Detroit: The Battleground for Abortion Rights
Sean Helzer is a recent college graduate from Wayne State University, who in December 2022, received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. While at Wayne State, Sean focused on and specialized in the study of American Government, Public Policy, Public Administration, and American History. His studies in those fields culminated in his project regarding the history of abortion access in Detroit and the compounding economic, political, and societal factors that access to abortion can have on a local, state, and federal level. Sean hopes to pursue a career in public service, dedicated to resolving the varying disparities and inequalities that continue to persist in our world today.
Chapter 1: Roe v. Wade
Prior to 1973, most states still criminalized abortion and would only possibly allow it in the event the mother’s life was threatened. With the Roe v. Wade ruling, that all changed. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Texas abortion law that had been on the books for over a hundred years. They ruled that abortion should be left between a woman and her doctor within the first trimester, but the procedure itself could be regulated by states in the second trimester, and states could possibly ban most abortions except in extreme cases in the third trimester due to the “viability” of the fetus. To breach such guidelines would be a direct violation of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and the constitutional powers given to the states in the 9th Amendment. This was a win for the abortion rights movement all across the country.
However, the battle for abortion rights was not over, since the states were given the power by the Supreme Court to enforce laws over late-term pregnancies. State governments sought to control women’s healthcare during pregnancy, claiming, “the State does have an important and legitimate interest in preserving and protecting the health of the pregnant woman” (Page 410 U.S. 162). The Supreme Court meant that the state had such power in the later terms of the pregnancy, but states used such discretion to enact restrictive abortion laws. Those most vulnerable to it were low-income women and women of color. With the refusal of government assistance for reproductive health care services, this would continue to reinforce the cycle of poverty that such women were already facing. The battle over state and federal tax dollars being used to fund reproductive health care services in Detroit was one facet of the economic abandonment of the city by the state of Michigan and the U.S. as public programs and services in Detroit became underfunded or cut altogether.
Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) and her lawyer Gloria Allred on the steps of the Supreme Court, 1989. [i2]
Immediate Aftermath: The Battle Has Just Begun
The Anti-Choice Movement:
In response to the formation of the abortion rights movement in Michigan by the mid-1960’s (Michigan Coordinating Committee for Abortion Law Reform), the Michigan Catholic Conference and the Detroit Chapter of the Right to Life came together and spearheaded the anti-choice movement of the state around 1968. This culminated in the April 1971 Conference of the Unborn held in Detroit.
The power of the Michigan anti-choice movement was evident in the 1972 election where they were mostly responsible for the defeat of Proposal B, which would have legalized abortion. Most voters in the state voted against the measure. Just over two months later, Roe v. Wade would legalize abortion in the first two trimesters of a pregnancy for all women across the nation. Defeated, anti-choice groups quickly got to work and formed the Michigan Citizen’s Right for Life in 1973. By the end of next year, they had 45 chapters and 100,000 members in the state, with their headquarters in Detroit [s1]. With the National Right to Life Committee being held in June 1973 in Detroit, five months after Roe v. Wade, the city would be seen as one of the main hubs for the anti-choice movement in the nation.
Announcement of Michigan Citizens for Life’s first convention in Detroit. [i3]
Chapter 2: Medicaid Bans
In August 1977, in response to pressure from conservative and religious anti-choice groups, Congress passed the Hyde Amendment, named after Illinois Representative Henry Hyde. This amendment denied the use of federal Medicaid funds to cover the costs of abortion except in cases where the mother’s life was threatened.
With the passage of the Hyde Amendment, states started Medicaid abortion bans all across the nation, including Michigan. The method of restricting abortion access by denying state and federal programs from covering it (Medicaid) was one of the earliest strategies and most effective of them used and implemented.
New York Times article discussing the impact of the Hyde Amendment on similar state legislation. [i4]
One of the reasons why Medicaid bans were so popular in Michigan was because, by the early 1980s, the state paid the second most in abortion costs through Medicaid, right behind California, the biggest state in the country. So, the anti-choice movement in the state used this information to argue that even though abortion is legal, the public should not have to pay the costs for abortion, a procedure that they morally disagreed with.
