Abortion – Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information

Ashley Judd continues to take a strong stance in the pro-choice movement as a three-time rape survivor.

Judd, 50, shared at a Women in the World panel discussion Thursday that one of the times she was raped, she became pregnant.

“I’m very thankful I was able to access safe and legal abortion,” she told moderator Katie Couric and the audience. “Because the rapist, who is a Kentuckian, as am I, and I reside in Tennessee, has paternity rights in Kentucky and Tennessee. I would’ve had to co-parent with a rapist.”

Couric noted that Judd was one of 50 Hollywood actors who boycotted Georgia’s Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act, also known as the “heartbeat” bill. The legislation bans abortions after a heartbeat is detected, which can be as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.

“Democracy starts with our skin,” Judd, who is also a #MeToo advocate, said at the panel. “We’re not supposed to regulate what we choose to do with our insides.”

In March, Alyssa Milano tweeted the full list of actors who have signed on to oppose the bill, which included both men and women in Hollywood like Judd, David Arquette, Debra Messing, Mandy Moore, Amy Schumer, Ben Stiller and Don Cheadle.

Source:

This article originally appeared in the New York Post. 

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/ashley-judd-abortion-decision?fbclid=IwAR1w7X3RfwnV_qS7RaeLF1hMly8FYxWlqtcMrLnNIoboPTSjqXBa2p6VpLw

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A bill imposing one of the most stringent abortion restrictions in the nation was signed into law in Ohio on Thursday, banning abortions after a detectable heartbeat in a long-sought victory for abortion opponents that drew an immediate constitutional challenge.

In signing the heartbeat bill, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine broke with his predecessor, Republican John Kasich, who had vetoed the measure twice on grounds that it was clearly unconstitutional.

But DeWine defended Ohio Republicans’ decision to push the boundaries of the law, because “it is the right thing to do.”

“Taking this action really is a kind of a time-honored tradition, the constitutional tradition of making a good faith argument for modification or reversal of existing legal precedents,” he said. “So that is what this is.”

He said it’s the government’s job to protect the vulnerable.

Ohio’s closely divided politics had slowed the progress of the bill as it has caught momentum elsewhere , forcing years of debate in the state where the movement originated. Of five previous states that have passed heartbeat bills, three have seen their laws struck down or blocked by the courts, another faces a legal inunction and the fifth is awaiting governor’s action.

“Victory!” exclaimed Faith2Action, the Ohio-based anti-abortion group that first introduced the heartbeat concept in 2010.

DeWine’s action came a day after the latest version of the bill, which outlaws abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, cleared the Republican-controlled Legislature. Doctors say a fetal heartbeat can be detected using transvaginal ultrasound technology as early as five weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

Even before the bill was signed, the ACLU of Ohio said it was preparing a constitutional challenge to the law on behalf of Pre-Term Cleveland and three other Ohio abortion clinics.

The legal challenge is what the bill’s backers have always wanted. They hope to provoke a legal challenge with the potential to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion up until viability, usually at 22 to 24 weeks.

“The heartbeat bill is the next incremental step in our strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade,” said Ohio Right to Life President Mike Gonidakis. “While other states embrace radical legislation to legalize abortion on demand through the ninth month of pregnancy, Ohio has drawn a line and continues to advance protections for unborn babies.”

Kellie Copeland, director of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio, said lawmakers and the governor have plunged the state into “a dystopian nightmare where people are forced to continue pregnancies regardless of the harm that may come to them or their family.”

The law makes no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.

EMILY’s List, a national group that supports candidates who favor abortion rights, also decried the Ohio bill, as did the Democratic National Committee.

DNC CEO Seema Nanda called it “the latest example of how the Trump administration’s extremist, anti-women policies have emboldened legislators across the country to attack women’s access to health care.”

DeWine said his administration is committed to supporting pregnant women.

“I just want to make it very, very clear, our concern is not just for the unborn, our concern is for all individuals who need protection,” he said. “It is our duty, I believe, and an essential function of government, to protect those who cannot protect themselves.”

