Today, March 10, is the National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers. March 10 is the day in 1993 when David Gunn, MD, was murdered by an anti-choice extremist.

Today we ask you to help us in fight the stigma around abortion.

Read “Why I Provide,” a collection of 32 physician stories, as well as our Class of 2013 Leadership Training Academy Fellows’ stories here.

Watch our documentary, Voices of Choice, which documents the experiences of physicians involved in abortion care and reform prior to the landmark Supreme Court Roe decision in 1973.

Write a note or send a card to an abortion provider. Start a conversation with a friend about the challenges faced by abortion providers and patients. Share our physicians’ stories with your loved ones.

Join us by becoming a member of Physicians for Reproductive Health today.» Read More

March 10 is the National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers. March 10 is the day in 1993 when David Gunn, MD, was murdered by an anti-choice extremist. To honor the courageous doctors who who provide this much-needed service and to fight the stigma surrounding this safe, legal medical care, members of our current Leadership Training Academy class share their stories of why they provide and why they support their colleagues who provide.

Human rights. Equality. Justice. These are the utopian ideals that sum up why I provide abortions.

As a medical student, several of my colleagues spoke disparagingly of abortion and vowed to never talk to a patient about having one, much less provide. I was appalled…and motivated.

I spent a rotation my last year of medical school as an assistant in an abortion clinic. The women I saw came from every imaginable background. I held the hands of physicians, teachers, administrators, students, mothers, nurses, and they held mine. Some cried, some told me their story; all were relieved to have someone to talk to. Now in my fellowship I have met the same kind of women I met as a medical student: many amazing, strong women making difficult decisions for the well-being of their families, their children, themselves.

Why do any of these women face less compassion and dignity, and more judgment and legislation, than any other patient? No one has been able to answer this question--not in medical school, not in residency, and not in the awful rhetoric on posters, websites, and billboards--because there is no justification. And that is why I provide.

—Frances Casey, MD, MPH
Washington, DC

I never questioned whether or not I would provide abortions--it was always a given. As an obstetrician-gynecologist, I see abortion as another part of the comprehensive care that I can provide my patients. My conviction in my work as an abortion provider grows daily as I witness the hardships women must overcome to access this service and as I listen to their stories. I am strengthened by their gratitude, yet dismayed that so many seem to expect to be judged or mistreated. No one ever expects or plans to have an abortion – an obvious statement, yet one that appears to be lost on so many today. It is never a decision made lightly, but rather is incredibly complex and individualized. It is also a decision that cannot and should not be made by anyone other than the woman herself with the support of her physician. Because of this I remain determined to not only provide abortion care, but to speak out on behalf of these women, to train others to provide, and to stand in solidarity with my colleagues.

—Amna Dermish, MD
Salt Lake City, UT

As a physician specializing in adolescent medicine, I do not provide abortions myself--but I fully support my colleagues who do this brave work and I don’t know what we would do without them. Because of them, I can offer a scared teenager facing a seemingly powerless situation the solace of knowing that she has options.» Read More

My patient Michelle, age 25 and newly married, has a severe congenital heart disease. Pregnancy would be life-threatening; Michelle has a 50% chance of dying if she carries a baby to term. She isn’t willing to take that risk.

Condoms are effective only 85% of the time, and the pill isn’t safe with her heart condition. Together we agreed that the IUD would be best, an extremely safe and effective method that costs $800. Michelle was able to afford it only because her job’s insurance paid for it in full.

If she worked for one of the institutions now in court over contraception coverage, Michelle would be suffering financially or gambling with her life—all in the name of someone else’s religious freedom.—Sara Pentlicky, MD, Philadelphia

Raquel, age 23 and mother to a seven-year-old son, had never been able to afford long-acting, effective contraception. In her subsequent unintended pregnancy, she was hospitalized with pulmonary hypertension, or high blood pressure in the lungs, a life-threatening condition in pregnancy. After four months in the hospital, Raquel gave birth to a girl. Twenty-four hours later, she died, her son crying by her side. She left behind two kids and a compelling message about the need for contraceptive coverage. Lack of coverage can have tragic consequences. I will never forget Raquel and her family. —Jennifer Kerns, MD, San Francisco