A woman from the Detroit Chapter of National Organization for Women (NOW) holding a vigil in Lansing as the state legislature begins to vote on another Medicaid Ban bill. [i5]
Article from the Detroit Free Press that provides statistics on Medicaid funding of abortions in Michigan. [i6]
Medicaid bans were especially appealing for state representatives because they had bipartisan appeal. Republicans could appeal to their more conservative base and growing anti-choice movement in their party. Meanwhile, Democrats could appeal to their more socially liberal base by still wanting to uphold the right to an abortion and also appeal to fiscal conservatives within the party by denying government funds (taxpayer dollars) to cover it.
Many attempts by the Michigan state legislature to enact such laws throughout the ’70’s and ’80’s failed. Between 1978 to 1988, the Michigan state legislature passed 17 bills regarding the ban of state Medicaid funds for most abortions, but were vetoed by both Republican Governor William Milliken and Democratic Governor James Blanchard throughout their time in office. They both recognized the negative economic and societal impact these bans would have on the state, regardless of their personal views on abortion or the political party that they associated with. Both governors had frequent conversations with pro-choice activists and had established a rapport with pro-choice organizations within the state.
Description: Letter to Lorette Moore from Governor Milliken notifying her that he will veto another Medicaid Ban bill. [i7]
A flier from the Committee of Reproductive Freedom discussing the abortion rights struggle and hoping to get members to join a demonstration. [i8]
A newsletter from Michigan Abortion Rights Action League (MARAL) asking members to get more involved as the anti abortion movement grows. [i9]
Chapter 3: Impact of Medicaid Bans
When it came to the impact of the refusal by states and the federal government to cover costs of abortion, the most affected were low-income women and women of color. Studies showed that by 2000, “women with household incomes below 200% of the federal poverty line accounted for 57.4% of abortion patients” [s2] and that women of color were twice as likely to get an abortion than white women [s3].
It is apparent that the Hyde Amendment had a correlation with women of color and their ability to get an abortion as they needed more time to raise funds to cover costs. When Medicaid was available, many abortion providers still refused to accept such health insurance programs or refused to tell patients about it as they got low rates of return from the government to use Medicaid for abortion costs. When some providers agreed to use Medicaid to cover costs of abortion, they would force women, predominantly black women, to also agree to become sterilized so they could no longer become pregnant.
Statement from the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America VP Odessa Komer discussing the harmful effects of denying Medicaid coverage of abortion. [i10]
When low-income women could get an abortion, it usually took them longer to raise the money, meaning they would get an abortion later in their pregnancy, which had severe consequences for their health. During the late 1970s, according to the CDC, “For each week of delay after six weeks of gestation, the risks of complications after legally induced abortions increases approximately 20%; the risk of death increases approximately 50%” [s4]. The lack of funds led to more women getting abortions later in their pregnancy. This led to a decline in abortion rates, estimates ranging from 17% to 68% among the Medicaid-eligible population [s5]. Therefore, more children would be born and more people would need to rely on government assistance, resulting in a clear correlation between a decrease in abortions and an increase in rates of poverty.
Laura Hussey’s research shows a decrease in abortions is related to the increase of funding for social safety net programs. [i11]
In an off-year election in 1987, the Detroit Based Michigan Committee to End Tax-Funded Abortions and the Detroit Chapter of the Right to Life got Public Act 59 on the ballot. If passed, it would lead to state Medicaid to only be used to pay for abortions where the mother’s life was threatened. This ballot initiative was approved by a majority of voters. This was followed by the pro-choice movement calling for a referendum on this proposal, which was seen as unusual as anti-choice groups were the ones who typically put ballot proposals and referendums on state ballots, as their expertise was in rallying voters to their cause, while pro-choice groups relied more on lobbying politicians directly.
