Anti abortion movement in post roe v wade louisiana, a qualitative study

ANTI-ABORTION MOVEMENT IN POST-ROE v. WADE LOUISIANA: A QUALITATIVE STUDY ----------------------------------- A DISSERTATION Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School Southern University and A&M College Baton Rouge, Louisiana ----------------------------------- In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs ----------------------------------By Emmanuel Okwaraocha December 2010 UMI Number: 3445348 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3445348 Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 DEDICATION To the benevolent triune God ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I appreciate the ingenuous advice of my major professor, Dr. James Larson, which saw me through in the course of this doctoral research. Dr. Larson has always wanted me to succeed in the program, and what you are holding in your hands or reading with your eyes is a testament to that success. I thank other members of the dissertation committee, Dr. Hassan Mahadallah and Dr. Christopher Hunte, for their assistance. The encouragement of the faculty adviser for the doctoral program in the Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs, Dr. Huey L. Perry, is commendable. Dr. Perry has always been on my side since my Master‟s degree program in the School. My parents, Nnaomadiebube Stephen Okwaraocha and Ezinne Josephine Okwaraocha (nee Ugbala), were highly elated at the news of my successful defense of this doctoral dissertation. I glory in their joy. I love them. My siblings have always shown me love. I appreciate their best wishes for me. I love them too. Chinenye, fondly called Bim-Bim and Chipem remains my best cousin. Mrs. Dolores Broussard, Mrs. Gloria Meaux, Mr. Travis & Mrs. Andree Stevens, Attorney Donald & Attorney Mrs. Chigo Iwuchukwu, Dr. & Dr. Mrs. Jack Gupta have always been good to me. May it be well with them, and their families. I appreciate the encouragement of some of my colleagues in the priesthood, Donatus Ajoko, Denis Ekwugha, Brendan Mbagwu, Celsius Offor, Paul Onuegbe, Onyedika Otuwurunne, Amaechi Awurum, Vitalis Abiamiri, Stephen Ugwu, Toochukwu Okpara, Capt. Thom Obiatuegwu, Capt. John Ijeomah, Dr. John Uche Asomugha, CSSp., Dr. Wenceslaus Madu, CMF, and others. I also appreciate the friendship of my colleagues in the doctoral iii program especially, Ms. Ngozi Anadi, Mrs. Karen Emery, and Ms. Tiffany M. Lloyd. May God grant their hearts‟ desires. My sincere gratitude goes to all men and women of goodwill in the Louisiana Right to Life movement especially, those I interviewed during my field work. I thank Mr. Ben Clapper, Mrs. Peggy Kenny, Retired Attorney Bob E. Winn, Dr. W. Al Krotoski, Attorney Dorinda C. Bordlee, Mrs. Barbara Thomas, and Attorney Angie Thomas for their friendship. Finally, I acknowledge that I am the greatest beneficiary of God‟s favors, and I cannot thank Him enough. All is to His greater glory (A.M.D.G). iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION .................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iii ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1 Statement of Problem ...............................................................................................1 The Purpose of the Study .........................................................................................6 The Importance of the Study....................................................................................7 Research Questions ..................................................................................................7 Delimitations ............................................................................................................8 Limitations ...............................................................................................................8 Organization of the Study ........................................................................................9 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................12 The Dynamics of the Anti-Abortion Movement ....................................................13 Abortion Restrictions in the Pre-Roe v. Wade Era .................................................13 Mobilization and Organization in the Post-Roe v. Wade Decision ........................17 Background ................................................................................................17 Organization and Countermobilization ......................................................20 The Movement‟s Strategies and Tactics ....................................................23 Issue-framing Strategy ...................................................................23 Political Strategy ............................................................................24 v Legislative Strategy .......................................................................26 Violent Strategy and Tactic ...........................................................28 Abortion Policy in Post-Roe v. Wade Decision ....................................................29 The Leeway to State Abortion Policy ..................................................................31 State Abortion Policy ...........................................................................................33 Woman-Related Abortion Policy...............................................................35 Fetus-Related Abortion Policy...................................................................36 Provider-Related Abortion Policy..............................................................37 III. