Roe v Wade is on deck

[Loren Pechtel]

I was not aware that a D&C would be performed on someone actively miscarrying. When I had spontaeous abortions, once as late as 12 weeks, I was not offered any care during the miscarriage. I sat in the waiting room to get my HCG, doing the cramping, the bleeding and all, then went home when they said, “yup, that there is a spontaneous abortion. Call us to schedule another HCG in a day or two.” This was in a blue state.

So I don’t understand this post.
Maybe things have changed in the last 20 years?

If the uterus empties completely they don't do a D&C. If the uterus doesn't completely empty they need to scrape it out--the remains will otherwise risk infection.

Dear Loren,

I know this already.

Sorry for the snark, but as you can see I was discussing “actively miscarrying,” as the article quoted someone in the waiting room doing the cramping and bleeding steps. And as you can see, I was one of those people (more than once.). And as you can see, they sent me home to return for a later, second, HGC test to make sure it was complete. I totally don’t need a childfree man ‘splaining it to me.

(Did you even process what I wrote? Or just reflexively answer?)

You asked if things had changed in the last 20 years. I was pointing out that not every miscarriage leads to a D&C.

Unfortunately, we are seeing what we saw back when there was strong enforcement of abortion being illegal--doctors afraid to intervene in an incomplete miscarriage for fear of being accused of performing an abortion.8

And I agree that is is a real issue about danger - but it is not accurate in the article to claim that this is relevant while a woman is actively cramping and bleeding.

It is relevant--they are afraid to remove fetal tissue from the uterus even after the pregnancy has failed.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, I guess we’ll get t do the crime experiment a second time, this time whith the lead pollution controlled for.

I wish you were nuts. Unfortunately, I think you're right.

 

[Rhea]

I was pointing out that not every miscarriage leads to a D&C.

I know that. None of mine resulted in a D&C.

You asked if things had changed in the last 20 years.

Correct - in terms of NOT doing a D&C while the woman is in the throes of abdominal cramping and beeding stages of a spontaneous abortion.

Unless things have changed, They don’t do a D&C while the woman’s uterus is expelling the products of conception. They wait for that to finish, then see if there’s anything left behind that needs to be done.

I know that.

His article said:

was astounded by how often patients were turned away from emergency rooms and their doctor’s offices in the middle of their miscarriages. No wonder Alabama has the third-highest maternal mortality rate in the nation, I initially thought.

And I posted that this sounded odd and wrong and that, 20 year ago at least, they would ALL have been turned away because there is no urgent medical attention to be given during active spontaneous abortion. You wait. You let the body do what it does.

So yes, I already said everything you’re trying to tell me. I’ve already lived through everything you’re trying to explain. I already made the point that you’re trying to make to me.

 

[Toni]

I was pointing out that not every miscarriage leads to a D&C.

I know that. None of mine resulted in a D&C.

You asked if things had changed in the last 20 years.

Correct - in terms of NOT doing a D&C while the woman is in the throes of abdominal cramping and beeding stages of a spontaneous abortion.

Unless things have changed, They don’t do a D&C while the woman’s uterus is expelling the products of conception. They wait for that to finish, then see if there’s anything left behind that needs to be done.

I know that.

His article said:

was astounded by how often patients were turned away from emergency rooms and their doctor’s offices in the middle of their miscarriages. No wonder Alabama has the third-highest maternal mortality rate in the nation, I initially thought.

And I posted that this sounded odd and wrong and that, 20 year ago at least, they would ALL have been turned away because there is no urgent medical attention to be given during active spontaneous abortion. You wait. You let the body do what it does.

So yes, I already said everything you’re trying to tell me. I’ve already lived through everything you’re trying to explain. I already made the point that you’re trying to make to me.

FWIW, I had the same reaction as you did to the article: It seemed wrong, and at odds with my experience and those of women I know who had miscarriages at various points in their pregnancies. I am certain that some women and some circumstances do call for a D&C during or post miscarriage. I wonder if the author wasn't confused about the real issue some doctors are having: concern of treating women and prescribing anything to help with pain, excess bleeding, or to ensure complete expulsion of all the components of the pregnancy, and fear of being accused of causing the miscarriage: ie performing an abortion. Given the absolute ignorance coming out of the mouths/pens of men who feel they are expert enough to write laws governing medical procedures, I can well understand their fears.

 

[lpetrich]

AOC recounts fearing she would need abortion after sex attack: ‘I at least had a choice’

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says she once feared she would need to undergo an abortion after being sexually assaulted, saying it left her feeling “horrified” and “really alone” but that she “at least had a choice”.

