Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish themDennett, Mary Ware
History
Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish them
Dennett, Mary Ware
Birth control; Birth control -- Law and legislation -- United States
This pledge, if applied to the laws prohibiting access to contraceptive
knowledge, looks comic indeed, for the National League of Women Voters
is made up of women who very obviously have not the remotest intention
of abiding by those laws. They belong for the most part to the same
general class as that which formed the basis of the report issued by
the Bureau of Social Hygiene, of which Dr. Katherine Bement Davis is
the executive secretary; this report gave answers to a questionnaire
sent to 1000 married women, mostly college graduates, in which 74% said
they used contraceptive methods.
When a National Conference on Law Enforcement was called in Washington
in 1924, in which representatives of all the leading women’s
organizations took part, inquiry was made of the program committee as
to whether there would be discussion of the enforcement of the law
which is more broken than any other in the United States, not excepting
the prohibition law, namely, the law forbidding access to contraceptive
knowledge. The inquiry produced consternation. The enforcement of
that law was not so much as mentioned on the program. The laxity of
officials and the indifference and criminality of citizens regarding
other laws came in for due attention, but not this one—horrors, no!
It reminds one of the little girl who had been brought up in luxury,
and who had never experienced any method of transportation except her
little perambulator and the family limousine. She was making her first
trip with her father in a street car, a very crowded one, and she piped
up, “Father, there are too many people in this car.” “Yes, my dear,
shall we get out?” “Oh, no, father, not _us_.” So the conscientious
women wanted thorough-going discussion of law enforcement, but not that
one. Perish the thought!
CHAPTER VI
A “DOCTORS ONLY” FEDERAL BILL
_“Doctors only” Federal bill followed straight repeal bill just as
limited bills in States followed straight repeal bills: Advocated
on Margaret Sanger’s initiative: Provides medical monopoly of
extreme type: Arguments in its behalf analyzed and answered:
Proponents of “doctors only” bill do not live up to own demands for
limiting contraceptive instruction to personal service by doctors:
Birth control periodical carries thinly veiled advertisements for
contraceptives: Improved type of “doctors only” bill drafted by
George Worthington: Not so many loop-holes and inconsistencies as in
first bill proposed, but still a special privilege bill and still
leaves subject classed with obscenity: Worthless as means of curbing
abuse of contraceptive knowledge: Clause permitting “reprints”
from medical and scientific journals practically breaks down all
restrictions: Makes pretense at limitation a farce._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account