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .........................................................................39 Deontological Ethical Theory ....................................................................39 Social Movement Theory...........................................................................42 IV. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................49 Research Design.........................................................................................49 Data Collection ..........................................................................................50 Instrumentation ..........................................................................................53 Data Analysis and Interpretation ...............................................................54 Research Validity .......................................................................................56 V. FINDINGS .............................................................................................................58 Participant‟s Profile ...................................................................................58 Description of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation ..............................62 Research Question One ..............................................................................64 Emergent Theme: The Quest for Change ..................................................64 vi Research Question Two .............................................................................72 Emergent Theme: Abortion as Murder that Negates the Sanctity of Human Life ............................................................................................................ 72 Research Question Three ...........................................................................77 Emergent Theme: Restrictive Abortion Policy ..........................................77 Research Question Four .............................................................................86 Emergent Theme: An Alternative to Abortion ..........................................86 Research Question Five .............................................................................90 Emergent Theme: Voluntarism ..................................................................90 VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH........................................95 Summary ....................................................................................................95 Conclusions ................................................................................................97 Research Implications ................................................................................98 Public Policy Implications .........................................................................99 Recommendations for Future Research ...................................................100 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................103 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................112 Appendix A Interview Guide ...............................................................................113 Appendix B Interview Participants ......................................................................116 Appendix C Louisiana Candidate Questionnaire .................................................119 Appendix D A Letter of Request to Participate in an Interview for Study ..........123 vii Appendix E Informed Consent Form ...................................................................125 Appendix F Initial Approval Form for Non-Exempt Research ...........................128 VITA .................................................................................................................................. xi APPROVAL FOR SCHOLARLY DISSEMINATION .................................................. xiv viii ABSTRACT Okwaraocha Emmanuel, Ph.D. Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs Southern University and A & M College Baton Rouge, Louisiana December, 2010. ANTI-ABORTION MOVEMENT IN POST-ROE v. WADE LOUISIANA: A QUALITATIVE STUDY Major Professor: Dr. James S. Larson. The 1973 Supreme Court landmark decision in Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in the United States, triggering an unprecedented controversy over the morality and legality of abortion. In turn, the decision caused the development of well-organized anti-abortion movements that consistently protest the abortion policy. The controversial extent of the extant nature of legal abortion policy is evidenced by ubiquitous anti-abortion movements in most states in the nation, including Louisiana. This research employs a qualitative method of inquiry to study the leadership, organization, and the propelling ideology of the Louisiana Right to Life (LARTL) movement in the State of Louisiana. The study also investigates the pro-life movement in terms of strategies, influence, activities, and public policy implications in the State of Louisiana. Findings are drawn from a triangulation of documentary information and data, data from interviews and archival