...
“I have, you know, publically kind of talked about my experience with sexual assault in the past. After you experience something that traumatising and if you are a person that menstruates you know your cycle, and this happened to me, your cycle can be really really thrown off,” she said during an Instagram Live appearance while raising funds for abortion care.

“You may miss a cycle, you may not even be pregnant but miss a cycle because of the amount of the immense trauma and stress of experiencing that,” she continued.

“I remember when that happened the horror that I had felt and I felt really alone,” she said, adding that she had grown up in a religious household and her choices were deeply personal.

“And that is why it is a choice for every person.”

“I remember in that moment after what happened I was so horrified. What I do remember in that moment was that I had felt like no matter what’d happened... I at least had a choice in what happened to my life after a choice was taken away from me... after a choice over my body was taken away from me,” the representative added.

Abortion Rights Fundraiser on Instagram Live | Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez - YouTube - her whole Instagram video on YouTube.

She also said that New York will be a sort of abortion sanctuary state for people from other states who want to come there to get abortions.

 

[lpetrich]

McBath tells personal story about miscarriages before House committee hearing on abortion rights |

U.S. Rep. Lucy McBath, D-Marietta, shared her painful story of multiple miscarriages before a House Judiciary Committee hearing on abortion rights Wednesday.

...
McBath raised the specter of the criminalization of miscarriage if abortion is outlawed, saying that she would not have had access to adequate medical care during her three miscarriages if abortion had been illegal.

“After which failed pregnancy should I have been imprisoned? Would it have been after the first miscarriage, after doctors used what would be an illegal drug to abort the lost fetus?,” McBath asked.

“I ask because the same medicine used to treat my failed pregnancies is the same medicine states like Texas would make illegal. I ask because if Alabama makes abortion murder, does it make miscarriage manslaughter?”

...
“Women’s rights are human rights. Reproductive health care is health care. Medical decisions should be made by women and those that they trust, not politicians and officials,” McBath proclaimed at the end of her testimony.

“Freedom is our right to choose.”

 

[lpetrich]

Abortion: El Salvador’s jailed women offer US glimpse of post-Roe future | Abortion | The Guardian

‘Don’t let our reality become your reality,’ campaigners warn after woman is freed after decade behind bars for medical emergency ruled attempted murder

A 33-year-old woman in El Salvador who suffered a medical emergency while pregnant has been freed after serving a decade in jail for attempted murder, the victim of a draconian abortion ban being replicated in the US.

The woman, named only as Jacqueline, sought medical help for an obstetric complication in 2011, and even though the baby survived, she was arrested on suspicion of attempted abortion. She was separated from her newborn daughter and eight-year-old son, and sentenced to 15 years for attempted murder.

Jacqueline, who was released on Wednesday, is the 65th woman to be freed after having been wrongly jailed on murder charges following a miscarriage or other obstetric emergency since the total ban on abortion came into force in 1998.

The Salvadorian anti-abortion law, which was subsequently written into the constitution, has led to at least 182 women who suffered an obstetric emergency being prosecuted for abortion or aggravated homicide.

Poor, young women from rural areas with limited access to healthcare have been disproportionately persecuted, with most reported to the police by hospital workers. In many cases, prosecutors and judges have argued that the woman’s failure to save the pregnancy amounted to murder.

Salvadorian lawyers and activists have worked to free the convicted women, pursuing pardons, sentence reduction and access to education and work programs that can lead to an early release. Ten women have been freed since last December, leaving three still in prison.

If anti-abortion activists get what they want, then this is a very likely future, with women who miscarry being charged with attempted abortion or negligent homicide or something similar.

 

[Toni]

I wasn't tested--very early miscarriage. I was just told to report any prolonged bleeding, any fever, etc.

In other words, any signs of the uterus not fully emptying.

Loooooove having a non-medically trained childless man explain miscarriage to me.

 

[lpetrich]

Nicaragua abortion ban 'cruel and inhuman disgrace' - CNN.com
noting Amnesty International's report
The Impact of the Complete Ban of Abortion in Nicaragua: A briefing to the UN Committee against Torture by Amnesty International - INT_CAT_NGO_NIC_42_9738_E.pdf

From CNN:

Nicaragua hands out prison sentences for girls and women who seek an abortion and for doctors and nurses who provide services linked with abortion.

Amnesty reports that doctors and nurses are frightened to treat a pregnant woman or girl for illnesses such as cancer, malaria, HIV/AIDS or cardiac emergencies where treatment could cause injury or death to the fetus.

