WaPo’s Richard Cohen has an intersting piece on Roe v. Wade that is worth a read: Support Choice, Not Roe.
It well-reflects my own views, at least in a general sense, about Roe, although I obviously differ with Cohen’s view on abortion itself.
Certainly it strikes me as one of the most reasonable things I have read from a pro-choice individual on this subject.
Americans don’t give up acquired rights easily, even if those rights have a shaky foundation. IF row were overturned another reasoning would take its place that gave some amount of constitutional protection.
My guess is the whole equal protection clause would come into its play. Not many people are comfortable with ordering a risky pregnancy to term when the mother may die due to complications. The life of the mother clause is a standard for all but the most ardent abortion foe.
But what is the right probability to decide a pregnancy poses an unacceptable risk to the mother? 10%? 2%? Every pregnancy has unique risk factors — first pregnancy, history of bleeding, various health irregularities, slight build, shape of the pelvis, smoking, drug use, and a thousand other factors all contribute to the overall risk. Also no pregnancy is totally safe, most people have a “friend of a friend” who went in for a simple delivery that turned horrible — even fatal.
So who should decide if the pregancy is too risky? The mother is the obvious arbitor of such a choice, as she has the highest stake in the outcome. If a life or death decision is made for her over her objection does she have equal protection unde the constitution?
That is where my crystal ball says the point of agreement will eventually come to, but possibly not in our lifetimes. In reality it’s abortion on demand, but with a more acceptable logical and constitutional framework.
Comment by Buckland — Thursday, October 20, 2026 @ 5:22 pm
Geeze, I can’t believe I wrote row instead of Roe. I do know the difference.
Comment by Buckland — Thursday, October 20, 2026 @ 5:23 pm
Not to worry–I do that kind of thing all the time.
The brain is a funny thing.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, October 20, 2026 @ 7:31 pm
That firmer foundation shall and ought to be “consent”–a woman’s right to refuse her consent to carry a pregnancy to term regardless of the circumstances of conception. That preserves choice and permits reasoned regulation at the margins.
R/
Comment by Henriet Cousin' — Friday, October 21, 2026 @ 9:16 am