-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
Many states have anti-abortion1 laws. Will they provide a social safety net for moms?
Stuart Butler of the Brookings Insitution talks about whether the party that's been pushing for anti-abortion policies is prepared to pay for the infrastructure3 needed to support moms and children.
RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:
The Supreme4 Court struck down half a century of federal abortion rights. And now a growing number of women are expected to carry unwanted pregnancies5 to term. If states are going to require pregnant women to give birth, are they also responsible for care for those children and their mothers? We asked Stuart Butler. He's a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution.
STUART BUTLER: I believe that the state does have an obligation to ensure that both the mothers or the mothers to be and the children do have an adequate level of benefits to enable them to lead a reasonable life. I think that many advocates for restricting abortion have said, over and over again, that the value of the life is so important and the value of the child that is born is important. Well, I think they have to kind of walk the walk, put their money where their mouth is.
MARTIN: So conservatives like to point to what are called crisis pregnancy6 centers around the world. But can you just explain, though, what care is offered there and the limits of it?
BUTLER: Well, it's very little. It's more a question of referral services and, I suppose, moral support and comfort to these women. But it doesn't amount to much unless there are strong programs in place for the health and the advantages of the children. And that's just not the case in many of the states which have the most strong advocates for restricting abortion and have these crisis pregnancy centers.
If you look at the states that do least today to provide either health care or they have very low levels of support for children and pregnant women, those states are highly concentrated in the South. Over half of them do not have Medicaid available for many of the women who would be affected7 by this. And almost all of them either have trigger laws in place that will make abortion illegal or are likely to introduce some of those. So it's really sort of a double whammy for anybody living in those states with this decision on Roe8. They are far less likely to have assistance for themselves and their children. And they're far less likely to have health care available to them when they are pregnant and for their children. I'm not really holding my breath for that, I have to say.
MARTIN: Well, and is there some hypocrisy9 here? Republicans and conservatives who've been pushing to overturn Roe for 50 years are the same lawmakers who have resisted family care policies, like extending the child tax credit, or passing federally protected family leave.
BUTLER: Well, it's certainly an odd combination to be saying, we are so concerned with life and with children that we want to ensure that no woman can have an abortion, but at the same time have done very little, if anything, to make available the resources that those women and children will need.
MARTIN: But what are you hearing, Mr. Butler, because you spent 35 years at the Heritage Foundation. I mean, you are a conservative. This was a - is a conservative think tank. These are your circles. These are your networks. Are you hearing that Republicans will be any more likely now after the court's decision to support these policies?
BUTLER: Well, I've not been looking carefully at each of the states, I have to say. But I certainly have not seen anything that suggest that there's going to be some fundamental change of direction. So that's what we're seeing over and over again, this simultaneous position of being very strongly pro-life, but at the same time being very strongly against expanding government assistance or raising taxes to fund government assistance. And I don't see any change in that on the horizon. And I think it is going to lead to really dire10 results in many of these states.
MARTIN: Can I ask you to expand? I mean, what will be the real-world implications of this?
BUTLER: Well, you're going to see, clearly, more people who traditionally have had abortions11 or most likely to have abortions in states obviously carrying their children to term. And that means people who are sort of in their late 20s, typically, disproportionately people of color, particularly people with low income who are unmarried. You're going to see many, many more of them, really, unable to provide for their children and obtain the health coverage12 that they need to have healthy children and to be healthy themselves during pregnancy.
I do believe it's a crisis - another crisis on top of an existing crisis in many of these states that already have very, very low benefits and no expanded Medicaid coverage. From the politics of the situation in many of these states, it's hard to see them changing towards a state that is much more open to expanding health and other benefits. So it's an enormous tragedy for the women and for the children who are going to be born.
MARTIN: I mean, already in this country, life expectancy13 is going down, especially for mothers and children. I mean, it's been on that trajectory14 already.
BUTLER: That's correct. And we have, of course, a maternal15 health crisis in this country. Compared with other countries, we have very, very high levels of maternal death - again, particularly among low-income women and women of color. That is going to increase. There's no question that that will increase. I think, ultimately, that we will never settle this issue unless we have legislative16 decisions, ideally at the national level, of course, rather than see it as a court issue. If you look at almost every other country that I can think of, they've resolved this issue through legislative changes, including changes to constitutions, not by court decisions. So I think this is going to be a litmus test for state races and for national races for, probably, decades to come.
MARTIN: Yeah.
BUTLER: I mean, we're going to be the outlier of every major industrial country.
1 abortion | |
n.流产,堕胎 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 transcript | |
n.抄本,誊本,副本,肄业证书 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 infrastructure | |
n.下部构造,下部组织,基础结构,基础设施 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 supreme | |
adj.极度的,最重要的;至高的,最高的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 pregnancies | |
怀孕,妊娠( pregnancy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 pregnancy | |
n.怀孕,怀孕期 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 affected | |
adj.不自然的,假装的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 roe | |
n.鱼卵;獐鹿 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 hypocrisy | |
n.伪善,虚伪 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 dire | |
adj.可怕的,悲惨的,阴惨的,极端的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 abortions | |
n.小产( abortion的名词复数 );小产胎儿;(计划)等中止或夭折;败育 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 coverage | |
n.报导,保险范围,保险额,范围,覆盖 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 expectancy | |
n.期望,预期,(根据概率统计求得)预期数额 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 trajectory | |
n.弹道,轨道 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 maternal | |
adj.母亲的,母亲般的,母系的,母方的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 legislative | |
n.立法机构,立法权;adj.立法的,有立法权的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|