Data for Democracy: The Essential Role of Guttmacher Evidence Post-Roe

Dr. Nori Rost: This data represents the stories of how countless of people have been impacted when their lives intersected with the need to access safe, legal abortions. The anti-life, anti-choice, anti-women movement has long been singing a song of oppression, of subjugation, of fear. It's a tired tune, and it's not in tune with the reality of millions of people in this nation and around the globe who want safe, legal abortions. So it's important that we're here tonight. We're all here to learn from the stories of real people represented in the data Guttmacher has collected. In knowledge lies power. And there's a lot of power in this room. Before we begin, I would just briefly like to invite you to two other events we're hosting here this weekend that also speak to this. This Saturday, June 22, at 10:00 a.m. our social service board is hosting our latest reclaim our vote postcard writing gathering, part of the center for Common Grounds nationwide campaign, where we'll be writing short, personalized postcards to voters in Florida, reminding them to register, educating them about feeding voter suppression measures in the state, and encouraging them to vote for the state constitutional amendment to guarantee abortion rights. Florida, wouldn't that be a great win? We've been doing this for every national election since 2016, and our volunteers have reached over 100,000 voters. So, 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, we invite you to join us for that. And then this Sunday, June 23, at our weekly platform, join us in person, or online for our weekly Sunday platform. Our guest this week is Frederick Farkson, longtime journalist, former investigative editor at Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and now senior research analyst at Political Research Associates. He will be exploring the latest developments in the religious right and the continuing threat it poses to democracy, abortion rights, and individual freedom in the United States. Tonight, we gather to learn. Tomorrow, we go forth in action. Thank you for being a part of this movement and for more information about Ethical, you can find us at ethical.NYC.

Destiny Lopez: Thank you. Good evening, everyone. I'm destiny Lopez. I'm the acting co-CEO of the Guttmacher Institute. I want to welcome all of you who are here in the room and those of you who are online, to our event tonight and thank Dr. Rost and the New York Society for Ethical Culture for their hospitality. I'm delighted to see so many friends tonight, both here and on Zoom. And I want to thank you first and foremost for all of your support. Its a privilege to be able to gather during this critical moment and this critical year. And in the midst of numerous crises that are happening both here and abroad, tonight we're marking two years since the U. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion via the Dobbs. Decision. This means that we have two years of evidence to start to understand the impact of this decision while simultaneously witnessing the political backlash and recalibrations. The Dobbs decision has ushered in as you can see from the map behind us that was produced from group macher research, the states in orange, which represent those with the most restrictive policies tell us a story, right, about the degrees of abortion care restrictions and those states now out number of states with less restrictions or protective policies. So kind of every. And the color might be a little hard to see, but everything that's in dark orange and then there's kind of everything else, right but we also know that Roe was never enough. Access to abortion care under Roe largely depended on what state you lived in, your income, the type of insurance you had. Decades of. A steady drumbeat of state legislation on abortion also hindered access and increased stigma. We had a lot of work to do even before Dobbs, but there is no doubt now that living in this post role world, people are being harmed. The Gummacher Institute, alongside our partners, have been at the forefront of the fight to counter these harms. Gumarker experts have been working for the last two years to gather evidence to understand how people who need abortion care are experiencing this chaotic landscape. With our partners, we are trying to untangle the many threads that together move the story of abortion in the US. We have some incredible speakers tonight who can help us understand this landscape. And we'll also hear from some of you as we take your questions later in the evening. So as you listen to this rich conversation, please write any questions you have on the note cards that have been giving to you at the entrance. Put your hand up when you're ready to submit your question and staff in the room will collect those from you. Well try to answer as many of your questions as we can during our Q&A, alongside questions that are being submitted virtually by the folks on Zoom. So first, I want to introduce our amazing panelists for tonight. In the amazing green, always representing The Green Wave is Paula Ávila-Guillén. She is a Green Wave movement leader, international human rights lawyer, and Executive Director at the Women's Equality Center. She has helped lead the fight to decriminalize abortion in her home country of Colombia, and has supported efforts that led to the decriminalization in Argentina and Mexico. Paula is part of the coalition of leaders leading El Salvador, holding El Salvador's government accountable for the systematic persecution and criminalization of women unjustly sentenced to imprisonment after having suffered obstetric emergencies. She's also contributed to the freedom of all the Salvadoran women who are incarcerated. Next, we have Jennifer Driver who is the Senior Director of Reproductive Rights at State Innovation Exchange, where she directs the 600+ member and counting cohort of state legislators committed to abortion rights. Jennifer is an award-winning reproductive health, rights and justice policy and advocacy leader, and before she joined SiX, she was Vice President of Policy and Strategic Partnerships with the Sexuality, Information and Education Council of the United States. Worked for Welcoming America, where her work focused on the intersection of immigration, racism, education, health and policy. Her previous experience also includes working for power to decide and the Georgia campaign for adolescent power and potential. Welcome, Jennifer. Next we have Kelly Baden, who's to my left, immediate left. She is Guttmacher's vice president for public policy. She joined just over a year ago to infuse deeper advocacy strategies into Guttmacher's work to equip policymakers, partners and the press with post op evidence and understanding. Previously also at the state Innovation Exchange, Kelly founded the country's only cross state cohort of state legislators committed to reproductive freedom and piloted innovative advocacy programs, including convening delegations of state legislators to visit El Salvador in 2019 to understand the devastating impact of abortion bans, and then Mexico in 2020 to learn from the powerful green wave with our partners here on the panel. Kelly has also previously worked at the center for Reproductive Rights and the National Institute for Reproductive Health. And finally, at the far left, my far left, we have Candice Gibson, who is our director of state policy at the Guttmacher Institute. She oversees the institute's work to advance evidence based state level policies to secure sexual and reproductive health and rights. Previously, Candice served as the director of government relations at the National Latina Institute for Reproductive justice, where she led the organization's federal policy and advocacy efforts. She was an if, when, how, reproductive justice fellow from 2012 to 2014, and was a new Leaders Council Maryland fellow in 2020. This is an amazing panel. Let's give them a hand now, because we know based on all of those amazing achievements, that they're going to have a rich discussion with us. So I want to dive in and start big picture with where things stand two years after the court overturned Roe v. Wade and what's happening us nationally in the states and around the world. And so I'll start with Kelly and then also invite Jennifer and Paulo to weigh in.

Speaker 3: Sure. Hi, everyone. Thank you, destiny. Thank you. To my fellow co panelists and to all of you online. And here, I think what's happening nationally, of course, is that here in the US, abortion remains at the forefront. Right. The kind of tone and tenor of the conversation is probably unmatched in decades, if not ever. And we hear about abortion, of course, in the newspaper headlines. Every day when it comes to every election and every ballot measure. And it's really infusing, I think, the political world in a way that I think we all have been hoping would happen in some ways, for a long time. Of course, we weren't hoping it would happen due to the overturning of 50 years of our constitutional right to abortion with the Dobbs decision.

Speaker 4: Two years ago.

Speaker 3: So you probably saw last week, the Supreme Court issued a decision in one of the two abortion related cases before them this term. And we're awaiting for the. Awaiting a decision on the other case. But I think rather than sort of getting into the details of what that decision said, although we can, what that really shows is that, again, the overturning of Roe v. Wade did not solve any questions around abortion policy in this country. Right. Instead, it actually unearthed an entirely new set of chaos and confusion in legal and policy questions. And the fact that we so quickly had not one, but two more cases before the Supreme Court related to abortion, not to mention all of the policy work that you'll hear about in legislation that's been happening. That this question is not over and that our opponents and opponents of abortion were not going to stop with overturning Roe v. Wade. So it really is about seeking at this point, unfortunately, how much farther they will try to go and what components of the legal, legislative and other systems they will use to try to reach their end goal of banning abortion for everyone in any state, for any reason.

