including what it is and how she will feel afterwards — rather than endure an abortion and then participate in a lousy campaign to commend it.
As Jeanne Mancini, president of March for Life, told me: “The sad truth is that talking about abortion can’t change the fact that abortion takes the life of one and often wounds the life of another. Talking about it won’t undo that reality or remove shame because something inherently terrible has happened. Many women regret their abortion and come to a place of peace by seeking mercy, hope and healing.”
It’s not only absurd for an organization to create a hashtag and event on Capitol Hill to laud abortion as if it’s a positive life event, but disingenuous to promote abortion in such a misleading, misguided way. An “abortion speakout” will always fail, because the entire thing deflects from their ultimate purpose — to normalize and celebrate abortion — but it particularly falls flat this year.
Nicole Russell is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist in Washington, D.C., who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota. She was the 2010 recipient of the American Spectator’s Young Journalist Award.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.