One health worker told Amnesty researchers that one woman who was admitted to hospital following a miscarriage was so terrified of being prosecuted for abortion that she asked doctors not to treat her in case any treatment was seen as an intentional termination of pregnancy.

"She told the health worker that she was concerned that her neighbor, who knew she was pregnant, might report her for having an abortion," the report said.

"There's only one way to describe what we have seen in Nicaragua: sheer horror. Children are being compelled to bear children. Pregnant women are being denied essential - including life-saving - medical care," said Gilmore.

According to official figures cited in the Amnesty report, in the first five months of 2009, 33 girls and women died from pregnancy and birth-related complications, compared to 20 in the same period last year.

Before the law was changed therapeutic abortion had been recognized as a necessary procedure in Nicaragua for more than 100 years, Amnesty said.

However, President Daniel Ortega of the left-wing Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) backed the law banning abortion to win crucial conservative Roman Catholic support in the January 2007 elections, Amnesty said.

How did he get into power?

The story starts in 1972, when there was a major earthquake in Nicaragua's capital city, Managua. Some 90% of the city was destroyed, 500,000 people were made homeless, and over 10,000 people were killed by it. A large amount of aid poured in, but leader Anastasio Somoza and his friends stole much of it.

This provoked a rebellion, a rebellion that soon took the name of an earlier rebel, Augusto César Sandino, becoming known as the Sandinistas. They took over in 1979, with Daniel Ortega being their leader. He was elected President in 1984.

The Sandinist government was sympathetic to the Soviet Union and Cuba, and the Reagan administration decided to try to overthrow them by supporting some counterrevolutionary rebels or "Contras". Financing the Contras involved selling arms to Iran and sending some of the proceeds to them, and when that was revealed, it became the Iran-Contra scandal.

The Sandinists were defeated in a 1990 election and were out of power until 2006, when Daniel Ortega came back as President.

 

[lpetrich]

Marking 10 years of Nicaragua’s abortion ban, Ipas releases study on resulting epidemic of ‘child mothers’ - Ipas

In Nicaragua’s capital, Managua, Ipas presented a study titled “Forced pregnancy after rape: Child mothers younger than 14 years old” and an accompanying collection of testimonials from girls interviewed for the study (both available only in Spanish). The event had a diverse audience: national organizations that work with children; government institutions, which attended these events for the first time in 10 years; and organizations from the wider women’s movement.

The study shows that every year approximately 6,750 girls between ages 10-14 are victims of sexual violence, and 1,300 become pregnant, according to Nicaragua’s 2011-12 National Demography and Health Survey. But Ipas’s report asserts that in reality the number of young girls who become pregnant from rape is much higher, as the same survey found 70 percent of girls who experience rape under the age of 15 never seek help or report the crime.

Latin American feminists vow to protect abortion rights at home after shock US ruling | Global development | The Guardian - "Women’s movements have fought hard to reverse anti-abortion laws in their countries and say it’s not the end for the US"

 

[lpetrich]

San Francisco archbishop bars Pelosi from communion over abortion stance | Nancy Pelosi | The Guardian

In a letter addressed to the US House speaker and posted on his Twitter account, ultra conservative Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone argued that Pelosi’s “position on abortion has become only more extreme over the years, especially in the last few months,” and he had decided to block her from communion after she had ignored his requests to explain her stance to him.

Cordileone – San Francisco’s archbishop since 2012 – accused Pelosi of failing to “understand the grave evil she is perpetrating, the scandal she is causing, and the danger to her own soul she is risking”. He said he would need to stop her from receiving communion until she “publicly repudiates her support for abortion”.

“Please know that I find no pleasure whatsoever in fulfilling my pastoral duty here,” Cordileone added in his letter, which he said served as a public notice of his decision to Bay Area Catholics.

The missive hailed Pelosi for “her advocacy for the care of the poor and vulnerable”, said the move was apolitical, and called the longtime Democratic congresswoman a “sister in Christ”, but it also called for the House speaker to confess and repent.

noting
Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone on Twitter: "The Archdiocesan website is having troubles so I am retweeting this. Full text of Archbishop Cordileone letter to Nancy Pelosi banning her from Communion - https://t.co/ds134LClbi" / Twitter
noting
Full text of Archbishop Cordileone letter to Nancy Pelosi banning her from Communion – Catholic World Report

... I am hereby notifying you that you are not to present yourself for Holy Communion and, should you do so, you are not to be admitted to Holy Communion, until such time as you publicly repudiate your advocacy for the legitimacy of abortion and confess and receive absolution of this grave sin in the sacrament of Penance.