The latest version of the bill passed out of an Ohio House committee Tuesday. The full House approved it Wednesday and, that same day, the Senate agreed to House changes and sent it to DeWine.

During Wednesday’s House debate, State Rep. Michele Lepore-Hagan, a Democrat, shed tears as she talked about the harm the bill could do.

“I’m concerned that our kids are going to leave, that we’re going to lose a large amount of young people who don’t want to live in an oppressive atmosphere,” she said.

State Rep. Candice Keller, a Middletown Republican, called the legislation “the most compassionate bill we’ve ever passed.”

Prohibiting abortions at the first detectable heartbeat means prohibiting virtually all abortions, said Dr. Michael Cackovic, a specialist in maternal fetal medicine at Ohio State University Medical Center. He said current standard practice, which involves transvaginal ultrasound, can reliably detect a heartbeat five to six weeks into pregnancy.

“Essentially, that’s three to four weeks after conception, or one to two weeks after a missed period,” he said.

(Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

Source: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/111923827/i-had-an-abortion-at-19-and-it-gave-me-my-life-women-need-the-power-to-choose?fbclid=IwAR23AGneOywsn_ml-I7al4GWwWcR6f5VBsTLHOsQFWK6E7ySE3flOPfuPRY

The bill was introduced by Republican Rep. Tony Tinderholt in January, but had its first committee hearing this week.

Texas lawmakers are considering a bill that would ban abortion in the state and charge women who have abortions with homicide, which can carry the death penalty in the state.

Rep. Tony Tinderholt, a Republican, introduced the “Abolition of Abortion in Texas Act,” or House Bill 896, in January to “protect the rights of an unborn child” but it was granted its first committee hearing on Monday and Tuesday.

Nearly 500 people testified, with 54 people testifying against the bill, according to The Washington Post.

“A living human child, from the moment of fertilization on fusion of a human spermatozoon with a human ovum, is entitled to the same rights, powers, and privileges as are secured or granted by the laws of this state to any other human child,” the text of the bill reads.

Republican Rep. Matt Krause, who sits on the Texas House Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence, which heard the bill, said in a statement on Facebook before the hearing that it was “the first legislative hearing since 1973 on this topic.”

Tinderholt introduced a similar bill in 2017, but it failed to leave committee. He was placed under state protection because of death threats he received after proposing the bill, according to The Texas Tribune.

Tinderholt did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Democrats on the committee excoriated the bill, calling the provisions hypocritical.

“I’m trying to reconcile in my head the arguments that I heard tonight about how essentially one is OK with subjecting a woman to the death penalty … to do to her the exact same thing that one is alleging she is doing to a child,” Democratic Rep. Victoria Neave said during the hearing, according to The Washington Post.

Tinderholt defended the bill, according to Fox 9, a Texas television station.

“I think it’s important to remember that if a drunk driver kills a pregnant woman, they get charged twice. If you murder a pregnant woman, you get charged twice. So I’m not specifically criminalizing women. What I’m doing is equalizing the law,” Tinderholt said.

The bill would ban abortion at any stage of pregnancy and would criminalize women who have abortions and the physicians who perform them, even in cases of rape, human trafficking or incest. The bill directly conflicts with the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, which outlawed criminalizing abortion.

Before the bill goes to the full Texas House for debate, it faces a challenge in committee.

Republican Rep. Jeff Leach, chairman of the House Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence, told The Dallas News that he would not allow the committee to advance the legislation with provisions that penalize women.

“I cannot and will not support nor will I let come out of this committee any bill on [abortion] which targets the woman with either civil or criminal liability,” he told the paper.

Leach did not respond to a request for comment.

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/texas-lawmakers-consider-death-penalty-women-who-get-abortions-n993171

Reproductive rights advocates expect Gov. Ned Lamont (D) to sign the legislation if it clears the Democratic-majority legislature.

