In the ongoing debate surrounding abortion, we see a sharp division between left and right, a tug of war where each side prioritizes one party in an inherently intimate relationship—that of the mother or her unborn child. The left is accused of disregarding the rights of the unborn, while the right is often seen as dismissive of women’s autonomy and well-being. But the truth is more complex than these rigid categorizations suggest. Neither political strategy has produced meaningful results when it comes to reducing abortion rates, and the time has come for the pro-life movement to rethink its approach.
For decades, the Republican Party has used abortion as a political carrot to galvanize votes, but its promises rarely result in real change relative to abortion numbers. Despite Donald J. Trump branding himself “the most pro-life president,” during his administration, the abortion rate stopped falling, and his administration made no meaningful legislative efforts to support pregnant women.
It is no surprise that abortion emerged as a central and heated issue in the first (and likely only) presidential debate between Mr. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. Mr. Trump continued to waver on the issue, refusing to say whether he would veto a national abortion ban as president. He also falsely claimed that Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz supports the “execution” of babies born through the ninth month of pregnancy. Ms. Harris responded forcefully, calling Mr. Trump’s remarks “insulting to women” and accusing him of distorting the facts.
While Mr. Trump appeared to reference “born alive” bills, which mandate care for infants who survive abortions, such cases are incredibly rare. Less than 1 percent of all abortions occur in the third trimester, most due to threats to the mother’s health, severe fetal abnormalities or non-viability. Current laws already require varying degrees of mandated care for these infants, although there is certainly an argument to be made for increased legal protection and care for them. Mr. Trump’s rhetoric, however, vilified women and doctors instead of offering a meaningful discussion on the complexities of the issue. Ms. Harris, on the other hand, underscored the difficult circumstances women face, such as needing life-saving miscarriage care or dealing with the trauma of sexual assault.
In the end, both candidates dodged key questions. Mr. Trump refused to commit to vetoing an abortion ban, while Ms. Harris avoided specifying her stance on potential restrictions.
The broader issue lies in the failure of the pro-life movement to engage with the complexities of women’s experiences. In doing so, it has overlooked the nuanced reality that abortion severs the deeply intertwined relationship between mother and child—a bond that cannot be adequately addressed by focusing solely on the unborn or by neglecting the experiences and rights of women.
At its worst, pro-life politics has been ineffective precisely because it appears to treat women as collateral damage in the fight to protect the unborn. This strategy will not work. The relationship between a pregnant woman and her child is distinct from any other. The life of one party implies the subjugation of the other, which presents a moral challenge for both those who advocate for the unborn and those who defend the rights of women. It is easy to label abortion as murder by focusing on the tragic end result—the death of a child. But we must recognize that not all deaths carry the same culpability, and there is no other situation in which a human life directly depends on another’s body in the way that pregnancy does.
To deny the reality that pregnancy inherently subjugates a woman’s body is to ignore one of the central aspects of the abortion debate. While some women joyfully embrace this experience, others do not. The pro-life movement, rather than treating this subjugation as an unfortunate side effect, should be doing everything possible to mitigate it.
Women face a host of challenges—economic disparities, sexual violence, discrimination—that contribute to the pressures of pregnancy. One in four women will have an abortion, just as one in four women will face attempted rape. These issues are deeply connected. Rape not only serves as a devastating reason many women seek abortions, but these numbers also underscore the broader realities of sexual violence and the immense difficulties women face in navigating a world that often seeks to control their bodies and violate their autonomy. These intertwined experiences reveal the profound vulnerabilities of being a woman, something those promoting life must grapple with more fully.
The disturbing reality is that the very people making and enforcing laws surrounding abortion are often perpetrators of sexual abuse and discrimination. When the Access Hollywood tapes surfaced, revealing Mr. Trump’s predatory comments about women, the pro-life movement’s silence spoke volumes. The message was clear: We are willing to overlook the exploitation of women in the service of an anti-abortion agenda. But in doing so, the movement has severed the rights of women from the rights of the unborn, undermining its own credibility.
Providing support to pregnant women
A critical question is why pro-life politicians not only fail to pass but often actively block legislation that would provide vital support to pregnant women, helping them carry their pregnancies to term. In 2021, 50 Senate Republicans and independent Senator Joe Manchin blocked the paid family leave portion of the Biden administration’s domestic spending bill, the closest the country has come to a federal solution. Currently, only 13 states and Washington, D.C., all predominantly Democratic, offer paid family leave. Last month, Republicans also blocked the expansion of the federal child tax credit, with some citing concerns about the lack of work requirements.
Measures like paid parental leave, raising the minimum wage, child care subsidies and expanded child tax credits could directly address the leading cause of abortion—poverty. Nearly half of all women who seek abortions live below the poverty line, while 75 percent are low-income. How can abortion bans be enacted without simultaneously offering real solutions to the underlying economic issues that drive these decisions?
Additionally, the pro-life movement has often failed to engage with the complexities of women’s medical care. When I miscarried, I was forced to wait days for blood work to confirm that my child had died, all because my medical judgment was not trusted. After hemorrhaging, I nearly lost my life waiting for permission to make my own medical decisions. This is the reality for many women, particularly under the weight of increasingly restrictive abortion laws.
Moreover, the pro-life movement has failed to acknowledge that women have been prosecuted for miscarriages and that good medical professionals face serious consequences for providing necessary care. This refusal to engage with the legal implications of abortion bans has left many women rightly fearful of a future in which their bodily autonomy is further eroded.
At the same time, we cannot ignore the staggering reality that over 600,000 unborn children die each year from abortion. These lives are no less valuable than the child I lost to miscarriage because their dignity is not contingent on whether their mother is willing or able to care for them, nor on how much they are wanted. Human dignity is based on the unconditional love of God, and each life is unconditionally and immeasurably sacred.
When I required emergency surgery during one of my pregnancies, my doctor explained the increased risks of fetal abnormalities, noting that some patients elect for an abortion due to the risk. This doctor was attempting to be empathetic but did not see the ableism he professed. The left fails to fully grapple not only with the rights of the unborn, but also with ableism and the racist and classist implications of aborting disproportionately poor and marginalized babies.
Ultimately, abortion is a symptom of greater societal oppression. By focusing solely on the act itself, we fail to address the underlying systems that drive women to seek abortions in the first place—economic inequality, lack of health care and systemic violence against women.
Where does that leave us? Neither political party will likely ban abortion, and reducing abortion requires a far more comprehensive approach than legislation alone. I have come to believe that while both parties are flawed in their approach to abortion, the left offers more societal support systems to address the root causes. Yet I grieve for the unborn lives left without legal protection in the left’s policies. This tension is a reflection of the larger struggle—one that calls for a new, holistic strategy in the pro-life movement.
The pro-life movement’s biggest victories will not come from political manipulation but from cultural and societal engagement. We must reject the false dichotomy between women and the unborn. If we are to be truly pro-life, we must advocate for both with equal fervor. We must stop dismissing women’s voices and, in doing so, create a movement that truly values life in all its forms.