records. By means of an open-ended interview of the executive level leadership of the LARTL movement, various directors of crisis pregnancy centers and church leaders in Louisiana findings indicate that the movement has successfully influenced certain pro-life policies that not only regulate abortion but also offer more material options to women seeking abortion in Louisiana. Some of the ix restrictive abortion policies the LARTL movement has influenced in the State of Louisiana are inclusive of the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act of 2010, the Ultrasound Before Abortion Act of 2010, the Human Life Protection Act (Trigger Law) of 2006, the Women‟s Right to Know of 1995, and others. Key Words: anti-abortion movement; pro-life movement; right-to-life movement; abortion policy; restrictive abortion policy; roe v. wade, qualitative study; social movement theory; deontological ethical theory. x Chapter I INTRODUCTION Statement of Problem The historic 1973 Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113) Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United States sparked an unprecedented controversy over the morality and legality of abortion, and thus gave rise to anti-abortion movements that consistently protest the controversial abortion policy. The basis for the Court‟s decision was the constitutional provision concerning the right to privacy (Hansen, 1980 and Rodman, 1991), which allowed a woman access to abortion during the first trimester of her pregnancy. The Supreme Court asserts, “This right to privacy whether it be founded in the Fourth Amendment‟s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment‟s reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman‟s decision whether or not to terminate pregnancy” (Roe v. Wade, 1973). Yet, the right to privacy holding on which legal abortion is hinged, is not explicitly enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The controversial nature of the Roe decision is evidenced in the existence of antiabortion movements that literally dot the length and breadth of almost every state in the nation. The State of Louisiana is no exception to this development, as there are currently active anti-abortion movements in the area that strategically aim at advancing restrictive abortion policies in the State, even to an overturn of the Roe decision. 2 Despite the saliency of the abortion issue and its contentious nature in the polity, there is a dearth of qualitative research to examine the numerous oppositional organizations against legal abortion in the various states of the Union. This work is aimed at studying the strategic activities of the anti-abortion movement in the State of Louisiana, the Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL). My focus on Louisiana is not only informed by the state‟s restrictive laws on legal abortion but also by the quest to ascertain the leadership and organization, as well as the propelling belief or ideology of the anti-abortion movement in the state. The pro-life movement also protests the Supreme Court‟s alleged usurpation of the authority which the United States federal system reserves to states through the Tenth Amendment on morality policy inclusive of abortion. This work is a study of the developments and strategies of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation in the state, the political implications of the pro-life movement as a “countermovement” to the pro-choice movement, and the public policy implications emanating from the successes and advances of Louisiana‟s anti-abortion movement regarding its pro-life activities. Contextually, it is noteworthy that the terms, anti-abortion movement, right-to-life movement, pro-life movement, and the like nuances are interchangeably used in this study to denote “a countermovement,” to pro-abortion or a pro-choice movement. Also, both pro-life or anti-abortion and pro-choice or pro-abortion movements are opposing social movements and each is an interest group. Although the Supreme Court legalized abortion via the Roe decision, its subsequent decision in the 1989 Webster v. Missouri Reproductive Health Services opened a window for the state legislatures to layer many regulations and restrictions on 3 abortion (Jelen, 1992b, Tribe, 1990 and Dodson and Burnbauer, 1990). The Webster ruling held that any “reasonably designed” (Webster, 109 S. Ct. 3058) abortion restriction by any state that “permissibly furthers the state‟s interest in protecting human life” (Webster, 109 S. Ct 3057) would be constitutionally legal (McCarthy, 1989). Another decision by the Supreme Court allowed the State of Pennsylvania to impose restrictions on legal abortion in the Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992). The ruling prompted other states, including Louisiana to enact restrictive abortion laws (Cook, Jelen and Wilcox, 1993 and Borgman and Weiss, 2003). The Webster and Casey decisions caused varying reactions across the nation some states passed moderate restrictions on abortion while other states affirmed existing laws on abortion via individual state legislations, while “Louisiana and Utah enacted restrictions that would ban most abortions” (Cook, Jelen and Wilcox, 1993, p. 223). With regard to the Roe decision which legalized abortion, Farber and Nowak (1990), believe that irrespective of the vehement nature of the perennial debate on