Sandy worked at a Catholic hospital in Baltimore. She came to me seeking help for her heavy, long periods. Oral contraceptives would have altered her quality of life dramatically, but because her insurance would not cover birth control, she couldn’t fill the prescription. Sandy’s health insurance should have covered all of her health care needs. —Zowie Barnes, MD, Baltimore

As an obstetrician/gynecologist, I have many patients like Jennifer, a 22-year-old Catholic mother of one. She has decided to postpone expanding her family while she works and finishes school. For birth control, she selected an IUD, a long-acting, extremely effective method. Her job’s insurance took care of the cost.

But if Jennifer worked for an institution that refused to cover contraception, she might not be able to afford the device or strain her family finances to afford it. Or she would be forced to set aside the IUD she knows would be best for her and use cheaper, less effective birth control, increasing her risk of an unintended pregnancy. With health reform’s contraceptive coverage, more women will finally have access to affordable contraception.—Kathleen Morrell, MD, Brooklyn

My patient Cathy, now in her 30s, was a teen mother. Recently she brought her two daughters, both in their teens, to see me for contraception. The young women each received an IUD, a highly effective contraceptive that the family wouldn’t have been able to afford out of pocket. Cathy offered her daughters an opportunity she didn’t have: a chance to finish school and decide when and if to become parents. She gave them the gift of self-determination.

As we celebrate such signs of progress, we must remember that many women still lack access to affordable birth control options—for themselves and their daughters.» Read More

PRCH board member and Leadership Training Initiative Fellow Willie Parker, MD, MPH, MSc, wrote the following essay, “A Perspective on Later Abortion… From Someone Who Does Them,” reprinted with permission from Conscience: The Newsjournal of Catholic Opinion, Vol. XXXIII, No. 1, 2012, the magazine published by Catholics for Choice.

I am intrigued by some reproductive rights advocates’ increasing willingness to search for “common ground” with abortion opponents, evidenced by a recent conference convened with this purpose at a major university. Prior to the conference, one of its organizers, long-time reproductive rights supporter and former Catholics for Choice president Frances Kissling, expressed sentiments representative of this disturbingly conciliatory tone:

“As long as women have an adequate amount of time to make a decision, and there are provisions for unusual circumstances that occur after that time, I would be satisfied [with early gestational age limits to abortion].… Women have an obligation to make this decision as soon as they possibly can.”

In short, the abortion debate has come to include abortion supporters and opponents bargaining about restricting second-trimester abortion as a means of seeking common ground. While I applaud efforts towards a more civil public discourse in principle, as a provider of second-trimester abortion services, I find this trend problematic and dangerous to the health interests of women. I am also troubled by the question—to whom, other than themselves, are women obligated “to make their decision as soon as they possibly can”?

Apparently recognizing that termination of pregnancy won’t be outlawed any time soon, abortion opponents are willing to engage in dialogues that— while appearing to progress towards a more civil exchange with abortion supporters—unwittingly enlist the energies of abortion rights activists for the restriction of those rights. These conversations subtly endorse the parsing away of this fundamental human right, ironically beginning with women in their second trimester, who often have the most compelling need to have an abortion in the first place. As is common in discussions of abortion, absent from these dialogues are the voices of the women and families that are affected—the very women who are and will be denied access to what is oftentimes a health-related decision.

The lives of these women and their families are what compelled me to add abortion care to my practice, mid-career, when I was no longer able to weigh the life of a pre-viable or lethally-flawed, viable fetus equally with the life of the woman sitting before me. My intent here is to share why I provide abortions. The times in which we live call for a thoughtful, compassionate, evidence-based approach to women’s healthcare that should empower healthcare providers to include abortion in their practice— second-trimester abortions included— because of the women who, in the absence of these services, would die unnecessarily.

I did not provide abortions for the first 12 years of my career as an obstetrician/gynecologist, even though my work allowed me to see first-hand the reproductive dilemmas and outcomes that women and families face. While recognizing that abortion was a need in my patients’ lives, I grappled with the morality of providing them, as I came from a traditional religious background that considered abortion to be wrong.» Read More