While the ideological divide between right and left seems as deep as the ocean and just as hard to bridge, in terms of personal health care, we all seem to want the same thing. We want respect for our decisions; we want government to stay out of our affairs; and we want to be treated as adults with bodily sovereignty. The divide emerges only when we claim these rights for ourselves while denying them for others. And whether you’re on the right or the left, don’t kid yourself, your side is also to blame.
Bodily autonomy and freedom of choice were bedrocks of my old alliance to the left. As a college freshman, I marched on Washington, D.C., for a NOW rally with a bus load of students chanting “my body, my choice.” I had an abortion at 19 and am grateful for the ease of care I received, which was seamless and without regret. I am devastated for all those young women who, like my little sister, fall prey to older boys, and find themselves pregnant, but now will be denied the choice, respect, and dignity that comes with being the master of our own fate.
Despite my steadfast belief in the right of women to control their own destinies, I have been ostracized by the left for daring to believe in “my body, my choice” unequivocally, and not just as a slogan for certain circumstances. Many in my community are a natural fit with the left, yet we’ve been demonized and kicked to the curb for demanding those same rights the left has been advocating for all along.
Sensing a promising realignment, the right has embraced our cause, extending a hearty welcome to those abandoned by the left. In California, and across the nation, many on the right have seized the opportunity to grow their ranks by affirming this particular tenant of bodily autonomy, which includes the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, including vaccination. This position fits neatly with their notion of limited government, which sadly stops at the door to the OB/GYN.
The esteemed Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was outspoken about the weakness inherent in the Roe decision, which was based, not on the equal protection clause or on the natural rights of a woman to bodily autonomy, but on a doctor’s freedom to practice.
While many on the left rage against the right for challenging and finally overturning that federal decision, they should understand that the left has also been busy digging a grave for the privacy precedent. A case in point is the far-left California Legislature, which is right now pushing bills to weaken that right to medical privacy by creating vaccine registries and mandatory vaccine reporting, and by writing laws to censor and criminalize what a doctor says in private to their patient if it goes against the leftist narrative.
How is it that those people shouting the loudest for bodily autonomy with regard to abortion are often the most strident supporters of vaccine mandates? This position is confused at best, and hypocritical, selfish, and discriminatory at worst. We either have sovereignty over our own bodies or we don’t. It’s for the “public good,” they say, yet even the CDC now acknowledges that COVID-19 injections don’t always prevent infection or transmission and are mainly for personal protection. Maybe they believe that people should be coerced to take the injection for their own good. Keep in mind that there are many on the right who believe a ban on abortion is really in the best interests of women. From the perspective of bodily sovereignty, both arguments are self-serving and fail to represent the whole story.
Thanks to the recent SCOTUS decisions, thousands of women will lose access to reproductive health care. Thanks to leaders on the left, thousands of women already have. For the crime of declining a vaccination, they’ve been denied essential medical services and refused access to loved ones in hospitals across the nation. Thousands more have been fired, kicked out of school, and denied entry to private and public institutions due to personal health care choices. Such treatment is not compassionate, equitable or inclusive—all words the left loves to throw around when it suits their agenda, but are just as ready to abandon when it does not.
At this point, the right and left are two sides of the same coin. Both sides want to restrict somebody else’s right to make their own medical decisions. Both sides believe in the moral superiority of their positions. Both believe they are saving lives with their bans and mandates.
Right now, I am joined by a growing crowd of people with a foot on both shores, striving to balance while straddling that huge divide. We feel the righteous anger of the left, many in disbelief that their daughters and granddaughters are losing fundamental rights enjoyed for 50 years. We also stand firm with those on the right who decry the recent obliteration of fundamental human rights enjoyed by generations of Americans for more than a hundred years. These rights include the right to work and support one’s family free from government intrusion into private health care decisions, as well the right of equal access to public services and institutions without sharing confidential medical information.
Now imagine if those on the left and right could bridge this divide by supporting bodily sovereignty in all its forms. Not just part time and in some instances, but almost always, for all. It may be uncomfortable to affirm the bodily sovereignty of others when we ourselves would make different choices, but it is essential if we are to continue as free people in a free society.
Just as the old adage goes, “united we stand, divided we fall.” United we oust politicians on the right and left who seek to divide us into those with rights and those without. United we stop the assault on fundamental freedoms barreling down on us from both the right and the left. United we are unstoppable. United we win. Δ
Nicole Dorfman writes from Morro Bay. Respond with a letter or commentary by sending it to letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Jun 30 – Jul 10, 2022.
Oh, I see. This is an anti-vax piece.
Pregnancy, luckily, is not a lethal contagious disease. So, nice try, but no prize.
I noticed the same contradictions. Where in the Constitution does it distinguish between “permissible” bodily autonomy, and “impermissible” bodily autonomy? While a good argument can be made for vaccination mandates, so can a good argument be made for protecting the lives of unborn children, particularly late term ones. If you are going to argue for an absolute right to bodily autonomy, be prepared to have your position asserted for positions you disagree with.
You’re right, John. The constitution failed to distinguish between an mRNA vaccine during a global pandemic and forced birth during an ectopic pregnancy. Therefore they are the same thing. Great document. Cool way to govern a country.
The Libertarian Party from it’s beginning 50 years ago has supported bodily autonomy.
Pro-Choice on everything as well as All Our Freedom, All The Time!
I think we have been pushed or trained to take a side of these personal choices that have unfortunately been politicized. I think this was well thought out, presented, and written. Either we have bodily autonomy or we don’t. It really is black or white. No one knows our body or our circumstance better than we do with the help of our doctor. Especially not politicians. Well done.
Nicole Dorfman did a intelligent and beautifully written opinion piece. A brilliant book by Naomi Wolf, The Bodies of Others, fully acknowledges her commentary. I hope the cruelty being dispatched by people who have different opinions is replaced for respect of one another’s bodily autonomy and we return to some sort of civility in future. Thank you, Nicole, for your most thoughtful piece.
If we were to balance the situation, we could reduce the number of abortions (wouldn’t most people want to avoid getting one?). We could educate and protect young women against predators better that we do. We could focus on better birth control. We could increase punishments for rape. We could balance out contagious illnesses. We could look into these gain of function studies and other causes of increasing virulence. We could go back to basic sanitation in our city streets. We could reduce pollution. We could bring back liability for all pharmaceutical products. We could ban propaganda. We should do no harm, and have my body my choice for all.
I don’t think that hiding under the umbrella of liberty that the “Leftists” provide when it suits you, then demonizing them when it doesn’t is going to gain you any credibility or the respect you so dearly crave.
The fact is… the Constitution doesn’t ensure your right to risk other people’s lives, in fact quite the opposite. In times of public health emergency the Constitution provides the government far reaching powers to protect the majority from those that threaten their right to life.
Perhaps you should run to your heroes on the Far Right to champion your dubious causes of individual liberty.
Let me know how that works out for you.
The left loves to save murderers… But MURDER the unborn….right up untill birth….what an evil party..,evil people….denieing science about when life begins….to see evil…just look to the demon-rat party