the abortion issue, the American public embraces the notion that states have a valid interest in the protection of women‟s health and fetuses, and as a result, abortion may not be banned completely. Furthermore, it is pertinent to note that since the 1973 Roe decision legalizing abortion, the State of Louisiana has advanced abortion legislation that regulates and restricts a woman‟s access to abortion (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Some of the State‟s regulations include: 4 gestational limitation – the state of Louisiana prohibits abortion after fetal viability except in the case of a woman‟s life or health; prohibition on a partial-birth abortion; the state not only requires an abortion be performed by a licensed physician, but also mandates that a second physician be involved in the service after fetal viability; public funding – public funding for abortion is limited to life endangerment, rape, and incest; private insurance coverage – coverage of abortion in private insurance plans is restricted to cases that pertain to life endangerment and; parental involvement – the state requires the consent of one or both of the parents of a minor before an abortion is performed (Guttmacher Institute, 2010); Women‟s Right to Know law of 1995 – the State of Louisiana mandates that a woman seeking to obtain abortion must wait 24 hours in between the time she makes her first visit to the abortion facility and the actual abortion procedure. The law also provides that the woman who is about to obtain an abortion must be informed about the abortion procedure, gestational age of the fetus, fetal development, the risks of abortion and the availability of other public assistance agencies that offer abortion alternative if she decides to carry the pregnancy to term; 5 the Ultrasound Before Abortion Act of 2010 – an amendment to the abortion informed consent law, which gives a woman the right to have medically accurate information about her health and the life of her child. Also, the Ultrasound Act avails the woman the opportunity to receive the information about the ultrasound and see the ultrasound; the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act of 2010 – the Act legally excludes the State of Louisiana from the federally subsidized abortion insurance plans as contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 that was signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 23, 2010 and; the Human Life Protection Act of 2006, also known as Trigger Law. This law makes abortion illegal in the State of Louisiana, except in the case of life endangerment of the mother, when the Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court or by a Constitutional Amendment (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). The pro-life or anti-abortion movement in Louisiana as aforementioned is championed by the Louisiana Right to Life Federation with organized chapters in the various parishes or counties in the state, Louisiana Students for Life which also has organized chapters in college and university campuses, and the church clergy. The explicit religious connotations of the abortion controversy necessitated an inclusion of the views of church leaders in the study. Moreover, on the issue of abortion, leaders in the 6 church are influential as opinion and political leaders (Ammerman, 1987 and Jelen, 1992b). As aforementioned, this work also investigates whether or not the Louisiana Right to Life movement influenced the state‟s restrictive abortion policies as well as successes of the movement to advance its pro-life goals. It is certain that the anti-abortion movement in Louisiana influences abortion policy in the State through employment of salient strategies toward advancing its goals that characterize other social movements. Strategies which include issue-framing, educational, legislative, and political concerns are elaborately discussed in Chapters Five and Six of this work. However, the unique effectiveness of the pro-life movement is also enhanced by the common belief of the Louisiana citizenry in the sanctity of the human life, revering God as the only One who has the authority to give or take life. Finally, Lo (1982) acknowledges the merit in studying public opinion on the abortion issue, but he also fervently enjoins researchers to also engage in studying the leadership, organization, and participants of the anti-abortion movements. Suffice it to say that this project literally serves as a response to Lo‟s (1982) scholarly call. The Purpose of the Study The raison d’etre for this research is to study the leadership, organization, propelling belief or ideology, and the strategic activities of the Louisiana Right to Life (LARTL) movement in the State of Louisiana. The study is also aimed at ascertaining whether the pro-life movement has influenced any anti-abortion or restrictive abortion 7 policies in Louisiana and the public policy implications of its successful advances of the movement in the state, regarding pro-life activities. The Importance of the Study The significance of this work is composed of two strands: first, this endeavor pioneers a qualitative, research work on the anti-abortion movement in Louisiana. Although much literature discusses public opinion on the controversial issue of abortion, there is a dearth of literature that dealing with the leadership, organization, and