Being pregnant during an 1800s-era abortion ban was scary. We can’t go back. | Opinion

For those of us in Wisconsin who believe that abortion should be a private medical decision, it’s been a roller coaster over the past two years. Now that access has been restored to what it was before Dobbs, there seems to be a feeling of, “We did it.”

Which may be why the most recent Marquette Law School Poll showed that “abortion” is a distant third (13%) when voters were asked their most important issue. It was behind “the economy” (33%) and “immigration and border security (21%). Granted, people can care about more issues than one at a time, but I can’t help but wonder if the urgency around the issue has dissipated thanks to the series of wins.

Which makes Vice President Kamala Harris’ third trip in four months to Wisconsin all the more interesting. Her visit to La Crosse Monday and an event in Waukesha County in January both centered on rallying voters over abortion access, which has proven to be a winning issue for Democrats in a state which will play a big role in who wins the the presidency in November.

“Who sits in the White House could very well determine whether a national ban on abortion gets passed or doesn't,” Harris said when I had the chance to interview her before her visit.

Wisconsin colleges are suffering. UW is running campuses like corporations.

Recognizing the polling numbers on the issue, I was left wondering if the choice to continue to campaign in Wisconsin on abortion access is more about capturing energy or attempting to stoke it back up. Maybe that would explain my lack of sustained outrage over what happened in Arizona.

Being pregnant in Wisconsin scary during 1800s-era abortion ban

When the news broke earlier this month that the Arizona Supreme Court ruled an abortion ban from 1864 could be enforced, I, admittedly, had a much more muted reaction compared to the Dobbs decision.

Granted, after Roe fell, I was not only furious, I was also scared. Furious because I have been a reproductive health advocate my entire adult life. Scared because it wasn’t clear what it would mean for me in Wisconsin where an abortion ban from 1849 suddenly became the law. When you plan to start a family, phrases like "the life of the mother” take on a new meaning.

I did get pregnant at the beginning of 2023 and that ban was in place for the entirety of my pregnancy. During my first OBGYN appointment, I was ecstatic to see that little bean on the ultrasound but I also ended by asking my doctor, "what happens if something goes wrong with my pregnancy?" She had to assure me that they had systems in place to get me the health care I would need across the border in Illinois.

Before each appointment, I had the gutting stories of women who were denied care for miscarriages or forced to continue nonviable pregnancies in the back of my head. When everything looked healthy at the infamous 20 week ultrasound, I finally started f to enjoy being pregnant and not be consumed with concern. Concern over not just what could go wrong but also concern over what hoops I would have to jump through to receive care if I needed it. The first concern is inevitable. The second I do not wish on anyone.

Thankfully, I had an uncomplicated pregnancy and an uncomplicated birth. I’m still concerned about my kid daily, but I’ve been told that’s a feature, not a bug, of being a parent. However, now that I have lived through being pregnant in a state where an 1800s era ban is in place, I was surprised I didn’t have the same level of outrage when the news about Arizona broke.

Reflecting on it, I think that’s likely due to some fatigue. Fatigue from balancing multiple jobs while having an infant at home but also from banging this drum through two high stakes statewide elections.

Wisconsin’s whiplash with abortion access

Wisconsin voters have now twice voted as if abortion was on the ballot and have, in turn, gained back the access to the reproductive healthcare we had prior to June 24, 2022,when Roe v. Wade was overturned.

After Dobbs returned the issue back to the states, the path to Wisconsin overriding its 1849 ban and diverting any new laws restricting abortion was clear, but it wouldn’t be easy. It would take winning two high stakes, expensive state wide elections: the governor's race and the open seat for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. One wouldn’t do, it had to be both.

Grocery bills drive views on economy. Wisconsin is gloomy heading into election. | Opinion

Re-electing Gov. Tony Evers meant there would be a veto for anything the Republican legislature could pass and electing Janet Protasiewicz would flip the Supreme Court’s ideological leaning, likely leading to a favorable ruling if Attorney General Josh Kaul’s lawsuit challenging the ban came before them.

And it happened.  Evers was re-elected by a margin of 3.4% in November 2022 and Protasiewicz by 11% in March 2023.

Since then, a Dane County judge ruled that the 1849 law applies to feticide, not consensual abortions, meaning the Wisconsin court wouldn't ban abortion and abortions are currently being provided in Wisconsin. The ruling was appealed directly to the state Supreme Court and, if the court does take up the case, it's likely to uphold the lower court's ruling. There’s not even a petition asking the court to "recognize a constitutional right to bodily autonomy, including abortion."

It’s easy to look at those hard fought wins in Wisconsin and feel relief from what we gained, and also feel tired from continuing to sound the alarm.

Harris' visits designed to remind us reproductive rights not safe

For that reason, it’s important that the Biden campaign continue to both capture the energy there is and remind Wisconsin voters how ephemeral these rights have become regardless of the wins we have had in our state.

For example, during our conversation, the Vice President pointed out that a national ban would override anything we have secured here in Wisconsin. Regardless of Donald Trump’s current evasiveness on the issue, if it behooves him at any point to further encroach on reproductive rights and women’s health, his track record shows he will.

Additionally, we are waiting to see if the Supreme Court ratifies a ruling from a conservative federal appeals court that would limit access to mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions. If they were to uphold the ruling, the drug would be banned regardless of a state’s abortions laws. The justices are also hearing arguments over whether a federal law on emergency treatment at hospitals must include abortions, even in states that have otherwise banned them.

The fragility of our reproductive rights is not limited abortion access either. In Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion on Dobbs, he listed Griswold v. Connecticut, the case securing access to contraception, as one of the cases the court should reconsider. In the past year, when given the chance to codify people’s right to contraception, Republican lawmakers at both the federal and state level, refused.

Arizona has shown what’s at stake. Who sits in the White House will undoubtedly play a big role in determining if women have access to health care. Wisconsin voters may well be the ones who ultimately make that choice for all women.

Kristin Brey is the "My Take" columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Abortion isn't a top concern in Wisconsin, but it should be