Providers at reproductive health clinics have long complained about how these anti-choice pregnancy centers poach on and distract their patients with false advertising.
Shutterstock

Connecticut legislators advanced a bill that would curb deceptive advertising by the state’s anti-choice pregnancy centers.

The legislation, known as An Act Concerning Deceptive Marketing Practices of Limited Service Pregnancy Centers, passed the Public Health Committee on March 29.

Conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that a California effort to regulate anti-choice clinics, commonly known as crisis pregnancy centers, was unconstitutional, though the Connecticut legislation isn’t nearly as far reaching. The Connecticut bill would ban advertising “any statement concerning any pregnancy-related service … that is false, misleading or deceptive.”

Reproductive rights advocates expect Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D), a strong proponent of abortion rights, to sign the bill if it clears the Democratic-held legislature. Around 25 anti-choice pregnancy centers operate in Connecticut, which has only 18 licensed family planning clinics, according NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut.

“I’m really excited about the momentum we have for this,” Sarah Croucher, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut, told Rewire.News. “We found that we have pro-choice Republicans in Connecticut who understand that the centers are a problem in the way they present themselves to people. So we are excited about this moving forward with strong political support, including some bipartisan support, and we are excited that Connecticut can set policy for the nation on this issue.”

Croucher testified in favor of the bill, which is aimed at limited service pregnancy centers (CPCs) that use deceptive practices, like appearing to offer unbiased counseling and abortion services when they do not. Cases like this often pit right-to-know health-care advocates against anti-choice activists who claim free speech. This measure is modeled after San Francisco’s 2011 truth-in-advertising law, advocates said.

Providers at reproductive health clinics have long complained that these anti-choice pregnancy centers distract their patients with false advertising. In Hartford, for example, an anti-choice center opened up 30 feet from the Hartford GYN, a licensed abortion clinic operated by The Women’s Centers, and often tried to block and redirect patients headed to the licensed clinic.

“At all of The Women’s Centers locations, including Hartford GYN, we have seen firsthand the dangers that fake women’s health centers pose when deceiving patients and delaying their access to time-sensitive medical care in their efforts to convince them not to have an abortion,” Roxanne Sutocky, director of community engagement at The Women’s Centers, said in an email. “At Hartford GYN Center, we frequently care for patients [who] report experiencing confusion and delays because they were deceived into going to the wrong office or were given misleading information about their pregnancy options—occurrences which have notably increased since the St. Gerard Center for Life opened as Hartford Women’s Center just 30 feet from our Hartford GYN Center’s front door. We have also experienced an increase in aggressive protester activity outside of the Center.”

Hartford officials responded to the complaints by rolling out an ordinance last October prohibiting deceptive advertising practices and requiring the centers to disclose if they do not have licenses medical provider on staff, or face a $100 fine per day.

Baltimore and Montgomery County, Maryland were the first to enact ordinances requiring signs in the waiting rooms of limited-service pregnancy centers, telling patients that such centers do not provide or make referrals for abortion or birth-control services. Both ordinances were later blocked by courts.

As the assault on reproductive rights continues, so has the proliferation of anti-choice clinics, many of which are funded by Republican lawmakers sympathetic to their cause: tricking people out of seeking abortion services. There are more than 4,000 of these anti-choice clinics across the United States, and 32 states allow “Choose Life” license plates that siphon public money towards anti-choice clinics or adoption services. A 2018 Rewire.News analysis found anti-choice clinics in 14 states were set to receive more than $40 million in taxpayer dollars. The Trump administration, staffed with anti-choice activists turned government officials, has funneled millions in taxpayer funds to anti-choice pregnancy centers.

One anti-choice clinic allegedly went as far as locking a patient in an exam room, according to a social media post from a clinic receptionist. In 2015, an undercover investigation by NARAL Pro-Choice confirmed that anti-choice pregnancy centers in California routinely lied to pregnant people.

Legislators in several states have taken steps to make people aware of the deceptive practices used by these clinics, which are staffed with people who often claim to have medical backgrounds and pretend to provide abortion services.