From 2015, In Pelosi, Strong Catholic Faith and Abortion Rights Coexist - The New York Times

But,
Vatican Warns U.S. Bishops: Don’t Deny Biden Communion Over Abortion - The New York Times - "Conservative American Catholic bishops are pressing for a debate over whether Catholics who support the right to an abortion should be allowed to take Communion."

 

[Bomb#20]

The ones who refuse to do their job because it involves siding on the trolley problem with the fully fledged adult don't deserve to be standing in that place, and also standing in the way of the wellbeing of the adult human.

Early term abortions are done in offices where all the employees are there to do that job with no excuse.

Late term abortions are done to save the life of the mother.

People in a hospital who refuse to save a woman's life because she is going to, but has not yet lost the child, do not have any right to work there. Period.

That's a perfectly legitimate policy position to take. Likewise, when a person who joined the military because he was willing to kill and to risk his life to defend his country from invaders, and who took the pay and benefits that came with that job, decides he's opting out when the chain of command orders him overseas to take out a government that attacked his country, because he didn't sign up for a foreign war, that too is a perfectly legitimate policy position to take. But he probably should not call himself a pacifist.

See, I never supported deserters so I don't get why you would try to draw that analogy. Even so, the deserter is still a pacifist, even if he is a traitorous asshole who wasted everyone's time and money.

That is fractally wrong. I get to draw an analogy because it's a good analogy irrespective of whom you support. People willing to fight in wars to drive invaders out of their countries are not pacifists and being unwilling to invade other people's countries does not make them pacifists. And desertion is not treason -- I get that you're ticked off at such people and rightly so, but the constitution has a specific definition of treason because the British government was in the habit of calling anybody it was ticked off at a traitor.

In fact, I joined the army, deployed like everyone else, and the only orders I refused to follow were the illegal kind, and the only one I ever had to refuse was a direct order to inflict medically significant self-harm: to cut myself with a dirty sharpened rock.

Weird. I'm not clear on what distinguishes the illegal order you had to refuse from the illegal orders you refused even though you didn't have to refuse them. And ordering you to cut yourself with a dirty sharpened rock does not strike me as necessarily illegal -- I can easily imagine scenarios where that would be a smart tactic, and I've never even been in the military. E.g. your platoon leader wants to leave a blood stain for the enemy to find, as a ruse. I take it nothing like that was going on in your case.

It is not a "choice" as in "something someone has a right to choose upon" to be hired and be a nurse.

It is a privilege, as is the mercy that any child in the womb receives.

It may be your preference, but ultimately it is someone else's choice, sometimes the distillation of many people's choices.

But for the applicant or employee or the fetus, it is someone else's choice whether they continue doing that thing.

By that standard, you could favor abortion prohibition unless the father consents and favor forced abortions if the father wants to abort but the mother refuses, and still claim to be "pro choice about abortion".

Earlier you wrote "Early term abortions are done in offices where all the employees are there to do that job with no excuse. Late term abortions are done to save the life of the mother." That's nonsense. Do you really imagine that elective abortions only happen at Planned Parenthood and dedicated abortion clinics? Lots of ordinary hospitals perform early term abortions as one of a myriad medical services they provide. People take jobs at them expecting to do all those other services; they aren't automatically there to do non-emergency abortions just because some outside party thinks the definition of their jobs is up to him. For instance, there was a recent lawsuit against U. of Vermont Medical Center because they allegedly illegally ordered a Catholic nurse to help perform an abortion. Congress passed a law right after Roe v Wade guaranteeing a nurse's right to tell the hospital to assign a different nurse to that job.

Now, you can certainly argue that that's a bad law and nurses shouldn't get to opt out and anybody who isn't up for every procedure should have thought of that when she decided to become a nurse, and maybe you can even make a solid case for that position. But if that's you're attitude, then you are no more pro-choice than the murderer of an abortion doctor is pro-life. You're just pro-the-choices-you-care-about the same way the murderer is pro-the-lives-he-cares-about. Whoop-de-do. Everyone is pro-the-choices-he-cares-about.

 

[Jarhyn]

People willing to fight in wars

But he wasn't actually willing to fight in the war was he, then?