Chapter 4: Michigan 1988 Referendum
The original text of P.A. Act 59 of 1987. [i12]
When pro-choice groups decided to form the political coalition of the People’s Campaign of Choice around early 1988, problems soon followed. The pro-choice movement’s campaign organization was weakened since leaders of the movement were based in D.C. not in Michigan and, more importantly, not in Detroit. Both Michigan Abortion Rights Action League (MARAL) and the Michigan chapters of National Organization for Women (NOW) relied heavily on funding from their parent groups as they could not keep up with the anti-choice movement’s ability to raise money on the state-level.
A pamphlet from the Northland Planning Clinic that provides information on the upcoming referendum. [i13]
Those in the state that got the referendum on the ballot were based in Lansing, not in Detroit. Much of the campaign was not in Detroit or Metro Detroit until the last weeks of the campaign.
A press release from MCERTFA about a 24-hour “Yes-A-Thon” to get churchgoers to donate and vote yes on the referendum. [i14]
The campaign was different from anything the Michigan pro-choice movement had done before. The Michigan pro-choice movement was stretched thin as they went against the state’s anti-choice movement, who had major connections with media outlets, the church, wealthy individuals, and influential politicians. The pro-choice movement had to relay their message within institutions that they had to create themselves, like the People’s Campaign of Choice. The pro-choice movement lacked support from many voters, many politicians including Governor Blanchard and Detroit Mayor Coleman Young. Lack of funding and outside support on top of infighting within the pro-choice movement led to the People’s Campaign of Choice to flounder.
Chapter 5: Doe v. Department of Social Services
In November 1988, the majority of Michigan voters supported Public Act 59, resulting in women no longer being able to use state Medicaid funds to cover costs of abortion. Groups like MARAL tried to educate those disproportionately affected by this law, low-income women and underage girls, by informing them of the costs of abortion and that Medicaid was no longer paying for abortion procedures.
A pamphlet from MARAL showing underage teenagers the costs of abortion without Medicaid coverage. [i15]
A few months later, a major event in Detroit would challenge the constitutionality of P.A. 59. In January 1989, a 15-year-old girl in Detroit was raped by three men, two of them later arrested and charged. The girl in question became pregnant and could not get an abortion in Detroit, as she could not afford the $250 procedure. Denied Medicaid funds she, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan, sued the Michigan Department of Social Services as P.A. 59 denied her rights granted to her in the Michigan Constitution – the right to an abortion.
The 1989 case went from the Wayne County Circuit Court, to the Michigan Appeals Court, and then finally to the Michigan Supreme Court in 1992. It would take three years for the case to reach the Michigan Supreme Court, years after Jane Doe was able to get an abortion, as the ACLU of Michigan paid for the procedure on her behalf.
Article from Detroit Free Press reporting on the Doe ruling. (i16)
In 1992, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that such law was not discriminatory because it did not explicitly target a certain group of people (race, ethnicity, national origin). If such discrimination occurs, it is an outlier.
They also came to the decision, which was supported in the previous U.S. Supreme Court rulings, that it is the government’s role to protect such rights, but taxpayers do not have to fund such rights. The Michigan Supreme Court said that the law was not discriminatory, as it affected all women on Medicaid, not just targeted members of Medicaid recipients. The state has the right to incentivize having children as it pertains to the general well-being of all. This was another blow to the pro-choice movement. Now that P.A. 59 was deemed constitutional by the highest court in the state, this led to a worsening of economic and societal conditions for low-income women and women of color in Detroit. Reproductive health care services were no longer subsidized, but, instead, privatized, as individuals were now responsible for the sole financial burden of having an abortion.
Epilogue: Impact on the city of Detroit
After twenty years of endless anti-choice assaults on Roe v. Wade, abortion rights had been weakened across the country, across Michigan, and across Detroit. Two years after the Jane Doe ruling, the U.S. District Court of Western Michigan overturned the original text of P.A. 59. In Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Michigan v. Engler, the court mandated that Michigan must cover abortion costs in cases of rape. This ruling came the year after Congress passed an extension of Medicaid funds for abortion in cases of rape and incest, not just in life-threatening situations. To continue to enforce the original text of the state law would violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, meaning that Michigan could not refuse to withhold state Medicaid abortion funds for women who had been raped when the U.S. government was providing federal Medicaid abortion funds for women who had been raped. For a state to infringe upon a right granted and protected by the federal government would be a violation of the 9th Amendment. This was a win for the pro-choice movement in the state, but many women could still not receive federal or state Medicaid funds to cover the costs of abortion.