Speaker 4: Thanks, Kelly. And thanks, gutmacher and the New York Society for Ethical Culture, for having us. As mentioned, I'm Jennifer driver with the state innovation exchange, and I'm going to talk a little bit about the state landscape. And I love kind of the framing that you had kind of set us up with, of this untangling threads. Right now, what we're seeing across the country is this really fractured landscape of abortion access that certainly didn't start with the Dobbs decision, but it exacerbated following the overturning of Roe. And so what does that mean for us? Right now, there are 14 states that have total abortion bans. There are 27 states that have bans based on gestational duration. So seven states that ban before or 18 weeks or at 18 weeks or before and then 20 states that will ban at 18 or after 18 weeks. And so why does this happen? I spend a lot of my time talking about the makeup of state legislatures. One of the things that I often point to is that state legislators are getting older, they're getting whiter, they're getting more mail, and it is harder to run for office. The majority of state legislatures in this country don't have staff. Right? So when you work with Congress and you look and you say, oh, I'm going to talk to a staffer, it's not the reality of state houses. The other thing is, the majority of state legislators in this country are part time, underpaid or not paid at all. And so when they're coming into office, there's this idea that they will be 100% prepared to deal with all the things that are thrown at them. And in a very short amount of time, they can see upwards of four to 5000 bills. And it doesn't mean that they're going to pass. It just means everything that's that's going to come at them. It also means that you're less likely to have a state legislature. Thank you. Less likely to have some really, really represent your ideas, the the things that you really care about. It also means that state houses, the the. The bills can pass through at rapid speed. So when we think about Congress, you often think, oh, things are a lot stalled and never moves. That's not how it is in state legislatures. And so bills pass really quickly. And what happens in one state, we generally can see a trend that will happen in others. I often think about Texas SBA, that happened during the 2021 to 2022 legislative session and it was a horrific bill. And it's immediately after that had passed, you had other states that popped up. So you had Florida that was ready to go ahead and do an SVA like bill. Right. And so the anti abortion legislators are actually watching their counterparts in other states to see what horrific bills they can actually introduce. The other thing is, because things pass so quickly, it's harder to keep track of everything that's happening. So I think about recently what just happened in Louisiana, where they have classified mifepristone, mesoprostole, the two drugs used for abortion medication as controlled substances. So what does that mean? It's a penalty of up to five years. Right. And I remember when this bill was going through the state house of trying to get so many people to pay attention. The bill went through lightning speed. So I think it's really important to name the. The ways that state houses are made up. The final two things that I'll kind of point to and then we can dive in a little bit more. Is kind of our lack of ability to pay attention to multiple systems in this country, right. We look at the administration, we look at the presidential, the administration, the federal administration. We look at Congress, we look at SCOTUS, how many people are actually paying attention to state courts and what happens in state courts or even know who your state legislature what state legislator is. Now, I'm not saying that one needs to be done. That we need to just focus on one or the other, but one can't be at the expense of other. And so I think more and more, we need to be paying attention at the totality. The final thing that I will probably say, and I actually feel this one deeply in my bones, it's like, really shifting what we identify as a win in states, oftentimes in states, or folks will ask me, so, Jennifer, you know, is a win, a bill getting passed and bills passing are fine, but what happens is a bill will pass, a new legislature will come in and completely gut what we already have. So you have these short term wins and long term losses, and it's in the position of where we are in this moment. And so I think, you know, when we think about, like, what needs to happen, it's how do we shift power, build power for sustainability, sustainable access, so that no matter where you live, the zip code, how much money you have, it doesn't depend on the type of healthcare that you get. And I think there's a lot from the global movement that we can talk about, about how they built power. A lot of lessons that we can learn for how they built power to actually sustain the wins that they've had.

Speaker 5: Thank you. And thank you so much. Good market for DC. Invitation. And I actually think that there's a lot that we should learn about how to make sure that our victories are sustained in the long term. So I think that that's why it's so important to have this conversation before I talk about what are the consequences of jobs, I think it's important to set the stage on where is Latin America in this context? Four years ago, Latin America had a landscape and a map. They will look a lot like the United States right now. We had, like one or two countries at that time, they will accept abortion based on choice. And then the rest of the countries have all these exceptions. It depends on the country, depends on the situation, like rape, health. So it was, like, very, very limited to access abortion and recognizing autonomy. But four years ago, the green wave, there's a movement that was born in Argentina. This represents for green, and it has the. As a symbol, the handkerchief born over ten years ago. Finally, after pushing for a very long time, are able to legalize abortion in Argentina. And this is December 2020. And what happened was in the same way that the anti rights movement moves to try to have one bad bill passing in multiple states. Well, we use it in the opposite direction. And in the course of three years, we were able to completely change the landscape of reproductive rights in Latin America. December 2020. Yeah. So December 2020, Argentina. September 20 21st. Mexico. February 20 22nd. Colombia. Three of the major countries, the largest countries in Latin America expand abortion and recognize abortion by choice being the Colombia legislature, one of the most progressive that we have seen in the continent. And then at the same time, we were able to free the women who were imprisoned. El Salvador. Even liberalize emergency contraception in Honduras. While all this movement and all of this is happening in Latin America, we are having the doves decision. And as it happens always, that has consequences all over Latin America. So what we are seeing is an opposition that feels has the momentum on their side, that they are bolder than ever. They took down Dobbs Road. Sorry, with Dobbs, there was 50 years, president. Well, Argentina is four years. Let me take that down just quickly. Right. And now we are facing threats that are being fueled by the anti choice movement in the United States. That they are absolutely now working more clearly with figures like Elon Musk, who is showing up in Brazil, is showing up in Argentina, showing up in Chile that is being absolutely active in terms of. Having relationships with politicians. And these were things that were happening before, but before Dobbs, they at least try to hide it. Now it's on the open, and they feel that they have the momentum on their side. So instead of keeping progress and pushing, and even though we are still pushing, and we will still push because we don't have any other option, we are seeing ourselves a little bit on the defense to try to protect a little bit of those victories more aggressively than what they believe we should.

Destiny Lopez: Thank you. And I think we'll have a chance to dive deeper into much of what three of our experts have shared, but I want to turn to Candice for a moment. I think our panelists have really done a beautiful job of laying out where the issues are. But I think we're also seeing all of us in this room and on Zoom, the headlines every day, right, about a new state law or a new court case that's emerging or some new threat to abortion rights. And essentially, it's this chaos and confusion that Kelly referenced that Dobbs has really unleashed. And so, Guttmacher, as a research and policy organization, one of the efforts that we're really at the forefront of and leading is to understand what we can measure right now about the impact of this decision and these 14 abortion bans that a couple of our panelists have mentioned. So, Candace, can you talk about what data we do have now and what it's telling us?

