Photo Courtesy of MHN Staff
By News Staff
Hundreds of protesters gathered in front of the steps of Northampton City Hall this past Saturday for the Pioneer Valley Women’s March, a demonstration intended to promote reproductive rights ahead of the Supreme Court reconvening on Oct. 4. The Northampton march was just one of over 500 similar marches across the nation this past weekend held in response to the Texas Heartbeat Bill, which came into effect on Sept. 1.
The Heartbeat Bill prohibits the abortion of an embryo with a detectable heartbeat and would make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy after approximately six weeks from conception. While only enacted at the Texas state level so far, the act symbolizes a wider movement to overturn legislation protecting abortion on a national scale.
Shanique Spalding, who manages mobilization and BIPOC organizing for the Planned Parenthood Advocacy Fund of Massachusetts, was one of 11 featured speakers at the march. She identified the Heartbeat Bill as having the potential to initiate a legislative domino effect across the nation.
“The Supreme Court failed millions of Texans when it allowed politicians to ban abortion before most people know that they are pregnant,” Spalding said. “We cannot allow the reality of Texas to become the reality of this country.”
Massachusetts law currently allows an abortion to be carried out if the pregnancy has existed for less than 24 weeks, or over that time if necessary to preserve the life of the patient or if the fetus is not viable. However, only four Planned Parenthood health centers capable of performing abortions currently exist in the state, located in Boston, Worcester, Springfield and Marlborough; the distance between the Marlborough and Springfield locations exceeds 70 miles. Unless they have access to a car, a person seeking an abortion in Massachusetts may have to rely on transportation by bus, train or ferry. Combined with additional travel costs such as lodging, the total amount of money spent just to arrive at a clinic may add up to several hundred dollars. Advocates for greater access to family planning resources at the march acknowledged the need to expand beyond just the law, with calls for greater access to healthcare and transportation to health centers.
Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1973, recognized the right to terminate a pregnancy by abortion as a constitutionally protected freedom. However, the decision faces an uncertain future due to an upcoming challenge in the Supreme Court. On Dec. 1, the Court will hear the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which concerns the validity of a 2018 Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks. The case will decide the question of “whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional,” according to a case document hosted on the official Supreme Court website.
Linda Summers, a resident of Southampton who attended the march, once believed that Roe v. Wade would put an end to legal restrictions on a person’s right to seek an abortion in the United States. She was 30 when the decision was made. Now 77, she is in disbelief that the ruling she once thought to be ironclad is facing a possible overturn.
“It’s very frustrating to continue this fight,” Summers said. “I don’t think [abortion restrictions] could happen in Massachusetts, but we should be concerned about all women and their reproductive rights.”
Also in attendance at the march was Mount Holyoke College’s chapter of Planned Parenthood Generation Action, a network of campus activist groups that includes over 350 college chapters across the U.S. The Mount Holyoke chapter, which currently has nearly 800 students on its email list, works to provide students across campus with menstrual products and contraceptives.
While the call to defend reproductive rights resonated with some of the members who attended the rally, some felt alienated by a perceived lack of inclusivity within the march.
“Unfortunately, many speakers at the march today neglected to include men and nonbinary people in their advocacy,” chapter co-chair Jojo Zeitlin ’22 wrote in an email. “MHC PPGA does not condone rhetoric that excludes trans and nonbinary people from the reproductive rights and reproductive justice movement. We strongly believe, and want to reiterate, that anyone with a uterus can have an abortion and deserves equal access.”
Eli Mancini ’24, who serves as secretary on the PPGA board, expressed a similar outlook. “If I had to change anything, I’d probably make some of the language and some of the practices more gender inclusive,” he said.
Maria Mutka, a senior at Smith College majoring in anthropology and Russian studies, echoed the MHC PPGA’s desires for intersectionality.
“To improve the march, I definitely would have loved to have seen more of a younger crowd there, as well as more women and gender-nonconforming people of color,” Mutka wrote in an email. “It was really important to hear from the youth activists that spoke and gave a lot of hope for the future of the abortion rights movement, and who also addressed a critical issue in the abortions right movement, which is the exclusion that tends to happen for gender-nonconforming and nonbinary folks who have uteruses.”
Outside of MHC PPGA’s attendance, the overall march saw a lower turnout of college students in comparison to older age groups. Anne Rogers ’88 expressed concerns that the rally’s main demographic consisted of older women and relatively few young people.
“I would have liked to see more young people in their 20s and 30s,” Rogers wrote in an email. “There were many more people with gray hair like mine in the crowd. This issue is an immediate threat, and we all need to wake up and get motivated. ... We cannot allow a tiny minority of people to dictate what happens to our bodies.”