Article from the Detroit Free Press reporting on the Planned Parenthood ruling in 1994. (i17)
Issues of race, gender, and class compounded other issues in the city also were central to the abortion rights debate in Detroit. State and federal tax dollars were leaving Detroit, which detrimentally weakened social safety net programs, including reproductive health care services. Many low-income women and women of color in Detroit could not afford to have an abortion after the Medicaid ban went in place.. After the success of denying Medicaid funds for most women seeking an abortion, the anti-choice movement would then go after other ways to deny a woman’s right over their own body.
Protest held in Detroit regarding abortion rights in 2017. (i18)
To learn more and see Hezler’s full project, click here.
End Notes
Images
[i1] Gray, Kathleen. “’We Should Be Terrified’: What Michigan Women Should Know If Abortion Becomes Illegal.” Abortion in Michigan: What women should know if Roe v. Wade overturned. Detroit Free Press, December 15, 2019. https://www.freep.com/in-depth/news/politics/2019/08/08/abortion-illegal-michigan-roe-wade-overturned/1790907001/.
[i2] Advance, Allison Donahue Michigan. “Here’s What Could Happen in Michigan If Roe v. Wade Is Overturned.” Detroit Metro Times, July 19, 2021. https://www.metrotimes.com/news/heres-what-could-happen-in-michigan-if-roe-v-wade-is-overturned-27615705.
[i3} Karrer, Robert N. “The Formation of Michigan’s Anti-Abortion Movement 1967-1974.” Michigan Historical Review 22, no. 1 (1996): 67–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/20173555.
[i4] Detroit Feminist Women’s Health Center Records, Box 8, Folder 35 Abortion, 1978-81
[i5] National Organization for Women (NOW): Downriver Chapter Records, Box 3, Folder 2 Michigan Coalition for Abortion Rights, newsletter, 1977-1983
[i6] Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 66, Scanned Document Group 04 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_66_04
[i7] National Organization for Women (NOW): Downriver Chapter Records, Box 3, Folder 1, Abortion; correspondence, Michigan and U.S. office holders, 1974-1983
[i8] Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 69, Scanned Document Group 01 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_69_01
[i9] Harriet Cooper Alpern Papers, Box 1, Folder 2 Abortion, 1981-March 1982
[i10] Edith Van Horn Papers, Box 1, Folder 1 Abortion, 1977-1985
[i11] Hussey, Laura S. “Welfare Generosity, Abortion Access, and Abortion Rates: A Comparison of State Policy Tools.” Social Science Quarterly 91, no. 1 (2010): 266–83. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956534.
[i12] “The Social Welfare Act (Excerpt) – Legislature.mi.gov.” Accessed March 30, 2022. https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(umqahddatk5pfimglj5pejly))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-400-109a.pdf.
[i13] Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 73, Scanned Document Group 02 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_73_02
[i14] Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 5, Folder 1, Scanned Document Group 01 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_5_01_01
[i15] Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 74, Scanned Document Group 01 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_74_01
[i16] “June 10, 1992 (Page 8 of 62).” Detroit Free Press (1923-1999), Jun 10, 1992, General edition. https://proxy.lib.wayne.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/june-10-1992-page-8-62/docview/1824065585/se-2?accountid=14925.
[i17] “July 19, 1994 (Page 1 of 59).” Detroit Free Press (1923-1999), Jul 19, 1994, General edition. https://proxy.lib.wayne.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/july-19-1994-page-1-59/docview/1824501057/se-2?accountid=14925.