Speaker 3: No. Thank you so much, destiny, for the question. And again, it's a pleasure to be up here with my esteemed colleagues and with so many great people here in the room and also virtually for this conversation. So I think in terms of the data that we are seeing and the data that Guttmacher is producing, right, is really understanding the need for travel that this abortion care crisis has caused you know, a level set that, you know, before the Dobbs decision, you know, people were traveling to get abortion care, right, because of the state restrictions that were in place. You know, you had individuals who, you know, went from places like Louisiana or from Texas, you know, going to other states within that same region to get care, but the magnitude has changed dramatically, right? So from our study, from the monthly abortion provision study we now know sort of the number of individuals who are traveling across state lines, where they're going and where they're coming from. And all of this travel is really being pushed by these abortion bans that you're seeing in the news, right? Like six week bans, these 15 week bans. So for 2023, we saw that over 170,000 individuals traveled across state lines for care. That's one in five, and that's double the numbers we saw in 2020. So that alone, I think, speaks to the impact that we're seeing post ops and what it has caused at the state level. I think, also, you know, too, to sort of provide some examples of where. Individuals are coming from, right. And where they're going to. You know, many individuals in Louisiana because of restrictions in that place. You know, before the Dobbs decision went to Texas you know, as my colleague Jennifer mentioned you know, Sba was passed in Texas, right, their vigilante law. And you know, now Texas has a total abortion ban with hardly any restrictions, or I should say any exceptions. So now individuals from Louisiana are having to go further to get care, right? They're going to places like Florida, and they're even going to Illinois. And in fact, according to our data, Illinois is receiving individuals across the country, right. They're seeing folks from Texas, they're seeing individuals from Florida, they're seeing individuals from Georgia and other parts of the country. And I also just want to know as well that, you know, I think a lot of people tended to write off Florida for abortion access, but Florida was a hub for abortion care in the southeast even when they had their 15 week ban in place. And now that they have a six week ban implemented in the state, we're going to see that not only Floridians are going to be harmed by this, right? But individuals in the region who are traveling there for care are also going to be impacted. Right. That means that they may have to travel multiple state lines, right. The other points of access in the south include, like, Virginia, for example, DC, right? So these are the extents to the lengths that people are going to. To get care and to bring it back to the individual level, right? You know, anybody who has to get, you know, health care, right. You know, I think about my father when he's been sick, too. It's a terrifying situation, right? And this is the same situation that people who are trying to figure out, like, how to get their needs met and trying to get abortion care if they have to now travel. There's numerous logistical obstacles in place, right. You have to think through, like, also the financial resources you have. You know, do you have child care? Can you take time off of work? You know, do you have a car? Are you able to drive? Are you able to take a plane? Right. Do you have support networks in the place that you are going to? These are all the barriers that I think people have to get through it, actually, to get this care. And for some individuals, they're not going to be able to do that. They are going to be forced to continue their pregnancies. Ill also point out, too, that during this time as well, we have to really speak to the incredible work of abortion funds. They have been you know, a role for decades and ensuring that people can get care. And initially, after the you know, Dobbs decision, everybody was, you know, doing donations, and there was that trend of rage, giving. Right. And you know, unfortunately, those donations. Have slowed down and the need has only increased. Right. And we're going to be in this, you know, in this, you know, in this situation for quite some time. So I think that really speaks, then again, to the need for state policies. You know, there's some states who are stepping up, right, as you see on the map, right, that are trying to use all the levers at their disposal to ensure that people coming out of this coming out of state can get care, as well as ensuring that their residents can still get care. And too, and I'm stealing this from my colleague Kelly. Every state ban is a regional issue, and it also becomes a national issue. So especially when you're seeing this map up here, right? Like, literally, abortion care is blocked in the southeast. So that being said, there is a need for us to work at all levels of policy to ensure that people can get the care that they need where they live. And again, really pushing the federal government to ensure that regardless of a person, zip code, they're able to get that care with the method they preferred and within the community that they live in.

Destiny Lopez: Thank you. And I just want to reference folks to Guttmacher's website. We have a great data visualization tool that actually really helps you, brings all of this data that Candace just shared to life. The New York Times also did its own data visualization earlier this week. Kelly. Yeah, yeah, last Thursday. What are the days of our data as well. So really trying to help you. You can pick a state and see where the outflow or the inflow of folks are, are within that state. And then the Times has a really powerful visual of the kind of overall state of travel for abortion care. So on top of this data, our monthly abortion provision study also shows actually an increase in abortion care in 2023, an 11% increase since 2020, which was the last time we tracked that data. We also have an abortion patient survey that complements this data, finding that one in four us women of reproductive age will have an abortion by age 45 if the 2020 abortion rate remains constant. So this increase in abortion care is happening against this backdrop where abortion is what we categorize, again, as restrictive in more than half of the states. So I'm grappling with, and our team is grappling with how we make sense, right, of the fact that abortions have increased while it has been harder to access many. And so I want to talk about this a little bit. So Kelly, I'll turn to you first. What are the challenges of using this particular data set with policymakers, and how do you overcome those challenges?

Speaker 3: Sure. Yes and I think many of us can speak to as Jennifer referenced with state legislators, it's true in many policymaking institutions, that it's policymakers are looking for, you know, the easiest. Quickest fact, they want to just, you know, just the facts, ma'am, like, give me the bullet points and I can do my job. And that's. That's great. And that's a lot of what we need them to do. And for something like this, it is more complicated. And so I think when we look at the rise in abortion restrictions, 14 total state bans, with the same time having a rise in abortion provision in clinician provided abortion care, not to mention what may be happening with self managed abortion. Right, which is kind of much, is not something we're currently tracking and is, I think, a little more difficult to measure. How do you tell that story? What does that mean when we have a long history of, I think, lawmakers and others saying abortion bans are harmful and they are, and people are not getting the care they need? Also true, but also a lot of people are getting care. And so I think for me two things. One, it just reinforces the centrality of abortion in people's lives. We've known from our global work for decades that a country is the legal status of abortion doesn't stop abortion. And I think we're seeing, obviously, something similar here, that a state's legal status when it comes to abortion does not mean that people are not getting abortions. And then I think, of course, the second thing, the world has been very chaotic and challenging since 2020. There's been a lot going on. And so the intricacies of someone's childbearing decisions are, of course, multilayered and very complicated and probably not equally able. They're equally able to be distilled into, like, an easy bullet point or talking point. And I think for me, I just try to really welcome the nuance and kind of welcome the complexity and invite, I think, people in, lawmakers or otherwise, to kind of grapple with us and really recognize, again, that this is not an issue that is as simple as Oh, are you pro choice or pro life? Right. The sort of longstanding polling question that we know has never really told us what's happening when it comes to people's opinions on abortion. And here we know that it's a complicated landscape. And it is true for probably many reasons, that the abortion provision of abortion care has risen in the us while the policy environment has become more restrictive. Candice or Jennifer? Well, I'll jump in. So I think, too, that I was actually one of. I worked with my colleague Isaac, working on the analysis for this data point. So I think there's a couple things here. Right. I think historically the reproductive rights movement has had a tar time to be apologetically pro abortion. And so I just want to say, with this trend, with this increase, it's a positive thing if people are able to get the care that they need. At the same time, it doesn't speak to the. At the same time. Right. There are many people who aren't able to get the care that they. That they want or need. And I think this data point really speaks to the resiliency of individuals who are able to. Just jump through all these obstacles to get the care that they deserve. And I think the other thing, too, as well, is that it's possible, too, that the state policies that we're seeing that are very protective are actually facilitating the ability of residents to get care, too, within their home states. Right. So many states have done incredible things to really ensure abortion access, insurance coverage for abortion care. Right. So, you know, I'm thinking back to, you know, Illinois that a couple years ago, they removed restrictions on their state Medicaid dollars for abortion care. Many states have implemented, you know, shield laws which you may have heard of in the last couple of years, to really see how they can protect providers who are, you know, trying to provide care to individuals coming from band states. So I think there's just numerous trends here that also speak to the fact that, hey, these policies are making an impact and how do we continue to build on this? And there still needs to be more research as well.