participants of the right-to-life movement, and no work may be found on the dynamics of the movement in Louisiana. Second, pro-life movement study adds to the preceding extant theoretical works that research the dynamics of social movement and countermovement. Scholars of social movement observed that although the civil rights movement of the 1960s in the United States caused an emergence of studies on models of the political process and mobilization, it was the pro-choice and pro-life movement that were responsible for scholarly interest in movement and countermovement dynamics. This research then serves as a contribution to the social movement scholarship. Research Questions Under the backdrop of this investigation of the anti-abortion movement in Louisiana since the Supreme Court‟s decision in Roe v. Wade, the following questions are addressed in this research: 1. What are the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation in the State of Louisiana, and what strategies does it employ to advance those goals? 8 2. What is the underlying belief or ideology that drives the pro-life movement? 3. How effective are the strategies of the pro-life movement and what successes has it achieved in Louisiana, regarding its pro-life goals and activities? 4. What are the sources of support for the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, and who funds the movement? 5. Has the pro-life movement in Louisiana influenced any anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the State? Delimitations The researcher recognizes the existence of many pro-life organizations that compose the anti-abortion movement in the United States as evidenced in the reviewed extant literature. Therefore this research focuses on studying the activities of the antiabortion movement by the Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL), in the State of Louisiana. Also, this study is limited to an open-ended interviewing of the leading members of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, directors of pro-life pregnancy centers, and church leaders in the State. The Louisiana Right to Life Federation is the mainstream pro-life movement in the State of Louisiana. Limitations The primary limitations of this study stem from the nature of the research method employed in the study, which is a qualitative research method. A qualitative investigation is essentially subjective. The process of data collection and analysis in a case study employing a face-to-face, open-ended interview is virtually the sole responsibility of the researcher. Hence, the researcher directs the final product of the study. 9 Further, research method scholars contend that interpretation is a major part of all research especially, a qualitative method of inquiry (Stake, 1995, Ericson, 1986, Yin, 1994 and Creswell, 2003). Scholars also emphasize the saliency of “making meaning” from the responses of an interviewee (Stake, 1995 and Creswell, 2003), as applied in open-ended interview methods of data collection. Evidently, personal interpretations are subjective, and meanings could be either misunderstood or misinterpreted. Another limitation of a qualitative case study of this nature is that it becomes particularistic and thereby, presents a little basis for generalization (Stake, 1995). Thus, the findings in this case study are unique to the context and may not be generalized. Finally, the concept that a qualitative researcher becomes the measurement instrument in a qualitative study (Patton, 2002 and Merriam 1998) brings to the fore an inherent human negative prejudice or bias. A possible bias on my part as a pro-life advocate researching an anti-abortion movement surely constitutes a limitation in this study. By way of minimizing such a personal bias, however, I never disclosed my ideological stance on the abortion issue to the interview respondents, in the course of the open-ended interview. Organization of the Study This research work is organized into six chapters. Chapter One introduces the study by highlighting the background and stating the problem. Also, the purpose and significance of the study is presented in Chapter One. The research questions, delimitations, and limitations of the study and a logical organization of the work are also presented in the introductory section. A review of the numerous literatures on the subject 10 is found in Chapter Two. This chapter discusses themes and sub-themes on the subject. These themes include the dynamics of the anti-abortion movement: abortion restrictions in the pre-Roe v. Wade era the movement‟s mobilization and organization in the post-Roe v. Wade decision –(a) background, (b) organization and countermobilization, the movement‟s strategies and tactics –(a) issue-framing strategy, (b) political strategy, (c) legislative strategy, and (d) violent strategy and tactics, abortion policy in post-Roe v. Wade, the leeway to state abortion policy, state abortion policy –(a) woman-related abortion policy, (b) fetus-related abortion policy, and (c) provider-related abortion policy. The theoretical framework of the study is presented in Chapter Three. This chapter discusses two main theories guiding the study. These theories involve the deontological theory and, the social movement theory. Contextually, the use of a multiple theory as a framework for the study of this nature is informed by Blanchard‟s (1994, p. 8) idea