[i18] Baldas, Tresa. “Planned Parenthood Protest in Detroit Turns into Women’s Rights Rally.” Detroit Free Press, Feb 12, 2017. https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2017/02/11/leggo-my-eggo-planned-parenthood-foes-draw-fire/97788578/.
Secondary Sources
[s1] Karrer, Robert N. “The Formation of Michigan’s Anti-Abortion Movement 1967-1974.” Michigan Historical Review 22, no. 1 (1996): 67–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/20173555.
[s2] Hussey, Laura S. “Welfare Generosity, Abortion Access, and Abortion Rates: A Comparison of State Policy Tools.” Social Science Quarterly 91, no. 1 (2010): 266–83. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956534.
[s3] Nsiah-Jefferson, Laurie. “Reproductive Laws, Women of Color, and Low-Income Women.” In Applications Of Feminist Legal Theory, edited by D. Kelly Weisberg, 1007–18. Temple University Press, 1996. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt14bs8md.75.
[s4] “Health Effects of Restricting Federal Funds for Abortion — United States.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 28, no. 4 (1979): 37–39. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23295289.
[s5] Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “The Economic Effects of Abortion Access: A Review of the Evidence.” Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep34475.
Bibliography
Primary Sources:
Manuscript Collections
Detroit Feminist Women’s Health Center Records, Box 8, Folder 14 NARAL, 1979
Detroit Feminist Women’s Health Center Records, Box 8, Folder 35 Abortion, 1978-81
Edith Van Horn Papers, Box 1, Folder 1 Abortion, 1977-1985
Harriet Cooper Alpern Papers, Box 1, Folder 2 Abortion, 1981-March 1982
National Organization for Women (NOW): Downriver Chapter Records, Box 3, Folder 1, Abortion; correspondence, Michigan and U.S. office holders, 1974-1983
National Organization for Women (NOW): Downriver Chapter Records, Box 3, Folder 2 Michigan Coalition for Abortion Rights, newsletter, 1977-1983
Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 66, Scanned Document Group 04 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_66_04
Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 69, Scanned Document Group 01 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_69_01
Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 73, Scanned Document Group 02 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_73_02
Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 4, Folder 74, Scanned Document Group 01 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_4_74_01
Toni Swanger Papers, Walter P. Reuther Library, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Wayne State University. Box 5, Folder 1, Scanned Document Group 01 https://digital.library.wayne.edu/item/wayne:Swanger1777_5_01_01
Newspapers
Detroit Free Press
Detroit Metro Times
State News
The New York Times
Court Cases
Doe v. Department of Social Services
Harris v. McRae
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Michigan v. Engler
Roe v. Wade
Secondary Sources:
Donovan, Patricia. “The 1988 Abortion Referenda: Lessons for the Future.” Family Planning Perspectives 21, no. 5 (1989): 218–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/2135575.
Hussey, Laura S. “Welfare Generosity, Abortion Access, and Abortion Rates: A Comparison of State Policy Tools.” Social Science Quarterly 91, no. 1 (2010): 266–83. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956534.
Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “The Economic Effects of Abortion Access: A Review of the Evidence.” Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2019. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep34475.
Karrer, Robert N. “The Formation of Michigan’s Anti-Abortion Movement 1967-1974.” Michigan Historical Review 22, no. 1 (1996): 67–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/20173555.
Mims-Gillum, Phillis Cherie. “Improving General Health Care for African American Women: Michigan and Beyond.” In African American Females: Addressing Challenges and Nurturing the Future, edited by Eboni M. Zamani-Gallaher and Vernon C. Polite, 367–78. Michigan State University Press, 2013. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.14321/j.ctt7zt8z0.20.
“Health Effects of Restricting Federal Funds for Abortion — United States.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 28, no. 4 (1979): 37–39. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23295289.
Nsiah-Jefferson, Laurie. “Reproductive Laws, Women of Color, and Low-Income Women.” In Applications Of Feminist Legal Theory, edited by D. Kelly Weisberg, 1007–18. Temple University Press, 1996. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt14bs8md.75.
Check out our other 2023 presenter:
Translating historical research for public audiences