Thursday Evening, July 21, 2022 |
|
GROUP OF 249 MILITARY WOMEN IN FEAR
OF RETRIBUTION SHOULD THEY SEEK ABORTIONS OR CONTRACEPTION
BECOME MRFF CLIENTS
"We all have deep fears about our current rights and availability
for reproductive health medical support in light of the recent
U.S. Supreme Court case overturning Roe v. Wade.
"We fear reprisal and retribution by our chains
of command should we make arrangements
for abortions, contraception or any other
reproductive health care needs. ...
"And we know we will need MRFF’s help should we
face either direct or indirect retaliation by our superiors
if we elect to engage currently evolving resources to
provide these often urgent medical needs."
— Active Duty Female Military Officer and MRFF Client,
on behalf of a group of 249 military women
|
|
(The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information
does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.) Image altered by MRFF.
Photo for illustrative purposes only, not a photo of MRFF's clients.
|
|
Email from Active Duty Female Military Officer and
MRFF client, on behalf of a group of 249 military women who have become MRFF clients in anticipation of reprisal and retribution by their chains of command should they make arrangements for abortions, contraception,
or other reproductive health care needs
|
|
From: (Active Duty Female Military Officer and MRFF Client’s E-mail Address Withheld)
Subject: 249 military women requesting MRFF's representation
Date: July 21, 2022 at 12:15:01 PM MDT
Mr. Mikey Weinstein and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation:
We want to thank Mikey Weinstein and the the Military Religious Freedom Foundation for the several long phone conversations over the last week or so confirming that the MRFF will be accepting our newly formed group as a collective and, as needed, individual client for civil rights advocacy representation.
We presently comprise 249 female members of the United States military from all 5 armed forces service branches and the Coast Guard. We are mostly active duty with some who are on reserve and national guard status and some who serve as military branch civilians as well. Our members' ranks span from flag officer to E-1.
We all have deep fears about our current rights and availability for reproductive health medical support in light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court case overturning Roe v. Wade. We fear reprisal and retribution by our chains of command should we make arrangements for abortions, contraception or any other reproductive health care needs. There are still so many unanswered questions here. And we know we will need MRFF’s help should we face either direct or indirect retaliation by our superiors if we elect to engage currently evolving resources to provide these often urgent medical needs.
We fully attribute this destruction of our basic human rights as women to such reproductive health care to the current climate of extremist Christian religious views. These misogynistic religious views permeate not only the Dept. of Defense and the Dept. of Homeland Security (Coast Guard) but our nation as a whole.
And for the record, 207 of our group of 249 military women are practicing Christians with the remainder from minority faith groups and non-faith groups as well.
Please do not share any of our identification information until such time, if ever, that any of our group's members so request it.
We all admire and respect the advocacy that MRFF has consistently provided for so many years to blunt the advance of these extremist Christians and their sectarian agenda. They promote career-killing, anti-female attitudes and behaviors to the continued detriment of female armed forces members everywhere.
We will be in touch as needed, Mr. Weinstein and the MRFF.
(Active Duty Female Military Officer and MRFF Client’s name, rank, job title, assigned unit and installation all withheld)
|
|
MRFF OP-ED ON
DAILY KOS
(Written five days after Roe was overturned)
|
|
What will the overturning of Roe v. Wade
mean for women in the military?
By: MRFF Senior Research Director Chris Rodda
Wednesday, June 29, 2022
|
|
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) has been besieged with calls and emails since the news broke last Friday that Roe v. Wade had been overturned.
What will happen to women in the military stationed in states where abortion is now illegal? Women like the writer of this email received by MRFF on Friday:
|
|
From: (Active Duty U.S. Naval Fighter Pilot’s E-mail Address Withheld)
Subject: MRFF Help for military abortion?
Date: June 24, 2022 at 8:39:14 AM MDT
To: Information Weinstein <mikey@militaryreligiousfreedom.org>
Mikey and the MRFF,
I am an Annapolis grad and a U.S. Naval aviator/fighter pilot.
We knew the decision to reverse Roe vs. Wade was coming. Now it’s here.
I am just a few weeks pregnant and want an abortion. I live in a red state where a woman’s right to abortion will be gone as soon as Roe was to to be overturned by trigger legislation and decree.
This ain’t the America I signed up for. Military women have civil rights too. We just lost one this morning.
What can I do?
What do I do?
Thank you for all the MRFF does to combat this extremist religious insanity. Nowhere else to turn.
Please do not use my name or email. The rest is fine.
(Active Duty U.S. Naval Fighter Pilot’s name, rank, unit and installation all withheld)
|
|
How things stood before the Supreme Court’s ruling
Servicewomen could not get an abortion at a military health facility except in cases of rape, incest, or when a woman’s life was in danger. And Tricare, the healthcare coverage for military members and their families, did not cover the cost of an abortion at a private, non-military medical facility with the same exceptions. But, although facing some potential hurdles not faced by civilian women, a woman in the military could get an abortion at a private facility in the state where they were stationed, paying for it out of pocket, and nobody had to know about it.
