Gestational Slavery and Human Trafficking WaPo Puff Piece

[musette_sf]

One of the most horrifying reads on the depraved, sociopathic attacks on reproductive justice in America, framed as a feel-good puff piece in the WaPo. And the editorial cowards left comments open for only hours. Reprehensible.

https://wapo.st/3TQctXU

(Gifted article, no paywall)

[ShazzieB]

1. Human trafficking?

I don't understand why you would describe the article this way. That led me to expect something completely different.

Whatever else one may think of this story, there is no human trafficking in it.

[musette_sf]

2. Gladney has been in the human trafficking business

for many years. They ran a network of maternity jails during the tragic Baby Scoop Era.

[ShazzieB]

3. I really don't think that was the same thing.

The term "human trafficking" has a very specific meaning, and I don't think it applies to what went on during the era you're talking about.

According to the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, "Human trafficking involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to obtain some type of labor or commercial sex act."
https://www.dhs.gov/blue-campaign/what-human-trafficking.

What went on during the Baby Scoop Era, sad as it was, was quite different. There was an attitude at the time (post WWII into the early 70s) that the only "solution" to an unwanted pregnancy (assuming marriage was not an option) was to have the baby, give it up for adoption, and go on with one's life as if it never happened. The stigma of being an unwed mother was so great that many pregnant girls and their parents didn't really see any other option.

Of course it was cruel and traumatic, but those homes were not run primarily for the purpose of making money, and no one was kidnapping girls and forcing them to produce babies for profit.

What happened to those young pregnant women was sad and awful and traumatic, but it was not human trafficking as the term is customarily used and understood.

In any case, the story in this article did not happen during the "baby scoop" era, and no coercion was involved. When Evelyn was unable to successfully have an abortion, she chose adoption herself. It wasn't her first choice, but it was the choice she made from the options that remained to her at that point.

Imo, describing this article as being about human trafficking is inaccurate and misleading. I believe in using words according to their generally accepted meaning, and I do not believe that is the case here.

[Kath2]

4. Agree.

The article had little to do with "human trafficking." I simply, and maybe stupidly, believe that women deserve rights over their own bodies.

[ShazzieB]

5. Not a stupid belief at all!

If only it weren't so difficult to convince some people of that.