Everything else just kind of shakes off of your detail into further nonsense and No-True-Scotsman Pacifist

 

[Copernicus]

Given the propensity of some people here to spout a lot of analogies, it is worth reviewing the informal fallacy known as False Analogy:

A false analogy is an informal fallacy. It applies to inductive arguments. It is an informal fallacy because the error concerns what the argument is about, and not the argument itself.

An analogy proposes that two concepts which are similar (A and B) have a common relationship to some property. A has property X, therefore B must also have property X. In a false analogy, the objects may have some similarities, but they do not both have property X. That way, both objects may have the same color, but this does not mean that they have the same size.[1] Even if bananas and the sun appear yellow, one could not conclude that they are the same size. One who makes an invalid analogy or comparison is often said to be "comparing apples and oranges".

Analogies are not always bad, but they always break down when used to make a point in an argument. Their primary use is to teach novel or complicated concepts, not to serve as proof that a conclusion in an argument is correct or true.

 

[Bomb#20]

Bomb, I have nothing further to add to what I've already said on the subject of "pro-choice" vs "pro-life". Thanks for the discussion.

Well, perhaps you do have something further to add...

Given the propensity of some people here to spout a lot of analogies, it is worth reviewing the informal fallacy known as False Analogy:

A false analogy is an informal fallacy. It applies to inductive arguments. It is an informal fallacy because the error concerns what the argument is about, and not the argument itself.

An analogy proposes that two concepts which are similar (A and B) have a common relationship to some property. A has property X, therefore B must also have property X. In a false analogy, ...

Analogies are not always bad, but they always break down when used to make a point in an argument. Their primary use is to teach novel or complicated concepts, not to serve as proof that a conclusion in an argument is correct or true.

I take it if I made a valid and sound deductive argument from true premises you'd reply with a link to a page explaining that there exist unsound arguments with false premises and/or invalid reasoning steps.

The term "pro-abortion" is a bit more problematic, because it is not about persuading women to prefer or choose an abortion.

That's an argument. It draws a conclusion from a premise, via some opaque inference procedure. Normally I would point out that the argument is unsound because the inference procedure is invalid; and I would back up that contention by exhibiting a counterexample in which the same inference procedure is applied to a different true premise and it leads to a manifestly false conclusion. But in this case I appear to be up against a disputant who simply labels counterexamples "analogies" and refuses point-blank to address the exhibited defect in his argument on the grounds that some analogies are false, even though he hasn't offered any case that the exhibited counterexample is a false analogy. This amounts to wholesale rejection of the principle of proof by reductio ad absurdum. Are you perhaps one of those so-called "Intuitionists" who deny that ((Not (Not (P))) implies (P))?

If reductio ad absurdum is off the table, what is there to say to an arguer who claims A is P because B is not Q, other than "Show your work."?

The term "pro-abortion" is a bit more problematic, because it is not about persuading women to prefer or choose an abortion.

That appears to be a formal fallacy: "Non Sequitur". By what inference procedure do you get from 'it is not about persuading women to prefer or choose an abortion' to 'the term "pro-abortion" is a bit more problematic'? Show your work.

 

[lpetrich]

Looking back 5 years:
Pelosi: Democratic candidates should not be forced to toe party line on abortion - The Washington Post

The Democratic Party should not impose support for abortion rights as a litmus test on its candidates, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday, because it needs a broad and inclusive agenda to win back the socially conservative voters who helped elect President Trump.

“This is the Democratic Party. This is not a rubber-stamp party,” Pelosi said in an interview with Washington Post reporters.

“I grew up Nancy D’Alesandro, in Baltimore, Maryland; in Little Italy; in a very devout Catholic family; fiercely patriotic; proud of our town and heritage, and staunchly Democratic,” she added, referring to the fact that she is the daughter and sister of former mayors of that city. “Most of those people — my family, extended family — are not pro-choice. You think I’m kicking them out of the Democratic Party?”

Nancy Pelosi says abortion is ‘fading’ as an issue for Democrats. The opposite is true for conservatives. - The Washington Post

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) thinks Democratic voters just don't care about abortion anymore, at least not to the degree they used to.

“It’s kind of fading as an issue,” she told Washington Post reporters on Tuesday. “It really is.”

But conservative lawmakers certainly still care a lot. In fact, antiabortion advocates are on a roll right now, successfully making it harder for women to get abortions in dozens of states.

This is the same Nancy Pelosi who talks about wanting a strong Republican Party.

But that has not been a very successful strategy.

 

[lpetrich]

Susan Collins Called Police Over Abortion Rights Chalk Message

Republican Sen. Susan Collins called the police on Saturday after a chalk message — which asked her to support legislation aimed at protecting abortion access — was found on a sidewalk outside her home in Bangor, Maine.