Now, obviously, this has changed for the thousands of servicewomen stationed in states where trigger laws have taken effect or will be taking effect soon, like the writer of the above email.
With the rate of unintended pregnancies being even higher among women in the military than in the civilian population, partly due to the staggeringly high rate of sexual assault in the military, the effect of this Supreme Calamityon military women, and the military itself, will be incalculable.
What action is the Department of Defense taking?
|
|
“Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and DOD families. I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force. The Department is examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law.”
|
|
Then, yesterday, it was reported that military medical facilities will continue to provide abortions in cases of rape, incest, or if a woman’s life is in danger, regardless of any state laws in the state where the military facility is located.
While it’s good that the Department of Defense (DoD) will continue access to abortions services for military women under these circumstances, that still leaves all the military women seeking abortions for other reasons in the same situation as civilian women, having to travel to another state where abortion is still legal, with the enormous difference that a woman in the military can’t just up and travel to a different state. They need to get their commander to grant them leave to travel. And while it is likely that the DoD will issue a regulation prohibiting commanders from denying leave to servicewomen seeking abortion services to travel to another state where abortion is still legal, how will this affect the servicewoman’s right to privacy. How will a servicewoman request leave to travel to another state without giving some sort of explanation to her commander? Will she have to violate the military’s core values and lie about why she’s requesting leave to maintain her privacy in what should be a very private matter?
What else might the DoD consider? How about going back to the DoD’s policy dated July 16, 1970, several years prior to the legitimate Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling. That 1970 DoD policy stated that (emphasis added):
|
|
“pregnancies may be terminated in military medical facilities when medically indicated or for reasons involving mental health and subject to the availability of space and facilities and the capabilities of the medical staff."
|
|
This 1970 DoD policy notably stated that abortions could be provided in military medical facilities regardless of the laws of the state in which the military facility was. At the time, 30 states and the District of Columbia had laws prohibiting either most or all abortions. Under this policy, no doctor was required to perform abortions if doing so violated their religious beliefs, so that issue is taken care of. And while the Hyde Amendment – the 1976 legislative provision barring the use of federal funds to pay for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or when a woman’s life is in danger – would prohibit abortions at military medical facilities from being funded by the government, but why not go back to this 1970 policy but with the servicewoman being required to pay the cost (and maybe ditch its requirement that the husband’s consent is needed for married women).
Although the 1970 policy’s provision of not recognizing state laws didn’t last long, thanks to another disgraced president — Richard M. Nixon — who, in 1971, citing his own personal religious beliefs, overrode the DoD, directing it to change its policy to require abortion access at military medical facilities “to correspond with the laws of the states where those bases are located,” it did set the precedent that the DoD can disregard state abortion laws. And yesterday’s news that military medical facilities will still provide abortions under the circumstances allowed by the Hyde Amendment shows that today’s DoD is willing and able to disregard state abortion laws. So why not go further? Why not include “for reasons involving mental health” to the circumstances that would allow an abortion at a military medical facility, since an unwanted pregnancy would have an effect on any woman’s mental health, but just require the servicewoman to pay the cost?
What about Congress?
Prohibiting commanders from denying leave to servicewomen to travel to a state where abortion is legal is also what Democrats in Congress are trying to get into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the annual bill for funding the military in which a slew of non-funding-related provisions are typically added as amendments. But this faces an uphill battle.
Even if, whether via a DoD regulation or Congressional action, commanders are prohibited from denying leave to servicewomen to travel to another state for a legal abortion, all semblance of privacy will be out the window. What if her commander is an anti-choice fundamentalist Christian, as so very many are? A fundamentalist Christian commander might not be able to deny the servicewoman leave, but what effect might it have on her career or treatment by that commander afterwards?
We don’t yet know what, if any, further action the DoD is going to take or how this will play out. All we can say for certain right now is that the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is and will be here to support our women in uniform in any way we can, which, if the scenario laid out above plays out and the DoD issues regulations prohibiting commanders from denying servicewomen leave to travel for abortions, will be ensuring that all commanders adhere to those regulations and protecting servicewomen who do get leave to travel for an abortion from any form of retaliation afterwards.
It is unquestionable that the overturning of Roe v. Wade was a religiously motivated act, and any retaliation an abortion-seeking servicewoman might face from her superiors will also undoubtedly be religiously motivated, placing this issue squarely within the purview of MRFF’s mission.
|
|
PLEASE MAKE A
100% TAX-DEDUCTIBLE DONATION
MRFF is a 501C3 Nonprofit
|
|
Please Share on Social Media |
|
MRFF Information/Contact:
(505) 250-7727
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