that “no single theory is sufficient enough to explain the complexities of any social movement.” The discussion of the methodology of the study is addressed in Chapter Four. This chapter discusses on the research design, the qualitative research method of the study, the method of data collection and analysis, the measurement instrument, and research validity. Finally, while Chapter Five presents the findings of the study, the 11 general summary, research and public policy implications for the study, conclusions, and recommendations for future research are presented in Chapter Six. Chapter II REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter presents comprehensive review of extant literature covering relevant themes in the study. Those themes, dealing with the dynamics of abortion policy and the anti-abortion movement include: abortion restrictions in the pre-Roe v. Wade era the movement‟s mobilization and organization in the post-Roe v. Wade decision, incorporating a. background b. organization and countermobilization the movement‟s strategies and tactics comprising a. issue-framing strategy b. political strategy c. legislative strategy d. violent strategy and tactic the dynamics of abortion policy in the post-Roe v. Wade decision the leeway to state abortion policy state abortion policy, defining a. woman-related abortion policy b. fetus-related abortion policy c. provider-related abortion policy 13 The Dynamics of the Anti-abortion Movement Abortion Restrictions in the Pre-Roe v. Wade Era Considerable literature examines the development of the abortion regulations and related anti-abortion campaigns before the historic 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion (Blanchard, 1994, Means, 1970, Petchesky, 1984, Cavanaugh, 1986 and Mohr, 1978). Between the First and Fourth Centuries, notable early Church Fathers such as Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Augustine of Hippo, and others denounced the procurement of abortion in the foremost ancient document of the Church, the Didache, which in the Greek means “The Teaching” (Blanchard, 1994). However, the Church allowed the practice of abortion between 450 and 1450 “only before quickening” (Blanchard, 1994, p. 11). The concept of quickening denotes when a woman felt movements from the embryo or fetus which was “usually about [the] fifth month of pregnancy” (Blanchard, 1994, p. 10). However, between 1450 and 1750, the Church not only allowed abortion before quickening, but also after quickening in cases of life endangerment of the woman (Blanchard, 1994). Further, Blanchard (1994) maintains that the stance of the Church on abortion with regard to the idea of quickening usually coincided with that of the Common Law in the latter part of the era. Still, it is pertinent to note that in 1869, the Church banned the practice of abortion by declaring excommunication to be a punishment for the act; latter in 1917, the Church extended the same punishment to include the woman (Blanchard, 1994). It is also noteworthy that from 1931 until the present, the Church maintained a strict stance of allowing no abortions under any circumstance. 14 The sociologist Cavanaugh (1986) contends that traditionally, the issue of abortion in the United States was neither a moral one nor a subject of any opposition until the turn of the nineteenth century. Cavanaugh (1986) is also of the view that women had the liberty to seek abortions from healers or practitioners of the era, irrespective of the success or failure of the services. There was no state with any law restricting abortion until 1800 (Mohr, 1978 and Cavanaugh, 1986). For centuries, Common Law traditions approved a woman‟s freedom to terminate her early pregnancy (Means, 1970). Nevertheless, the United States public policy on abortion was crafted between 1800 and 1850 on British Common Law, a law founded on the notion of quickening (Blanchard, 1994). Furthermore, Blanchard (1994) informs us that the State of Connecticut was the first state in the Union to pass abortion legislation in 1821, making the practice of abortion illegal only after quickening. Yet in 1828, New York became the first state to allow abortion after quickening, in the case of life endangerment of the woman. New York State also required consultation and approval of a second physician in the case. Blanchard (1994) also informs us that although 10 states in the nation had passed some legislation on abortion regulation by 1841, it was not until the latter part of the nineteenth century that the United States witnessed its first anti-abortion campaign. The campaign against abortion in the United States was initiated by the members of the American Medical Association (AMA). Following its formal organization in 1847, the AMA established a first priority to make the practice of abortions illegal for those who were not medical doctors (Blanchard, 1994). Thus, some scholars accuse the AMA 15 of monopolizing the abortion services under the auspices of medical professionalism (Luker, 1984, Mohr, 1978 and Blanchard, 1994). Corroborating the views of other scholars, Cavanaugh (1986) argues that it was the so-called “regular doctors” of the American Medical Association who curtailed the abortion services that formerly were an open market affair. Thus, some scholars contend that abortion remained a general practice until the beginning of the latter part of the