Speaker 4: So the thing that I thought about when looking at this question is we work with legislators who are really grounded in their core value, the core value, this belief that people can make the decisions about their bodies, about pregnancies and what have you. And so one of the things that we do is really take the research and translate it into a way that legislators can use. Right. How do we make it accessible? You mentioned yet they want bite sized nuggets. And lately they've been coming to us and saying, I need the full picture, right. Because when I go into committee or I go somewhere else, I need to know, what is it telling me in totality. So there are a couple of things that I know how legislators have been using studies like this. One four legislators. So, for example, one legislator in Illinois had said, you know, it's not enough for me to protect access for the people in my state. I need to know about the people who were coming to my state and how do I make abortion more accessible for them coming into the state. On the flip side, legislators don't want their community members to have to leave their state. And I think this data actually reaffirms that we cannot normalize people leaving their state to get care. People need to be able to get care in their state, in their city, in their community. And so what this also shows is that those legislators where their constituents are having to leave their state to go to other states, that that is a political failure that we need to address. Right. We also don't talk about I'm glad Candace brought up the people who are able to lead. Right. Young people, how are you traveling across state? How are you getting there? How are immigrants, undocumented folks, folks from rural communities? Many folks know I'm from the south. My folks aren't leaving out of rural Alabama to go and get health care. Right. And they shouldn't have to. And so when we look at studies like this, this allows us to connect, you know, what's happening, but then take it to what's happening in reality. And legislators can then think about. What are the policies to improve or correct where the gaps have actually been? And I think that that's really important. The last thing that I would say one of the things that we do at six is work on. We have what's called these rapid response rooms, and it's where legislators come after the doc, after the Dobbs leak or the leak. When the Dobbs decision was coming down, they were saying, what's the plan? What's the strategy? And so we started to convene these rapid response rooms where we get legislators themselves coming on and saying, you know, what is the strategy? How do I provide, ensure that people get care? And it's studies like this that they're huddling around in real time saying, this is what's happening in Illinois. Here's what we're doing. Here's some amendment language. So they're using this data both for their states, but for those folks who are in like, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, they're listening other ways where the ways that we need to actually shift our strategy to ensure that our folks can stay in their state. And that's harder to do especially in a landscape where everyone wants that win that I talked about. Like, let's focus on Illinois, let's focus on New York. It is easier to focus on those states where we need the investment and the long haul staying is in those southern states. That's where the investment doesn't mean that we need you to come in and tell us what to do in those states. It means how do we partner, how do we support the folks who have been building for long term and supporting legislators in that state. And that's generally how we kind of use this data in both places.

Destiny Lopez: Thanks, y'all. And I think the one other point that I would add to this is, and we're making up for lost time telling the story, right? Because pre row, you know, where I started was, you know, Roe was never enough. These stories existed pre Roe, these stories of travel and folks needing to leave their state because you know, there were restrictions in their state or they didn't have insurance or what have you. And so. And we also know that folks were really unaware of those journeys. Pre dobs. Right? So we're making up for lost time, telling folks, oh, there is now a journey that folks need to take. It is often very far away from their home. And that's a new story for folks. I think folks are just coming to that where we've known that that's the truth for a long time.

Speaker 4: That's right. And the chipping away at these policies didn't happen overnight. Right. And so it's going to take much longer than a session, a couple of sessions, to build back. Right. To build beyond what we actually had under Roe. And so these are like generational fights, as much as that pains us to say, that of what we're building towards.

Destiny Lopez: Yeah. Jennifer, I'm going to stay with you for a moment. You've got the fire in you now, so I'm just going to let you keep going. So, as many of you know abortion rights have really been on a winning streak at the ballot box since the Dobbs decision, even in states whose legislatures enacted anti abortion laws. And so if you could talk a little bit about what this tells us about the relationship between abortion rights and broader democracy issues like gerrymandering or voting rights.

Speaker 4: Yeah. So, you know, like you said, in every state where abortion has been on the ballot, it has won. And so what does that tell you? That people overwhelmingly want abortion to be protected in their skills. And yet anti abortion politicians have not stopped at their way to circumvent the will of the people to restrict or change laws and policies in their state. I think about Ohio, where abortion was on the ballot, and the Ohio anti abortion legislators tried to raise the threshold for what it would take to pass a constitutional amendment. And the community of Ohio was like, oh, no, you're not doing that. Right? So just because abortion is on the ballot, it wins, does not stop from the anti democracy, the democratic attacks, right? If we pass something, in theory, it should be the will of the voters. What I think is really interesting for our movement is we have singled in on abortion, but haven't zoned out to the ways that democracy actually impacts abortion, right? So I think about states, like many states that have actually made it harder to vote have removed their voters from the voting roll. My own mother and my sister were removed from the voting roll in Alabama, and they didn't actually notice until it was time to vote. And so that's all by design. Closing the dmvs or how you get ids to be able to go and vote. In Kansas. Kansas is really interesting because in Kansas, if you have accident, you come out of prison, you're on probation. You can't get off probation until you pay your fines, but you can't get your voting rights back until you're off probation. So there's a large swath of folks of who that targets and how you're going to actually be able to get your right to take place in the civil participation of voting. And so I think we do a disservice when we've only looked at this kind of singular issue. We don't look at how states have carved out to keep and willpower through gerrymandering or redistricting. We don't look at the penalties, the fees, and how people are over criminalized. So if we say, okay, this large swath of folks, they're incarcerated, we don't have to worry about them because they're not at the voting bloc. Right. And then what happens when they come out and they're still not able to participate and have civic participation? That's a large voting bloc of folks that can't have their needs met. And so I think it's critical that we look at the ways that democracy. I'm really nervous if you have heard me speak lately, you have heard me talk about project 2025, this authoritarian playbook that's often looked at. At the federal level, but the ways that it's already showing up in states of what would look like for a conservative administration and kind of the gutting of all things that we really value. The Department of Education, right. The health and human services introducing a total abortion ban restricting DEIJ and LGBTQ rights. So all of these things go hand in hand. And I think it's. It's incumbent on us that we walk and chew gum at the same time. Both look at how. Abortion has been restricted. But what are all of the other ways that are contributing, that allow abortion to be restricted in states?

Destiny Lopez: Yeah.

Speaker 5: If I can jump here for a second. I think that something that you just said just resonate with me with what is happening right now in Argentina and is we just passed this law four years ago. There is a new authoritarian president now taking over, and he's threatening to take back the law. And, like, I am going to have a referendum. I am going to have some, like, a pass a law. While he puts the narrative in the media and make us mobilize to the street. He is dismantling the department of Women affairs. He's dismantled the social impact programs. He's dismantling taking money away from all these other services, health services, gone. So I think they also. Abortion has been used many times as an issue to distract us of a bigger conversation and a bigger picture.

Destiny Lopez: Yeah. And I'm going to ask you to talk more about the latin american experience and what we can learn. The one thing I want to add before I pass it back to you, Paula, is And all of those attacks on democracy and voting rights gerrymandering. All of those attacks are on black and brown folks, right?