New York rolled out a public campaign and website called “Know Your Options” last summer to educate residents about anti-choice clinics. But California’s abortion services disclosure law, or the Reproductive FACT Act, was struck down last summer by the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision. The California law required licensed centers to disclose to pregnant people that the state provides access to reproductive health care including abortion, and required unlicensed centers to disclose that they are unlicensed. A similar law was also struck down in Hawaii.

Connecticut’s bill still needs to pass the house and senate, both controlled by Democrats. A majority of the Public Health Committee voted in favor; Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin and state Attorney General William Tong both gave testimony in favor, advocates said.

“Whether someone is seeking abortion care, prenatal services, or contraception, fake women’s health centers cause unnecessary delays that needlessly imperil a patient’s health by deceptively diverting patients away from legitimate reproductive health care providers,” Sutocky said. “Unfortunately, the deceptive advertising practices employed by fake women’s health centers do a great deal to undermine the patient-provider relationship, making it more challenging for pregnant people to access the care they need.”

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2019/04/08/connecticut-lawmakers-bar-anti-choice-clinics-from-lying-to-pregnant-people/

In four yellowing pages, she outlined her struggles with the question, and the pivotal role the death of her daughter Robin played in forming her views.

In 1980, when George H. W. Bush was making his first bid for the presidency, Barbara Bush covered four sheets of lined paper with her bold handwriting, then tucked the pages into a folder with her diary and some personal letters. She was trying to sort out what she believed about one of the most divisive issues of the day.

She was sure to be asked what she thought about abortion, and she wanted to have an answer.

The former first lady never released the pages or detailed the reasoning she outlined in them, not in hundreds of interviews she gave over the decades that followed nor in her two memoirs. But in February 2018, two months before she died, she gave me permission to read her diaries as I researched a biography of her. (The Matriarch: Barbara Bush and the Making of an American Dynasty is being published by Twelve on April 2.) She had donated the diaries to the George H. W. Bush Presidential Library, in College Station, Texas, with the restriction that they be held private until 35 years after her death—as it turns out, until 2053. Only the historian Jon Meacham had been given permission to see them before, when he was working on Destiny and Power: The American Odyssey of George Herbert Walker Bush.

When I began reading her diaries, she and I planned to have another interview, our sixth, in March 2018. (I was allowed to read her papers and to make notes, but not to photograph them.) But she fell the night before and ended up in the hospital; she never recovered enough for us to meet again before she died, a month later. I never had a chance to ask her about what I found.

Despite a powerful anti-choice lobby and the presence of anti-choice Democrats who have blocked the bill in the past, many Rhode Island lawmakers are determined to protect abortion rights.

Despite being the most Catholic state in the US with powerful anti-choice Democrats in the General Assembly, Rhode Island added more women and pro-choice legislators last year than ever before.
Nagel Photography / Shutterstock

As a bill to protect abortions rights is being considered in the Rhode Island Senate, lawmakers are cautiously optimistic after decades of pushing for Roe protections in a state legislature long run by anti-choice Democrats.

The hotly debated bill, S 152A, continued its momentum with a visit from Dr. Leana Wen, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, who came to the capitol Tuesday to urge state senators to pass the legislation, which would protect abortion rights if conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court strike down Roe v. Wade. The state senate bill mirrors the house version, which was reintroduced in January by Rep. Edith Ajello (D-Providence). The bill passed the Rhode Island House on March 7.

“I’m very proud to be standing with so many people here who are amazing champions of reproductive rights and health,” Wen said in the house’s crowded State Library, where many advocates and lawmakers sported pink.

The Reproductive Privacy Act (as the Reproductive Health Care Act or RHCA will be known if it becomes law) would guarantee safe and legal abortion in Rhode Island, and would eliminate restrictions like spousal notification and the criminalization of health-care providers.

