n Who Killed Roe v. Wade? We All Did. Help Us Fund Its Reincarnation. |
Fair Start Movement Logo
U
Q

What is it you're looking for?

As the Supreme Court of the United States prepares to strike down Roe v. Wade, paving the way for the states to ban abortion, many are wondering how we arrived in this place. While the pro-choice lobby and legal maneuvering meant to protect the right to terminate a pregnancy has focused on women’s bodily autonomy, there are actually at least three interests at stake in that decision: 1) Women’s bodily autonomy, 2) the interests of the future child (not the fetus, but the child that would have otherwise existed), and 3) the interests of society more generally. As a safe rule of thumb if a mother does not want to have a child, interests two and three are not going to go very well.

And while women’s bodily autonomy is crucial, interests two and three actually precede it because that autonomy occurs after and within the formation of society – which is the thing two and three account for.

So how did we all kill Roe? We should have prioritized two and three, or the importance of the autonomy because by preventing forced parenthood it prevents bad parenting, the social chaos that results, population-driven ecological disasters like the climate crisis, and other things that now threaten us and our kids’ future.

That bigger move, decades ago, might have resulted in a highly developed, self-governing and empathetic national populace unlikely to fall for people like Donald Trump. That’s not the populace we have now.

It’s not too late to make Roe three-sided, and as such much weightier, than it was before.

Here’s how: Help us fund a pilot program for the Reincarnation of Roe.

The Fair Start SMA Pilot Program

The Fair Start Movement (FSM) is dedicated to replacing the parent-centric and subjective family planning paradigm that fundamentally created the climate and inequity crises with a new paradigm of child-centric, ecologically restorative and objective systems of planning that are treated as the first and overriding human right (“The Right.”)  The Right is premised on the concrete standards in the Children’s Convention, and is more weighty than traditional reproductive rights because it accounts for the interests of future children and society more generally, rather than maintaining a myopic focus on parental interests. 

FSM pioneered the claim that such a right overrides all others – because existential justice necessarily precedes other forms – which is a claim now backed by voluminous peer-reviewed and recommended research.  The right operates practically by making wealth at the top of the economic pyramid subject to family planning incentives/entitlements that will bend the population growth arc towards qualitative optimality. An example of this process involves our current campaign to shift the official interpretation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in this regard

While initial FSM proposals centered on furthering The Right through a broad challenge to a recent ban on abortions in Texas, this modified proposal will support elevating and scaling programs of education for self-managed abortion (SMA) by abortifacients for paramedical personnel across the U.S. by offering a high-profile pilot program for pro bono legal services to such personnel (the Project), initially in Texas and Oklahoma. 

In democracy self-determination always begins with your place in the town hall. Always.

The key here is creating a movement of pro bono legal services interceding for SMA educators/providers that treat the service as the constitutional priority and human right with the biggest impact on our collective future. Note that while legal services for SMA do exist, we have yet to complete a comprehensive assessment of them. Note too that we will be expanding our initial research regarding safety.

The Project Goals: 

1) To publicize a specific pilot program for priority pro bono legal services to paramedical personnel educating women in Texas and Oklahoma regarding SMA, as an example of the emergence of The Right, 2) to connect that story as a driver of prioritized pro bono legal services around the country from a network of firms we have access to. 

Depending on progress on 1-2, we may add 3) developing eventual litigation regarding suing Texas over harm to children consigned to state foster care because of the state’s historic abortion laws, which will include direct action demands for wealth transfers from specific high-profile targets to pay for the resulting damages under the theory of The Right. 

We may also peg #1 above to the filing of an amicus brief defending a specific physician in Texas, but we are still assessing the status of the case. 

The key is creating a national movement of pro bono legal services interceding for SMA educators/providers that treat the service as the constitutional priority and human right with the biggest impact on our collective future.  

Project AOMIs and Project budget:

Final Activity List:

1) To publicize a specific pilot program for priority pro bono legal services to paramedical personnel educating women in Texas and Oklahoma regarding SMA, as an example of the emergence of The Right: 

Budget: $6000 – primarily towards two law firms, and two public relations firms.

  • To finalize recruiting two law firms we are in conversation with. 
  • To complete the initial research, and determine the number of hours we can provide pro bono. 
  • To assess the target educator/provider audience, and to provide the advice. 
  • To publicize the process nationally, via two public relations firms we are in conversation with. 
  • To connect with leading family planning organizations in the nation to see whether they will replicate the process. 

2) To connect that story as a driver of prioritized pro bono legal services around the country from a network of firms we have access to: 

Budget: $3,500 – primarily towards FSM administrative contractors, and follow-on services from the public relations firms. 

  • To solicit interest from our network of pro bono firms. 
  • To develop a script for why this work is a priority. 
  • To recruit at least twenty (20) firms who can provide extensive pro bono services. 
  • To evaluate the services provided. 
  • To publicize the process and seek to triple the number of firms in a future round.  

Which activities can and will be used as key performance indicators for quarterly reporting?

  1. The number of news articles, the reach of those articles, and other communication impacts, including social media. There are more precise metrics we can obtain from the firms. 
  2. The number of educators/providers reporting positive encouragement and advice that altered their plans. 
  3. The number of leading family planning organizations that will replicate the process. 
  4. The number of law firms that commit to pro bono services, and the hours they will commit to.
Climate mitigation anyone?

Project review assessment includes these considerations for a successful project award:

– Does the project promote innovation and experimentation?

Yes. The Right as described herein is nascent in practice, but irrefutable, and Texas/Oklahoma provide ideal theaters in which to experiment with the messaging, political development, and eventual establishment of The Right. 

– Does the design of the project include specific interventions that impact local or global population issues?

Yes. We intend to provide pro bono legal services in Texas and Oklahoma, and expand on that pilot towards a national provision of services. If this process furthers The Right, the impact on bending the population curve would outweigh many comparable efforts.

– Are there quantitative process and outcome measures that reflect the success of the project’s goals?

Yes, per the KPIs above. 

– Does the project include new ideas and approaches that might improve or extend an activity into a new setting?

Yes, we have intentionally used a pilot-to-scale design, ideally around a movement that will be compelling. 

Conclusion:

This project is not meant to further a particular goal while operating within the parent-centric and subjective family planning paradigm that fundamentally created the climate crisis. Rather it is meant to further a new fundamental movement that changes the paradigm towards child-centric, ecologically restorative and objective systems of planning that are treated as the first and overriding human right.

Share This