Speaker 4: That's right.

Destiny Lopez: They disproportionately feel them, and those are the same people impacted by abortion bans. Right. And then if we think about the links to, as you mentioned kind of briefly toward the end of your remarks to LGBTQ attacks on transgender health. Right. There's all of this interconnectivity, and so these are not single issues that we're talking about, really. They're really deeply in connectivity, interconnected particularly in our domestic context. But I am curious, Paolo, what is resonating for you? What else What do you recall from the latin american experience that feels resonant with what you're hearing your colleagues talk about, or what else are the lessons learned from your experience that we should take home in the US?

Speaker 5: I mean, in the part of democracy? I think that we all need to work together, the United States and Latin America, because our opposition is the same that you have. It has different names, but we have They are funded by the United States. They have a version of the playbook that they are trying to pass everywhere. And I feel that you're seeing the connectivity is just kind of silly of us to don't see the connectivity on our end of how to fight back. Right. So I think that one of the things that we need to do is have more of these conversations of what is happening levels and in the United States, in some of the countries in Latin America. So we are alert, but also that we know how to fight back. The other part is that not only the interconnectivity on issues like what you mentioned in LGBTQ and trans issues is exactly the same thing that we're seeing in Latin America. But in the good side of not only the threats, but how we need to fight back. I believe that there are, like, five lessons they will take from our fight in the United and Latin America. They have worked in every context, and I believe it will work in the United States. One is you need to find a common ground to look at the base. What we leave the base and have a united. Front. And that, for us, was the. And the uses of the green bandana. Like, it didn't matter which organization we belong, we will all wear in green. We will all in the same kind of side. And what they show, it was a very powerful picture, a picture of a united movement, even if internally, maybe we would know as united, but at least, you know, the picture was a very powerful one. So expand the movement and make it easier to people to belong to the movement by just wearing green. It was so something that really helped us. The second one of it is find how to talk to the middle. Find a way to have common ground, to talk to the middle and understand that the middle is not going to come to accept our messages. We need to go there. And for that, I have to say that we use a lot of the data of Goodmaker, and the data that Goodmaker have been collecting in Latin America for years to talk to the middle, because the data and the public health argument was something that really helped understanding what were the consequences of not having abortion. Understanding that abortion was happening regardless of the status of the law, but who was actually being able to access it was something of privilege. Right. We were making abortion a privilege. Those with money will find a way to have abortion. Those with money can travel. Those with us possibilities can find a way. So the use of data was something that really helped us, and that the data next to a powerful storytelling, it was a perfect combination that really helped us to resonate with those who might not be ready to hear some of the arguments that the movement has. The other lesson, I think, that was fundamental on the work is to know what the opposition is doing, but stop dedicating so much time to the opposition. Say that one again. Oh, my God. I feel that the biggest audience of the opposition is the movement. Yes. We just, like, are obsessed with them, and we just listen to everything that they're doing. And every time that they do something, we kind of stop and be like, oh, now what do we do? And so we find a way to just say, hey, they are going to do their thing. Let them be now. Let's do our thing and concentrate our efforts in doing our thing. And I think that that's still a struggle, but it's something that has been, like, really good into kind of advancing our own agenda. And the last two that I will mention for me is the use of the partnerships that we have, for instance, with six, the use of leverage of international experiences to bring in Latin America, mainly from the United States, but we also use some from Europe, like examples of what the work could look like if we have something different. At that time, it was like the United States was our reference. Maybe now it's different, but still it was one of those. And the second part was. And the fifth one was the use of very dynamic strategic communications. There is no boring And there is no base on legal arguments because for many years in Latin America, the communications was made by lawyers, and I am a lawyer, and that wasn't good. So we needed to really change the way that we spoke about this issue to be able to rely to a broader audience.

Speaker 4: Can I just say a couple of things? That struck me that you said that part about worrying about what the antis. I think about that with research, too. A lot of folks are like, Judy, put the research out there because how are the antis are going to use? The antis are going to do what the antis are going to do. They are going to use either the really bad stuff that they have, or they're going to see the research. And so there are often times that I get so kind of frustrated because they're like we are doing the work for them. I don't actually. There are times when I think about policies or legislation that I don't actually have to worry about the anti, because we do the work and we, we start, we cut ourselves off before we're able to do it. And then you mentioned the deli, the delegation. So I just want to just do a quick nod to that, because as much as the US, and we're coming over to Latin America, there's something really beautiful about when we take legislators there and then they come back to the US. This idea that we are without borders, right? So we talk about travel, we talk about going. And so this idea of being without borders means that they can go, they can learn from Latin America and then come back and figure out where changes need to be made. And so recently, we took legislators to Mexico and the Dominican Republic, and they learned at the time, Mexico had advanced abortion access, and Dominican Republic was rolling back, kind of similar to the US. But it was a legislator who went over and came back. She was the one that repealed the 1864 law in Arizona because she had gone to Mexico. Learn from the on the ground folks. Her counterpart in the Senate was the legislator who went to the Dominican Republic. Saw how Dominican Republic was rolling back and said, oh, no, I'm going to actually introduce this bill. And she, they email or they text me after that had passed, and they were just so tearful of, like, I had sat on the sidelines. But it wasn't until I went on this delegation that I had actually come in. So I think that there's both power and both the research and the experience experiences of being really connected to others.

Speaker 3: Kelly, I saw you picked up a mic do you want to add anything? Yeah, and I'll keep it non electoral. Absolutely. But you mentioned. No, no, no. You were great. You mentioned Project 2025 and you talked about you know, not always having to respond to everything our opponents say. And it does make me think like, all of our full time jobs could be trying to rebut everything Trump says about abortion because obviously he makes no sense and he changes his mind every day. Why would we spend our energy doing that? Like he's just going to change his position again in another few days or announce this plan for medication abortion that he's supposedly been planning to announce for weeks. That is not what the people need and that's not what we need. In order to keep finding those people, whether they are in the middle or they're already on our side, bring them in, welcome them, find our core shared values together. And kind of build our movement that way.

Destiny Lopez: Great. So first, let's give a round of applause to these panelists. I meant to remind you, but I got so engrossed in the conversation that I forgot to. If you have questions, please fill out your index card and raise your hand. And a staff member can come and collect that. We're going to get to q and a in a moment. But before we do, I wanna stress that our fight. Oh, I see a card here. This is fun. I'm, like, doing an auction and gonna say some things. This fight that we're all in for reproductive freedom is dependent on the dedication and support of everyone in our movement. The panelists on this stage and the organizations we represent are fighting with absolutely everything we have, as I think all of them have alluded to. Whether it's conducting innovative research or forming national and global coalitions advocating for progressive policies, engaging with state legislators, all of this is really in service of protecting reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. And that's for all people, right. And so right now, the stakes just simply couldn't be higher. So I would love for you to consider tonight to support not only the work of Guttmacher Institute, but also our allies who are on the stage with us to strengthen all of our ability to do this work. All of you in the room received a program. On your way in, on your printed program, you will see how you can make a gift to the Guttmacher Institute, to the state innovation exchange, and to our host for tonight, the New York Society for Ethical Culture. For folks who are joining via Zoom you should be getting a link dropped into the chat of the donation pages of all of these organizations. We can only offer programs like this programs like we've all referred to, maps with amazing data, and do the work that we do with the support of all of you. So please consider giving generously and thank you in advance. And now onto the q and a. So I think someone's bringing me questions. Yeah. Yes. Give it a minute. Thank you, Wendy. And I'm just gonna. Okay. Oh, she's gonna be back. That means there's more. Okay. Okay I'm gonna keep going. Oh okay, I'll go to that one next. Sorry. What are the You spoke to this a little bit, Kelly, but others might wanna weigh in. What other, if any, limitations are there to kind of all the data and research that we're producing and then talk maybe a little bit more about how you translate data into policy and advocacy. When. And so anyone who wants to take that on.