Wen commended supporters of the bill and said the fight is urgent given the “terrifying reality” of Roe v. Wade being overturned, which could lead to as many as 25 million—more than 1 in 3 women of reproductive age—living in states where abortion is outlawed or criminalized. In 2017, there were 212,000 women of reproductive age in Rhode Island.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Dr. Leana Wen came to Rhode Island this week to support the Democratic effort to safeguard abortion rights in the state.

“It’s early in 2019, and already there have been over 250 bills introduced that directly restrict abortion access across the country. Fifteen states have introduced abortion bans early in pregnancy at six weeks, when most women don’t even know they are pregnant,” she said. Two of those GOP-backed bills have been signed into law, in Kentuckyand Mississippi. Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) is expected to sign similar legislation passed last week. “These are examples of politicians directly interfering with medical practice and, in the process, endangering women’s lives,” she said.

Yet support for abortion protections is at an all-time high, she said, pointing to the midterm elections that resulted in the most pro-choice, most female, and most diverse U.S. House of Representatives in history.

“It’s Rhode Island’s turn to stop politicians from directly interfering with medical practice and endangering women’s lives. We urge the Senate to stand with us and vote to protect women’s health and the health of families and communities,” Wen said at Tuesday’s press conference.

Abortion providers like Dr. Beth Cronin, Rhode Island vice chair of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), debunked falsehoods that have fueled some of the most draconian anti-choice legislation. “Abortion, like pap smears and prenatal care, is essential health care,” she said at the Tuesday press conference. “The Reproductive Health Care Act will not change how I or any other physician in this state currently practice medicine. It will simply keep abortion safe and legal for all citizens of Rhode Island.”

Democrats in New York and Illinois have passed laws safeguarding abortion rights, while anti-choice Democrats stopped a similar effort in New Mexico last month.

Despite being the most Catholic state in the country, with powerful anti-choice Democrats in its general assembly, Rhode Island added more women and pro-choice legislators last year than ever before. Many of the newcomers are champions of the bill—like state Sen. Melissa Murray (D-Woonsocket, North Smithfield), who told Rewire.News she has heard from an increasing number of constituents who want the bill to move out of committee and come to a full vote.

“Fifteen cases that could overturn Roe are steps away from the Supreme Court. Our rights are at stake. We must do everything we can to protect Roe and a woman’s right to a safe, legal abortion. It is critical. It is urgent. We are the 71 percent and the time is now,” she said at the press conference, referring to a 2018 poll that indicated statewide support for the legislation.

Advocates who joined the Rhode Island Coalition for Reproductive Freedom to urge for the bill’s passage in the state senate said they are excited to see support grow.

Jordan Hevenor, co-director of The Womxn Project, which has been hosting weekly events at the state house, told Rewire. News the movement to pass the bill “has really been building.”

“One of the most inspiring things is that new people are coming out and showing up. At every event we are capturing this energy and excitement, and helping people get plugged into activism that work for their life,” she said.

At least four of the nine senate Judiciary Committee members plan to vote favorably; three who were endorsed last year by the Rhode Island State Right to Life Committee are expected to oppose it. Like his anti-choice counterpart, House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello (D-Cranston), Senate President Dominick Ruggerio (D-Providence) seems to be allowing the process to play out despite his personal opposition to abortion rights, according to news reports. Both men have blocked the RHCA from floor votes in past years.

With 17 co-sponsors in the state senate (19 votes are needed for passage), where Democrats maintain a supermajority, lawmakers are hopeful the bill can pass this year. A committee vote has not yet been scheduled.

“I feel optimistic,” said state Sen. Gayle Goldin (D-Providence), a longtime supporter of legislation to secure abortion rights in Rhode Island.

“I know there are thousands of people talking to their senators about the bill and we are hopeful. Every year we have seen a growing amount of momentum for the passage of a bill to codify reproductive rights and there is ongoing support here every day,” Goldin, the bill’s sponsor, told Rewire.News.

Despite a powerful anti-choice lobby and the presence of anti-choice Democrats who have blocked the bill in the past, “we know there is a real threat to Roe being overturned and we don’t need to wait until reproductive rights are further diminished to take action in Rhode Island,” she said.

