Title:

An Open, Honest Deliberation About Positions on Abortion

Central Question:

To what extent should the U.S. government intervene on the issue of abortion?

Intended Audience:

For this deliberation on the United States government’s intervention (or lack thereof) on the issue of abortion, Davidson students will be invited to participate. I am interested in helping Davidson students articulate a clear stance on the U.S. government’s intervention on abortion. Although students who are confidently supporters of the polar pro-life or pro-choice positions might be initially most prepared for this deliberation, I want this deliberation to be accessible to all students. With that said, student’s whose views align somewhere else on the pro-life/pro-choice spectrum will be encouraged to participate too. Additionally, I want experts on the issue of abortion to participate, so that there is a greater understanding of the issue that can be achieved. Those experts will include doctors, activists, and legal experts from across the ideological spectrum.

General Format:

This deliberation will take place on campus in a private space, such as a classroom in Chambers, or even the classroom in Watson where GSS 101 meets. I would prefer for this meeting to take place in person as opposed to over zoom because I anticipate that people could be less sensitive with each other on zoom, as it seems like a less personal space. In addition, I am suggesting that the deliberation take place in a private place for two reasons. First, the conversation might be sensitive at times, and being in a controlled environment might make it easier for people to feel safe. Second, because the deliberation will follow ground rules, those ground rules can be controlled easier in a private space as compared to a public space.

Background:

According to MedlinePlus, which is a website supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an abortion “is a procedure to end a pregnancy. It uses medicine or surgery to remove the embryo or fetus and placenta from the uterus. The procedure is done by a licensed health care professional” (https://medlineplus.gov/abortion.html).

The two main stances on abortion that are represented in the media are pro-life and pro-choice positions. The National Right to Life organization is one of the most vocal groups that represents the pro-life stance. They say that their mission is to “protect and defend the most fundamental right of humankind, the right to life of every innocent human being from the beginning of life to natural death (https://www.nrlc.org/about/mission/).

On the other hand, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America is one of the largest groups in the United States that advocates from a pro-choice stance. On their website, there is an “ask the experts” article that says that “generally, people who identify as pro-choice believe that everyone has the basic human right to decide when and whether to have children. When you say you’re pro-choice you’re telling people that you believe it’s OK for them to have the ability to choose abortion as an option for an unplanned pregnancy” (https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/ask-experts/can-you-explain-what-pro-choice-means-and-pro-life-means-im-supposed-to-do-it-for-a-class-thanks).

These are the main positions on the issue of abortion, however, there are many others that exist on the spectrum between pro-life and pro-choice. I would recommend that someone participating in this deliberation read the sources that I cited, and other information about abortion on those websites before attending the deliberation. I also think it could be valuable for them to read Pew Research Center’s article called “Key facts about the abortion debate in America” (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/17/key-facts-about-the-abortion-debate-in-america/). The Pew Research Center is non-partisan, and their information on abortion in this article is fairly recent (June 2021).

Shared Language:

Abortion: “a procedure to end a pregnancy. It uses medicine or surgery to remove the embryo or fetus and placenta from the uterus. The procedure is done by a licensed health care professional.” (https://medlineplus.gov/abortion.html)

Conversation Agreements:

Below are the conversation agreements that I propose. I will allow the deliberation group to further decide whether this list should be edited in any way. These rules can be edited if there is more than 50% approval from participants:

No criticizing individuals, only their ideas or actions.

No interrupting others while they are making their points.

No publicizing anyone’s statements from during the deliberation.

No invalidating the experiences of others.

Specific Format (Deliberation Agenda):

90 minutes total:

• 15 minutes discussing takeaways from background material
• 30 minutes discussing the questions for consideration
• 30 minutes discussing conclusions for the central question
• 15 minutes reflecting

Questions for Consideration:

1. What is abortion, and what are the current policies in the United States that address the topic?
2. What is the main argument that comes from “pro-life” activists? Why are these activists passionate about their position?
3. What is the main argument that comes from “pro-choice” activists? Why are these activists passionate about their position?
4. How are these two positions and passions similar, and how do they conflict?
5. What are the abortion stances that might exist on the spectrum between pro-life and pro-choice?
6. Based on the present-day situation, should the U.S. government further intervene on the issue of abortion?
7. If yes, why and how should the U.S. government intervene?
8. If no, why should the U.S. government avoid intervention?

Reflections and Follow Ups:

For the reflection, I will have participants anonymously answer the following questions:

What did you learn today?

Were your viewpoints changed in any way? If so, how? If not, why?

What suggestions would you have for any future deliberations on this topic?

Further, I will ask for each participant’s action plan and policy recommendations by having them answer the following questions:

What will you do differently after this deliberation? If you do not have any plans to do anything differently, why is that the case?

What policy recommendations would you make following this deliberation?