Speaker 3: Well all starts off on limitations because I've been in several conversations on this topic. So, you know, I. So I also, you know, my. My background, as Destiny mentioned, has been the last decade of my career. I've been focused in reproductive justice advocacy. That's really about centering the communities who are most harmed by these issues and having an intersectional approach. I think one of the limitations with this type of data that our partners always ask us for is, where are the travel trends, right. For young people, what's, like, you know, and, and also what's happening with communities of color, right. And, like, really getting to this granular specifics are very important. And there's some it's, there's some, like, hard conversations to be had, right. Because there's also questions that I am not at all well, I should say, qualified to answer. Like, how do you create the methodology for these research efforts, right? Like, how does patient confidentiality come into these conversations, right? And so I think that's the limitation of data is, like, there are sometimes that there's sometimes at least there's not a way to get to the data point that you want. And also, that's why I think it's really important to have an approach in data that's based in movement building and in partnership, because you need folks who can share their stories, right. Who are building sort of the organizing efforts. Right, to. So that way policymakers can understand the full picture of what is happening. And also share, too, that I think at least speaking from my prior work in federal advocacy, that sometimes that policymakers weaponize data as well, right? And so I've been in conversations where federal policymakers are like, well, where's the data on this? And I'm like, well, I can tell you that we're not going to get any data on this because, for example, working on immigration issues, because that community is already highly surveillanced within this country, right? That's not going to happen. But I can tell you that this is a problem, and these are your constituents and you should be doing something. Right. I think also in the last, the last Trump administration, as a federal policy advocate, there were very much concerns of how these various agencies would use their reporting requirements to weaponize these issues or to collect data. And I think that is an ongoing concern as we enter the next year and see what's happening with elections.

Speaker 4: For us, it's really taking to legislators. Here's what the data is saying. Here's also what it's not saying, right? So I think it's important that they know both. And then the how, now that I have this data, how do I use it. How can I talk about it? What does it mean for me and my state, me and my community? So that's one thing. The other part that I want to make really clear. Even if there are legislators watching on Zoom or in the room, one of the things that we often say is, like, here's the research, but we don't need you to. To legislate medicine like that is not your role. What we need you to do is not be a barrier and let the actual providers and the patients make the decision. Like, so the providers provide care and the patients make the decisions for themselves. But here's the data that helps support you be able to do that. And I think that that is one of the things that I.

Speaker 3: I just want to add, too. People are scared, right? Like, rightfully, many people in these 14 abortion ban states either are told or are confused understandably, or don't know if it is literally legal for them to leave the state to get abortion care in a neighboring state where it is legal.

Speaker 4: Right?

Speaker 3: And again, some of that is intentional on the parts of attorneys general or others who make statements to try to make it sound as though somebody's right to travel is at risk. And so that does limit data. If people are scared and the hostile climate has been ratcheted up by policymakers people's understandable response is to not share information, to not talk about how or where they might be accessing abortion care in a different way. We are seeing attempts at criminalizing support for young people who get help to leave their abortion ban state to get care where it is legal. Four states introduced that this year. Idaho passed it last year. Tennessee passed it this year. Idaho has been challenged, I assume Tennessee's will. But we also know that lawmakers start with young people and they see what they can get away with, and they target their ability to get care in any way, and then they expand from there. We're seeing localities in Texas and other places think about how or whether they can use their own highways and block people from traveling on them to leave the state to get care. I mean, these things sound really out rageous because they are, but they are happening. And I think they are the start of what we know will come next. Because, again, as Jennifer talked about with Louisiana and the mifepristone kind of reclassification of the drug, they are not stopping. Even when they have banned abortion, they will find other ways to keep going. And so the fear and the climate of fear, I think, is a real challenge to data collection and to the work overall.

Speaker 4: Yeah.

Destiny Lopez: And the only thing I would add to piggyback on that, Kelly, is also. And providers are overwhelmed. Right. Provider, if you think about the numbers that Candice shared in terms of, you know, the number of folks that are traveling in from other states. So we have really had to adapt our methodology even for our monthly abortion provision study to really ensure that what we're asking of providers is not too much. Right. So that they can actually get to providing the care that they need to provide. And so we've been really sensitive to that dynamic as well. So we're going to get to some audience questions, and I think any of you could really respond to this one. So panelists spoke about needing to move away from focusing too much on antis. Are there other examples of strategies we've used or have been used in the latin american context that don't quite work anymore or need to be revised? It's a juicy one.

Speaker 4: No. Where to start?

Destiny Lopez: I know. Thats why I started there.

Speaker 4: Go. Can you just say the last part of the question?

Destiny Lopez: Yes. Are there other examples of strategies we've used that don't quite work or need to be revised?

Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, one stigma and shame. I think that goes without saying. The other one. So, Kelly, you brought up young people, right? And so I started working with young people. I kind of grew up in my career working on behalf of getting young people access to care. And what our movement will do is we make a lot of concessions, right? We will say we want abortion access, we want people to have abortion. And then, because it's hard, they'll start carving out. Well, what if we carve out this group? Can we get this passed? And the group that is primarily carved out are young people. And so I think what we then say is, we want people to have healthcare, but not all people. You need to be this age and older in order to get the healthcare that you want. And so one of the things that I wish our movement would stop doing is allowing young people to be the carve out for healthcare, right. If we're saying we want reproductive healthcare for folks, for community, that includes young people. And so that's probably the hill that I'm. I'm not gonna die, but, like, the hill that I'm gonna really fight hard on is making sure that young people have access to care as well.

Speaker 5: In the context of Latin America something that happened during many years is because we implemented human rights, international human rights standards, we put all our faith in the legal strategy and in the legal fight, and we thought that that was going to save us. It's like, as long as there is in the constitution, then we are set, we are free. And if you look at the constitutions of Latin America, most countries in Latin America, we have some of the most beautiful constitutions include right to education, right to health, right to housing. Like, it's really, really beautiful. And many of those right. Those constitutions don't reflect the reality of the people. So something that shift, two years, four years ago, we started making changes is we. We stopped believing in putting all in one strategy, and we started diversifying our strategies, and we were able to, like, divide as a movement and say, okay, you do this, you do this, you do this, you this. So we stopped putting that much power into changing the law and start thinking of a little broader strategies.

Speaker 4: Veronica Cruz from Mexico. I remember when Ro had overturned and she had done this article. She was with Las Libres in Mexico. And one of the things she had said for a long time, other countries have been looking at the US for our protections around abortion. And she noticed once Roe was overturned, she said if one case could gut the entire country, do you really have access? I love this idea of this multi pronged approach to how we're going.

Speaker 3: Going to improve the situation that we're in.

Destiny Lopez: Yeah.

