Dorothy Roberts Reproductive Justice Essay

Reproductive Justice is a phrase utilized by multiple social movements in support of various issues, typically abortion rights and access to birth control. This phrase has no official definition because it is socially defined within the context it is used, but the most basic, inclusive explanation is that reproductive justice is the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social, and economic well-being of women and girls, based on the full achievement and protection of women’s human rights (Public Education Project). This concept is often discussed in feminist spaces to mobilize for feminist causes, but there is dissent within the feminist movement about how reproductive justice can be achieved. Dorothy Roberts in “Reproductive Justice,

Not Just Rights” and Gretchen E. Ely along with Catherine N. Dulmus in “Abortion Policy And Vulnerable Women In The United States: A Call For Social Work Policy Practice” attempt to disentangle the complex web of politics and rhetoric surrounding reproductive justice by outlining their personal interpretations and plans of action to achieve their desired goals.
Roberts argues that in order to attain reproductive justice in America the political Left must replace the dominant logic of the reproductive rights debate and replace it with more extensive visions of social change.

She disparages the rhetoric of choice commonly used in Leftist arguments, citing its potential to limit state support for reproductive rights by placing the blame on women who make “bad choices”. She goes on to criticise the logic used by sections of the Left to argue for reproductive justice because, “framing birth control as a cost-reducing and problem-solving measure masks its potential for racial and class bias and coercion, as well as the systematic and structural reasons for social inequities.” (Roberts). Overall Roberts promotes reform of the reproductive justice movement to include efforts to achieve “a living wage, universal healthcare, and the abolition of prisons” because she believes these would be instrumental in achieving true reproductive

justice.
Ely and Dulmus point to systematic and structural barriers to achieving reproductive justice and focus on the legislative aspects of the fight for reproductive rights.They argue that while women in the United States are constitutionally guaranteed equality, they often experience inequality when seeking reproductive health services due to their status as members of vulnerable groups. They point to the disparities in services experienced by minors, women who live in rural areas, women who earn less than 200% of the poverty level, and women of color. Ultimately, Ely and Dulmus support efforts to change the legislation surrounding reproductive justice issues and the use of social workers to support this movement.
While all the authors criticize the current system’s inequalities on similar grounds, they also have fundamentally different approaches to the solution of these problems.

All authors consider reproductive rights inequality through a lens of class and race, and argue for changes in the way the United States addresses these problems. However, Roberts calls for broad changes on a social level along with institutional reforms. She states that, “true reproductive freedom requires a living wage, universal health care, and the abolition of prison,” (Roberts), which illustrates her desire for a large, foundational overhaul of American systems. This type of comprehensive change to address structural inequalities aligns with the goals of radical feminists who advocate for a complete overhaul of oppressive systems. Conversely, Ely and Dumas argue for changes within the legislation, primarily the repeal of laws which they consider to be the main oppressive force faced by vulnerable groups, which falls within the liberal feminist framework for enacting change within the established system. Additionally Ely and Dumas use the language of choice to uphold their argument, stating, “The power to choose whether to bear children is the fundamental premise of reproductive freedom.” (Ely and Dumas). Roberts disparages the rhetoric of choice used by many on the Left. Ultimately Ely and Dumas, and Roberts approach the same issue, reproductive justice, with different possible

solutions.
The argument made by Roberts is more intellectually stimulating than that made by Ely and Dumas but potentially less realistic. Ideologically, it is appealing to address inequality on a broad social level, however the lack of concrete goals and direction makes this type of change difficult to enact. The mobilization of large groups of people to achieve changes is often done around specific, single issue causes which makes the plan of Ely and Dumas more feasible despite doing less to change the lives of disadvantaged groups. Ultimately, Roberts makes a compelling case for broad social change, however Ely and Dumas offer a more realistic and feasible approach to addressing inequality in reproductive health systems in the United States.