Rep. Anastasia Williams (D-Providence), who co-sponsored the legislation, urged women in Rhode Island to speak up. “It was a hard and very long journey but we are almost there,” she said of the passage of the house bill. “This is our moment to make the change that needs to be made. We are halfway there and we cannot allow any guy, anyone to stop it.”

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2019/04/04/this-could-be-the-next-state-to-secure-roe-protections/

With its obvious polemics, Hallmark Channel acting, and gauzy visuals, the film adaptation of the anti-abortion activist’s personal story isn’t even skillful propaganda.

Based on Abby Johnson’s memoir, Unplanned depicts Johnson’s journey from being conflicted about abortion but working at Planned Parenthood to being staunchly anti-choice after witnessing an abortion.
Unplanned Movie / YouTube

The political is ultimately personal. And oftentimes, the best art, the art that has touched me personally, doesn’t attempt to obscure this fact.

Chuck Konzelman and Cary Solomon, the writer-director team behind the new anti-abortion film Unplanned, know this.

Based on Abby Johnson’s memoir, the film depicts Johnson’s journey from being conflicted about abortion but working at Planned Parenthood to being staunchly anti-choice after witnessing an abortion. And the film, to its credit, acknowledges the personal nature of how Johnson (played by Ashley Bratcher) arrived at her stance after what she characterizes as a life-changing and traumatic experience.

But that is where my praise of Unplanned, however faint, begins and ends. Unplanned is far from the best art. It’s not even particularly sophisticated propaganda, and it allows for no nuance in how it depicts people with either pro-choice or anti-choice beliefs.

It’s impossible to ignore the cartoonishly anti-choice representations of Planned Parenthood employees—not a surprise since Johnson has worked with anti-abortion group Live Action, which has targeted Planned Parenthood in secret video stings. The workers are positively giddy about the notion of abortion. Johnson’s co-worker Renee (Tina Toner) jokes about a room where the biological waste is handled, saying that POC (products of conception) stands for “‘parts of children.’ Hope you had a big breakfast!” She delivers the line with a cheerful wink. And during the abortion scene that provokes Johnson’s epiphany, the male technician gleefully states “Beam me up, Scotty” before inserting the vacuum aspirator into the patient’s uterus.

In addition to the film’s obvious anti-choice positioning, Unplanned delivers a more coded racial—and racist—message. The only nonwhite speaking characters are either those overly enthusiastic Planned Parenthood staffers or abortion-seekers who are portrayed as too downtrodden or stupid to realize the “wrongness” of their decision. The film features several montages of sad women seeking abortion services, including women of color specifically dressed and styled to indicate their poverty. They are rarely given dialogue compared to white women in these montages. Here, there is no chance for redemption if you’re Black or brown: You are either a glib “abortionist” or a tragic victim.

There’s also a disturbing visual message in the casting. Perhaps it’s a coincidence that many of the white anti-choice activist women are blonde, blue-eyed, even Aryan-looking. Most of the Planned Parenthood employees, including supervisor Cheryl (played as a child-hating, evil career woman by actress Robia Scott), have dark hair.

Beyond the racial politics of Unplanned, it also has an ax to grind against working mothers. The film opens with Johnson feeling guilty and apologizing to her daughter for having to work on a Saturday while her saintly husband, Doug (Brooks Ryan), eats breakfast. It’s just one of several scenes in which working mothers apologize for their absences or the film frames motherhood as incompatible with having a career. Take a flashback in which Johnson tells her boss about her pregnancy. Johnson’s supervisor encourages her to abort in order to advance her career, though Johnson is clearly excited about the pregnancy. The tacit message: To be a professional woman means to be against motherhood.

I watched this film, trying to be cognizant of my own biases and beliefs. I did not want to launch into immediate condemnation, like the clinic protesters who lob judgments from the other side of the Planned Parenthood fence in the film.