Speaker 3: Over reliance on the courts. I'll echo that. Over reliance on the White House and national elections rather than building power in the states. Obviously, that was a long term mistake. And then the young people. Absolutely. And I think similarly, I think we thought that if we just sort of let bans on later abortion go, that we could just, I don't know, they would stop there. They did not stop there. And we, even before Dodds walrose still stood. Right. Part of what we saw were states saying, oh, my 24 week ban can be held up in court. Cool. I'm going to try a 20 week. Oh, now I'm going to try an 18. I'm going to try a 15. I mean, I think Louisiana literally, like, had a two week. Like, it did 18. 1512, six, like, so we give an inch, they will take a mile because we actually can't compromise on our rights to bodily autonomy. So it's not about what is the gestational duration that is acceptable, limit that is acceptable. None of them are acceptable because it's not the state's decision.

Destiny Lopez: Great Thank you. So our next question comment on how you anticipate the impact of the SCOTUS decision if they determine states do not have to abide by Emtala. And if you could also just talk a little bit about what Emtella does.

Speaker 3: You're just looking at me. Looking at me. So in terms of intolerant, that is a federal protection, federal law guaranteeing that you have the right to emergency care if you need to be stabilized. If you're in a life threatening situation, a hospital has to treat you to the standard of care. And abortion care is health care. And so some people in life threatening situations will need an abortion. Right. So I think with the Amtala case, you know, I'm not following it that closely. I know I am a policy attorney by background, but I don't know all the details. I will think, though, that if we do get a bad decision and I'm tall, I think that's going to continue to create the confusion and chaos that's happening at the state level. Right. We already know that providers, for example, in the states that have a banned abortion, they're fearful now of how they practice medicine, right. Because they now are just confused about what the laws on the books say and, like, how far can they actually go in terms of providing the standard of care that they were taught to do so. Right. And there's providers who are now leaving states, right. There's medical students who refuse to you know, apply to residency programs in certain states because of their abortion policies. So I think that will only create more confusion and chaos. And I think, you know, you know, unfortunately for my two cent here, too, I think then you could continue this type of litigation playing out state by state, possibly as well. So you know, hopefully. I don't know. I don't know what the decision is going to be like, and I think ScOtus has broken. In my heart many times. So I'm trying to stay I think, somewhat optimistic here. But I do think if there is a bad decision, right, that we're just going to continue seeing this chaos unfold.

Speaker 4: I will say there is a state, Illinois, that introduced language that mirrors the federal protections for Emtala. For their states. They're already preemptively thinking about what are ways. I mean, at this point, we're trying everything. So there's that. Sorry, destiny, that last question. Everything is coming up for me at this moment.

Destiny Lopez: There's just one go, go.

Speaker 4: There's just one about what does our movement do? Im channeling. So Guttmacher just recently had this policy hub. I hope I can say that it wasn't private. Sorry if not. So Kwajalein Jackson, if you're listening. Hi. There was a statement that she had made during that policy hub.

Destiny Lopez: Executive director of the feminist Women's Health center in Georgia.

Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Yeah, she had made this comment about how our movement defines six week bans that has just stuck with me ever since I left. That one of the things she says is we have to be really thoughtful about how we classify six week bans and saying that they are total abortion bans. And she said, in her state, that means something different. Six weeks, actually, they are still providing care. And for our movement, we have to be mindful, because when we say that, it causes more chaos and confusion of saying, oh, no, there is no abortion, that can happen in Georgia. And actually, she is still able to provide care. So I think if I want a strategy that's done differently, it's how we message and communicate. I think we are trying to raise the alarm for people to really care about the issue. And I get why we do it. On the flip side, for patients who are needing care, it is causing more confusion about what they can and cannot do in their states. And so I think we need to be really mindful about how we communicate these bans and what's happening in states.

Speaker 5: And just jumping into what you said about the bans and how we just become comfortable, right? So, like, we start lowering the standard and we start becoming comfortable. And let me tell you, they're not going to stop with abortion. And if it's anybody out there who believes that, oh, this is just a fight against abortion, this is just a fight about, you know, trans kids, and this is. They're absolutely wrong. Like, they are starting with what they. Believe is the low hanging fruit. They have a very clear plan of what they see. The world in which many of us don't fit in. And I think if we don't fight back now, we are allowing this new life to be the status quo. And the longer it states the status. Quo, the longer it will be to fight back. So it's just really important to understand that what is in play is know. If you can have or not have an abortion. What is in place is if you can have the freedom to the type of life you want to live. That's it.

Destiny Lopez: Okay, getting back. To our questions. So in conversations with state legislators, especially those who are less inclined to give you a lot of time, how do you balance the presentation of quantitative data with more personalized stories of individuals impacted by restrictive policies?

Speaker 4: Yeah, I think sometimes we try to go to the most extreme story, and that's actually not helpful for a state legislator, because when they get on the floor and they get challenged on it, they're not gonna be able to answer or come back at it. And so, really, it's like, what do they need to know? Legislators are not going to talk about something if they cannot answer all the questions about it. Right. Because they don't wanna be caught up standing and not knowing what they don't know. And so my recommendation, it's also better if their constituents are telling the story, not some person. So if I'm a legislator in Georgia, I don't need to know a story. It's not helpful if I know a story in California or Arizona. It is a story about what is happening in my community that is most helpful for legislators to actually use. And then from the data point, generally, I talk to them, I say, okay, how much do you need to know? Here's the research, but here's a summary page. Here are the key points. If you get asked this question, here's how you answer this. You get asked this question. And so we have this kind of relationship where we're able to drill down. And so for the researchers out there if you are interested, if you have research and you're like, I want to get this in front of legislators. They want it in front of them. Lets talk, because we can figure out, how do we streamline that so legislators can actually use the data that you're putting out. The last thing I will say is, six convenes these regional. To your point about regional networks these regional roundtables of researchers and providers and state legislators. For them to take the data, talk to providers, what does it mean for them in real time? What does it look like on the ground in the state? And then, okay, here's how I can use it in, like, policy form or during committee hearings or something like that. And so that's another way that legislators are kind of using this information. But storytelling is great. It's better when the story is actually in their state, in their community, and research is great if they're able to answer and have the knowledge to be able to respond to.

Destiny Lopez: This is really valuable legislative training for any of you. Who have done or plan to engage with legislators. It's priceless. So thank you. I think I know who wrote this question. So the question is, what advice do you have for legislators in Louisiana? But I think you could plug in a lot of different states to stay motivated session after session after session, in the face of constant restrictions and setbacks, not just on abortion, but queer rights, racial justice, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Speaker 5: Actually getting jump here. And it's because it's not only about the legislators in Louisiana, it's about the movement, and it's everything that's right. And there is, we, the two of us, visit when Kelly was at six the prison in El Salvador. And the women who had been imprisoned for miscarriages and stillbirths and they had more hope than we did visit them. And they had been serving sentences of ten years, then separated from their families for her miscarriage and stillbirth. Hearing them and hearing them believe that they can still be out, even though their cases have no option, this is a political solution. Now they are all out but like to hearing them. And if they are allowed to have hope, we are not allowed to not have hope. And it's our duty to have hope. And you need to find hope in those who are the struggle in the most. And remember, you are not doing this for you. This is not about me. I am very lucky to live in New York. I am an immigrant. I have papers and can travel somewhere. I will figure out a way to have an abortion if I need to. But this is about those who don't have those privileges. And because of them you can go to a corner and cry and then you wake up and have hope. Because hope is what really motivates and changes all.