nineteenth century, when the action was virtually seen as a crime, and hence proscribed (Mohr, 1978 and Cavanaugh, 1986). Also, Blanchard (1994) believes that the AMA‟s campaign against abortion was not only informed by a concern to advance professionalism in the medical industry, but also by the need to promote women‟s health and the quest to instill morality in the society. Blanchard (1994) opines that the AMA campaign against abortion was literally helped by the publication of some deaths that stemmed from abortions and a contested 1871study sponsored by the association. The AMA‟s sponsored study arguably revealed that about 1 million induced abortions were performed annually in the United Sates (Luker, 1984 and Blanchard, 1994). Cavanaugh (1986) maintains that abortion was declared immoral and illegal, once the AMA succeeded in securing a regulated monopoly over the dispensation of this service and other medical services. In the periods of 1890 through the 1900s, every state in the Union was either restricting or prohibiting some types of abortion, causing disparities in anti-abortion laws amongst the states (Blanchard, 1994). Thus, while most states in the Union prohibited abortion, except in cases of incest or rape, other states allowed abortion when the physical or mental health of a pregnant woman was threatened, and still others allowed 16 abortion only in a case of life endangerment of the woman (Blanchard, 1994). In a related development, Blanchard (1994, p. 15) contends that in the early decades of the twentieth century (about 1910 through the 1920s) the United States government “encourage[ed] the use of birth control and even involuntary sterilization among women who were perceived as being “defective.” Suffice it to say that although there were existing restrictions and prohibitions on some types of abortion in various states of the Union, illegal abortions were still being carried out in the 1960s during the abortion rights campaigns and in the early 1970s, before the legalization of abortion in 1973 via the Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision. It is ironic that the same medical professionals of the AMA who succeeded in making abortion illegal in the nineteenth century, championed the contrary cause of legalizing it in the 1960s (Cavanaugh, 1986 and Blanchard, 1994). Thus, owing to health reasons, medical doctors reverted to lobbying state legislatures to support the revision of the abortion section of the Penal Code, initiated in 1959 by the American Law Institute (Blanchard 1994). The Penal Code allowed for abortion only in a case of rape or incest, life or mental health endangerment of a pregnant woman, deformity, and with the approval of two physicians (Blanchard, 1994). Besides the pro-abortion campaigns of some medical doctors, other abortion rights organizations included: Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), the National Organization for Women (NOW), the Birth Control League of America, Zero Population Growth, and others. The organizations called for the liberalization of state restrictive abortion policies (Blanchard, 1994). It is noteworthy that 17 these abortion rights organizations hitherto had goals and agendas that embraced either feminism or birth control, but in the 1960s and 1970s, the fight for freedom of choice for abortion by women caused the organizations to resume their common cause (Blanchard, 1994). It is certain that the consistent campaigns of the pro-abortion organizations brought about the quashing of state-wide restrictive abortion laws following the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. Suffice it to say that the Supreme Court Roe decision legalizing abortion was a win for the pro-choice movement against the anti-abortion movements. However, the following section deals with the mobilization and organization of the antiabortion movements following the Roe decision. Mobilization and Organization in the Post-Roe v. Wade Decision Background The relevant literature regarding the dynamic developments in the abortion issue and the attendant activities of the anti-abortion movement following the legalization of abortion in 1973 abound (Dillon, 1993, Himmelstein, 1986, Luker, 1984, Petchesky 1984 and Blanchard, 1994). As aforementioned, the United States legalized abortion via the Supreme Court‟s ruling in Roe v. Wade (1973) (Hansen, 1980, pp. 372-373, Kelly, 1989, Rodman, 1991, p. 155 and Segers and Byrnes, 1995, pp. 1-2). A certain Texas woman, Jane Roe, whose true name was Norma McCorvey, made an unsuccessful case in the Texas State courts to obtain legal abortion on her pregnancy, which she claimed was a result of rape (Faux, 2001, pp. 3-13 and Blanchard, 1994, pp. 28-29). The “Wade” in the case was the incumbent District Attorney Henry Wade of Dallas County in the State of 18 Texas (Faux, 2001, p. 86). When the Texas courts frustrated McCorvey‟s efforts to obtain an abortion, an appeal was made to the United States Supreme Court. Thus, the Roe case proceeded to the U.S. Supreme Court, which eventually declared that a woman has a right to terminate her pregnancy during the first three months of pregnancy. It is noteworthy that McCorvey never had the abortion, and decided to carry her pregnancy to term as the court proceedings (the Texas courts and the U.S. Supreme Court) lingered. However, McCorvey supported the Court‟s ruling on legal