It was last month. I was casually driving to my tennis club, listening to Bloomberg Radio when I first heard about the draft US Supreme Court opinion on Roe v Wade that had been leaked to the world.
My jaw literally. dropped. to. the. floor. This news had shock factor. Hang on, my focus quickly zoned in on the presenter; that there was a written draft opinion overturning the decision that made abortion rights legal in the US in 1973.
Since then, I’ve been trying to get my head around this; trying to find a rationale to support a progressive, equal and democratic legal state. Yet I can’t.
This is not a blog to debate the right and wrongs of abortion. But it is about choice. Women’s choice. Women’s bodies. Women’s freedom.
Who is Roe and who is Wade?
By way of a maybe too short a summary, this was a case dating back initially to 1969, in the Texas Courts, USA. The case was brought by a single, 25 year old woman, who went by the pseudonym of ‘Jane Roe’. Jane Roe challenged the abortion laws in Texas where it was illegal on the basis of it being unconstitutional for women to have an abortion. The district attorney at the time who defended the case was Henry Wade. Jane Roe conceived her third child from a rape and later appealed the decision in 1973 alongside another woman fighting the same case.
In 1973 the Supreme Court ruled 7:2 that the Constitution protected a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.
Even, after the ruling was overturned in 1973 proclaiming that it was to be a constitutional right to have an abortion, there were critics who were concerned about the decision; more so the reasons behind the decision and at the time, to name one was Judge Ginsberg. This was a case right up her street as most know she really pioneered for woman’s rights, gender equality and didn’t miss a trick.
Justice Ginsberg; the case was ‘wrongly decided’
It wasn’t that Ginsberg didn’t support the decision at all, to the contrary, it was her tireless and unwavering commitment that she feared the key arguments relating to a woman’s right to privacy and privacy violations made the ultimate decision weak and potentially open to attack in the future.
She called it. She said it. In 1973, with the foresight and ability to look into the future, fast forward 49 years and there it is lurking, the attack she feared the most. Ginsberg felt the arguments used by Jane Roe should rather have focused on gender equality and on the basis of restricting abortion rights, it blocked gender equality.
This case was and still is, ultimately about a woman’s right to choose. How is it 49 years later this decision has gone full circle and women’s rights have digressed and reversed?
What could the world look like under the new Roe v Wade?
Global leaders, CEOs, Presidents and US citizens are genuinely scared by this.
We can only embrace the business leaders who are fiercely speaking out about the leaked draft opinion, no doubt for a 2-fold purpose; to push company values and promote gender equality for the sake of their businesses and employees; and to try influence political opinion.
This is definitely a new era of accountability and obligations on multi-national companies to speak publicly about difficult issues; employees are demanding it. I truly believe gone are the days of companies ordering employees back into the office. This language just doesn’t land well anymore.
The more companies stay quiet on big topics fearful of failing to navigate the geo-political, gender or minority issues the bigger the problem they will endure. In my career, one of our competitors published a best-in-class equal maternity and paternity policy, which was genderless and I ‘liked’ it on Linkedin. I was then called into see HR and criticised for ‘liking’ the way a competitor was shouting about gender equality in their workplace. Are we meant to just stay silent?
I follow Paul Polman’s Linkedin blog and he wrote an article on this topic ‘What Roe v Wade means for CEOs’.
Another incredible woman in business is You Tube CEO Susan Wojcicki who has also spoken out about the impact the draft opinion has had on the You Tube business. You Tube are now reviewing its employee benefits. If the draft opinion is indeed enacted into law, how will businesses support employees impacted by the ruling and what support can businesses offer employees.
Another example is Elson Musk’s Tesla business. Given Texas is home to Tesla, since 2021 Tesla have been paying for the employees to get out of state abortions following tightening of abortion laws. Tesla’s Impact Report that is published talks about a “Safety Net program and health insurance offering” which includes “travel and lodging support for those who may need to seek healthcare services that are unavailable in their home state.”
Salesforce has also spoken out about the threat of reversing Roe v Wade for their employees by offering to help with costs of travel and accommodation to seek healthcare that is unavailable in their home state and to help employees relocate.
I cannot see how Roe v Wade can ever end well. American polarity will grow greater, families will up sticks and relocate to states who continue to put gender equality first on the agenda and businesses will face growing pressure by its employee to enforce its moral compass and protect its employees.
With or without Roe v Wade it highlights the need for businesses to speak up and look beyond their own back yard to contribute towards a much higher cause in human rights.
In 2022 there is no place for the Courts to diminish women’s rights or restrict choice.
canyouhearme.blog 