Destiny Lopez: Just that. Im going to try to get in maybe two more questions before we wrap up. Maybe a little bit more. I might have a little bit more time. Can you talk about the impact of telehealth, telemedicine post ops? And you can also guess if you know her, who wrote that question.

Speaker 3: Well, I mean, let me just say on the data in terms of medication abortion which is crossed over with, but not necessarily a total in the Venn diagram of telehealth, but our data also shows that medication abortion or abortion pills now comprises 63% of abortions in the clinician provided healthcare system in the US. So again, that doesn't factor into what we don't know about how folks are self sourcing abortion pills through community networks, online and in other ways. And so that does mean that people are getting abortion in different ways than they did 2030 years ago. And certainly again the pre roe time period. Look, what we have now when abortion is illegal in 14 states, it's very different in terms of what it is like to access abortion when it is banned somewhere. And so I think that is a huge component of just developments in healthcare overall and people's ability to get healthcare when they live in a rural area, when they live in an abortion banned state, or when they don't have the ability to get to a clinic. Some states still have multi day waiting periods where you like North Carolina, where they not only have a twelve week abortion ban, but you have to go in person for your first state mandated counseling appointment and then go back 72 hours later to get your abortion. So there's just a lot of barriers, again, that states put in the way of easy access to healthcare. And telehealth provision helps mitigate some of those barriers. Yeah, no, I'll just add so plus one to everything that Kelly just said. I was like, I know she's going to pull the medication abortion stat. I think one of the things, too, as Kelly was saying, there's a number of states that have placed restrictions on medication abortion, including telehealth. So there's a number of states that mandate that the provision of even medication abortion has to be in person, or there's an in person counseling visit or you can't mail or. Some of these states have banned the mailing of medication abortion to those states. So I think there's a number of restrictions in place that actually, while telehealth is a critical tool and it is a method that people prefer, states also have been really trying to see how they restrict this service because they know that it's a critical tool. Anti abortion policymakers know this. And I also want to say too, right, as we think through about policies, it's important to make sure that state policymakers, as well as our movement, continue to push policies that respect and provide the resources that people need so that they can have an abortion by the method that they prefer. Right. Because sometimes medication abortion is not what people want. People don't want telehealth. They want to actually go to a provider in person. Right. And so we need to be mindful of that as we're thinking through these solutions.

Destiny Lopez: Great. So I'm going to wrap us up. I'm going to give you, I'd love to hear from each of you. You can choose between the two questions that I'm going to offer, because Paula gave us such a beautiful answer about hope. But if you would like to reflect anything on anything else that's giving you hope in this current moment, please do so. Alternatively, if you have a specific book or podcast to recommend to our audience that could help them continue their learning, or maybe just help them get through whatever you prefer. So who would like to start? What gives you hope? Or what's the book or podcast that might help us continue our learning? Go ahead, Jennifer.

Speaker 4: I mean, I read the contraception journal, so that's not on the train right up here. So that's not the thing that's, like, doing. So I'm going to do the hope question, right. I think to your point about, like, there are folks who truly need this, and so there, I have to remain hopeful. I also, I think for me, I'm thinking about what we are building towards. It is something that we actually have not seen ever. And I am okay. No, also not okay. But I know that it may not be something that I will see in my lifetime, but there is something really beautiful of building a world that knows building a world where people like me know that it was meant for you. Right. I recognize that I live in a country that this was not built for me. The policies that are implemented the things that legislators or politicians or movement, even movement folks say that don't reflect me and don't include. My lived experiences, and there's something really beautiful knowing that I am contributing to something that is so much bigger than me, and it's going to look so much different than the world that I am in right now. And I have to know that, like, a just world can exist. And that, I think, is what fuels me and gives me a lot of hope in this moment, because I'm not sure what the alternative is.

Speaker 3: I think the first thing that gives me hope is the opportunity and true privilege to work with such amazing colleagues and friends. And I think related to that is like the political backlash to Dobbs, the new communities of people, new kinds of people, whether it's because a poll told them or a polling firm kind of told them as a candidate was a good idea. I do think there's a new generation and a new awakening of people who see this as an opportunity to join a movement that maybe they ignored before or didn't think was something that they needed to work on, or they weren't worried about it, or. Life is busy, and it's hard to be politically engaged. We do not make it easy to be civically engaged, necessarily. And so I think I am hopeful by this influx of new activists and supporters. And I very much see my role as rolling out the welcome mat and bringing people in again and kind of helping build their ability, their leadership development around what it means to become an activist. And it's difficult to recruit people to join a fight or a battle like, that's hard. I want to recruit people to join a community of people who have shared values and are really in this together to create a world that hasn't existed yet.

Speaker 6: All right, Paula.

Speaker 3: So I will say. I'll answer also.

Speaker 6: It gives me hope because I think.

Speaker 3: It really builds off of what Kelly.

Speaker 6: And Jennifer have shared.

Speaker 3: So a long time ago before I went to law school, I.

Speaker 6: Thought I was going to get a PhD to study social movements.

Speaker 3: And so studying that and being.

Speaker 6: Exposed to some of the initial work I did in that area you.

Speaker 3: Know, really makes me grateful for the.

Speaker 6: Work that I do now, right?

Speaker 3: Because I have, like, a full understanding of how social movements.

Speaker 6: These are decades long efforts, right?

Speaker 3: People have gone before us, and more people will come after us, too, right? And I think it's really hopeful that I don't know, like, similarly to Kelly, I feel like, oh, I'm building.

Speaker 6: Space for others to be part of.

Speaker 3: This effort and that they're gonna bring.

Speaker 6: Their creativity to this work and probably.

Speaker 3: Come up with something that I didn't even think out or that any of us did.

Speaker 6: Right. This world could look so different in 2030 years.

Speaker 3: And so that's what really gives me hope. And when Dobbs fell, when the decision was leaked

Speaker 5: It was the first time I am an immigrant from Colombia. And even when I was working in decriminalizing abortion in Colombia, I was still living in New York, so I still had escape. And it was the first time that I felt really attacked personally in a personal level. And it was my activist, my WhatsApp started blowing up. And they are all my colleagues from Argentina and from Mexico and from Latin America asking me. And I was like, oh, wait a second. This is affecting me. I don't have a right anymore. This is getting a little more complicated. And then they asked, what do you need? And the first thing they say was, and one week later in my house, I had over 1500 pagniellos that have come from different countries in Latin America. And we organized a march that was crossing the Brooklyn Bridge. And it's this beautiful picture of us crossing the Brooklyn Bridge wearing green with. And to go back to that solidarity, that international solidarity gives me hope. But I also think, look, we were able to change laws in countries that the pope is from. Argentina. Colombia has one of the strongest Catholics and evangelical. Mexico. There is nobody more important in Mexico than the virgin. Like, we really were able to change programs in countries that are very, very, very difficult to work with. And I think if we were able to do that, why, we are not going to be able to do it here. We have to. So we need to have hope in the possibility that change is possible, but we just need to be able to organize in a way that we are able to. And I love this, but to dream in the world that we want and to be part of a bigger community where we can really relying on each other so that we can fight for the future that we want.

Destiny Lopez: It's a beautiful way to end. What gives me hope is this panel and all the wisdom that they've shared tonight. And just having leaders like this in our movement to fight with and beside. And all of you for joining us tonight, being willing to get some deeper learning and understanding of the issues that we're facing in this landscape. So thank you for coming and joining us. Whether you're in the room or on zoom, please give generously if you are able, and have a good night.