"Susie, please, Mainers want [the Women's Health Protection Act]," the message said, according to a police report obtained by BuzzFeed News. "Vote yes, clean up your mess."

The message was "intricately drawn" in "multiple different colors," the police report stated.

She voted against it, as did every other Senate Republican, including Lisa Murkowski AK, another pro-choice Republican.

 

[Politesse]

Looking back 5 years:
Pelosi: Democratic candidates should not be forced to toe party line on abortion - The Washington Post

The Democratic Party should not impose support for abortion rights as a litmus test on its candidates, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday, because it needs a broad and inclusive agenda to win back the socially conservative voters who helped elect President Trump.

“This is the Democratic Party. This is not a rubber-stamp party,” Pelosi said in an interview with Washington Post reporters.

“I grew up Nancy D’Alesandro, in Baltimore, Maryland; in Little Italy; in a very devout Catholic family; fiercely patriotic; proud of our town and heritage, and staunchly Democratic,” she added, referring to the fact that she is the daughter and sister of former mayors of that city. “Most of those people — my family, extended family — are not pro-choice. You think I’m kicking them out of the Democratic Party?”

Nancy Pelosi says abortion is ‘fading’ as an issue for Democrats. The opposite is true for conservatives. - The Washington Post

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) thinks Democratic voters just don't care about abortion anymore, at least not to the degree they used to.

“It’s kind of fading as an issue,” she told Washington Post reporters on Tuesday. “It really is.”

But conservative lawmakers certainly still care a lot. In fact, antiabortion advocates are on a roll right now, successfully making it harder for women to get abortions in dozens of states.

This is the same Nancy Pelosi who talks about wanting a strong Republican Party.

But that has not been a very successful strategy.

And we're supposed to believe the DNC leadership gives a shit about us? It's fine to "build bridges", but not if they're only building on the other side.

 

[Copernicus]

Bomb, I have nothing further to add to what I've already said on the subject of "pro-choice" vs "pro-life". Thanks for the discussion.

Well, perhaps you do have something further to add...

But not on the subject of "pro-choice" vs "pro-life". My comment was about using analogy, an informal fallacy, to prove a point.

...Analogies are not always bad, but they always break down when used to make a point in an argument. Their primary use is to teach novel or complicated concepts, not to serve as proof that a conclusion in an argument is correct or true.

I take it if I made a valid and sound deductive argument from true premises you'd reply with a link to a page explaining that there exist unsound arguments with false premises and/or invalid reasoning steps.

No, I would congratulate you on finally making a sound argument. Time to break out the champagne!

 

[lpetrich]

And we're supposed to believe the DNC leadership gives a shit about us? It's fine to "build bridges", but not if they're only building on the other side.

I agree that being conciliatory won't work if the other side refuses to also do so. I remember from some decades back some pro-choicers tried to reach out to anti-abortionists, but that side objected to working with "baby killers".

The Real Dividing Line On Abortion | FiveThirtyEight

... Even though abortion is often presented as a women’s issue, it’s not a topic with a stark division of opinion between men and women. If you dig into the polling and research, it becomes clear that the divide is less about people’s individual genders than the way they think about gender. People who believe in traditional gender roles — and perceive that those roles are increasingly being blurred to men’s disadvantage — are much likelier to oppose abortion than people who don’t hold those beliefs.

The two sexes are much alike about abortion, though men tend to be slightly more opposed than women. There are also plenty of anti-abortion women.

"People with different views on what's needed for gender equality, it turns out, also tend to think pretty differently about abortion"

What to Know about Public Opinion on Abortion in 2022
Gender Equality, the Status of Women and the 2020 Elections.
Pro, anti, poll option

• + - "I want there to be equal numbers of men and women in positions of power in our society"
• - + "These days, society seems to punish men just for acting like men"
• - + "Agree women are too easily offended"
• - + "Agree most women interpret innocent remarks or acts as being sexist"
• - + "Agree men generally make better political leaders than women"
• + - "Agree I want there to be equal numbers of men and women in positions of power in our society
• + - "Think the way women are treated in society is an important 2020 issue"
• + - "Agree the country would be better off if we had more women in political office"
• + - "Think access to birth control affects women's equality"
• + - "Think lack of women in political office affects women's equality"
• + - "Favorable toward #MeToo movement
• + - "Believe systems in society were set up to give men more opportunities than women"

So differences about abortion reflect broader differences.