I have been staunchly pro-choice since I was 15. Like Johnson, I arrived at my position based on my own experience. I was raised Catholic, attended Catholic school, and was pro-life by default—until a classmate I’d known since childhood had an abortion. A few months later, her abortion became public knowledge after a spiteful former best friend divulged the information. Gossip and ridicule basically ran her out of the school, clear across the country where she went to live with her father. I remember thinking: “This can’t be God. This can’t be what God looks like.”

Neither is Unplanned what a good film looks like.

Overall, the movie is shot (and scored) like a laundry detergent commercial, with a gauzy, soft filter. In the abortion Johnson watches, a badly CGI-animated fetus is depicted via ultrasound as fighting to avoid the vacuum aspirator during the procedure—echoing the 1984 anti-abortion film The Silent Scream and debunked claims about fetal pain.

The acting in Unplanned is just as unconvincing as the animated fetus. The success of this story hinges on its lead actress selling the emotional arc of going from being ostensibly pro-choice to being pro-life. Bratcher’s simply not up to the task. She certainly is no Kimberly Elise, whose performance in the film adaptation of Woman Thou Art Loosed elevated Bishop T.D. Jakes’ regressive ideas about gender roles and facile writing.

Still, I want to be as fair as possible to Bratcher, who has mostly acted in short films and bit parts here and there. The script does her absolutely no favors with a tone that veers wildly from obtusely earnest to transparently cynical. The script calls for her to narrate the film, which often indicates lazy writing or directors who don’t trust their actors to show rather than tell. “Any choice you make that you’re not comfortable sharing with your mother is probably a bad idea,” Johnson/Bratcher states early in the film—a broad and strange declaration, considering all the perfectly reasonable choices many adults don’t share with their parents.

What it does show, however, is a sensationalistic take on one of Johnson’s own abortions. According to the film, she had two abortions before working as a supervisor for Planned Parenthood—both while partnered with an unloving and disrespectful first husband.

Johnson is clearly happy to be rid of him and not have any connection to him, so one can’t help but wonder about the mixed messages on display here. Abortion helped her leave a neglectful, uncaring partner without having to be tethered to him. Yet she’s ashamed of her choice. In a shower scene, the character writhes in pain, with bloody tissue dripping from between her legs. She later lies on the floor of a blood-splattered bathroom, crying in both physical and emotional agony. The implication is an abortion gone terribly awry—when the complication rate of abortions is actually very low—or, worse, that most abortions are like this or most women feel as Johnson did. Most women don’t, with an overwhelming majority saying that terminating a pregnancy was right for them.

In scenes like these, Bratcher’s flat, Hallmark Channel-caliber acting just doesn’t pass muster. It verges on the comic, and it actually did evoke laughter from a few audience members in my screening, even though their responses told me they were generally inclined toward the film’s political message.

In addition to an obtuse yet obvious script, the film relies on swelling, dramatic instrumental music and Christian pop-rock songs to convey emotions its actors can’t. The combination of overly telegraphed and polemical writing, miscasting, and overwrought music makes the whole exercise feel amateurish. And this ultimately falls on the writer-directors, Konzelman and Solomon—two men, for the record, whose previous credits include Christian dramas such as God’s Not Dead.

There is nothing wrong, on its face, with a story about someone discovering abortion doesn’t jibe with their personal politics. Look at Jason Reitman’s Juno (2007). Ellen Page plays the 16-year-old pregnant title character. After considering abortion and a clinic-visit encounter that had viewers questioning the film’s abortion politics, Juno decides to carry the pregnancy to term and give the child up for adoption. Like Johnson in Unplanned, Juno’s shift from thinking about getting an abortion to deciding that abortion isn’t right for her is key to both the narrative arc and the protagonist’s emotional journey. Juno’s skillful direction, its thoughtful use of voiceover to get us in to Juno’s head, and Page’s Oscar-nominated performance sell the film with subtlety and emotional truth.

Unplanned does not rise to that level of craft.

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2019/04/02/from-abortion-worker-to-anti-icon-film/