abortion (Blanchard, 1994, p. 29). The basis for the Court‟s decision allowing a woman access to abortion during the first trimester of her pregnancy rests on the constitutional provision concerning the right to privacy (Hansen, 1980 and Rodman, 1991). Thus, the Supreme Court asserts, “This right to privacy whether it be founded in the Fourth Amendment‟s concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment‟s restoration of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman‟s decision whether or not to terminate pregnancy (Roe v. Wade, 1973). Unarguably, the right to privacy reason on which the legal abortion is hinged, is not explicitly written in the U.S. Constitution. However right or wrong the proponent of abortion rights or the anti-abortion advocates might deem the Supreme Court‟s ruling, the reality is that the Court exercised its constitutional power of judicial review. Suffice it to say that the Supreme Court‟s exercise of judicial review of local and state laws is its most important means of advancing public policy in contemporary American history (Canon and Johnson, 1999). 19 The Roe decision caused an unprecedented controversy over the morality and legality of abortion, and thus fueled anti-abortion movements that have consistently protested the controversial abortion policy. Multiple anti-abortion movements literally dot the length and breadth of the nation. The State of Louisiana is no exception to this development, as there are some active anti-abortion movements in the area that strategically aim at advancing restrictive abortion policies in the State, and even overturning the Roe decision. As aforementioned, the Louisiana Right to Life movement is the subject of investigation in this study. Scholars of social movements and interest groups believe that these advocacies do not spring up spontaneously in a society, irrespective of the latency of the interest or how favorable the setting for the interest group or the social movement might be (Loomis and Cigler, 1991 and Truman, 1971). Citing some cogent examples, Loomis and Cigler (1991, p. 6) contend that farm unions and organizations formed as a consequence of the dynamics between farmers and landed interests, much as craftsmen and laborers existed before the formation of labor unions and the related organized interests. In like manner, persons had been performing or obtaining abortion however crude or illegal, before the Roe decision. In the same vein, campaigns against abortion existed in earlier times as evidenced in the stance of the Church and the activities of medical professionals in history, as noted in the preceding section regarding pre-Roe developments. Further, campaigns against abortion rights were organized in the 1960s and 1970s by groups of lawyers and medical professionals who disagreed with their associations‟ supports for abortion reform or repeal (Luker, 1984). However, abortion reform bills 20 were passed in some states, such as California, North Carolina and, Colorado in 1969. Hawaii succeeded in repealing that state‟s long standing abortion laws in 1970 (Steinhoff and Diamond, 1977 and Blanchard, 1994, pp. 25-28) Yet other states strongly agitated for repeals (Blanchard, 1994). Himmelstein (1986) informs us that the anti-abortion medical and legal professionals and others who joined the movement through religious networks were mainly upper- and lower-middle-working-class people in the society of that period. Organization and Countermobilization Historically, shortly before the 1973 Supreme Court decision, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops of America (NCCB) appointed its Family Life Bureau to monitor all the efforts by various state legislatures and abortion rights organizations to reform or repeal the existing state laws which allowed abortion only to save a woman‟s life (Kelly, 1989, Blanchard, 1994 and Petchetsky1984). The right to life movement organizations which had existed in local parish churches before 1973 were established by the Family Life Bureau of the NCCB (Blanchard, 1994 and Petchetsky1984). According to Blanchard (1994, p. 84), the NCCB “quickly moved to support and organize the National Right to Life Committee” following the Roe decision. It is pertinent to note that conflicting information exists, regarding the formation year of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC). Thus, whereas Blanchard (1994, p. 84) informs us that the organization was established in 1973, Dillon (1993, p. 307) contends that the National Right to Life Committee was founded in 1971. Yet most importantly, Dillon (1993, p. 307) makes the case that the National Right to Life not only is the oldest and largest antiabortion organization in the U.S, but it also represents the mainstream anti-abortion 21 movement in the land. In like manner, the Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL), under present study, is the mainstream pro-life movement in Louisiana, as well as an affiliate of the NRLC. Importantly although the anti-abortion movement originated in the Catholic Church (Petchesky, 1984 and 1981, pp. 211-213), the Church coalesced with the Protestant churches following the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion (Nietz, 1981, Petchesky, 1981, pp. 212-213, Granberg, 1978, Peterson and Mauss, 1976, Merton, 1981 and Steinhoff and Diamond, 1977). Although the Catholic Church spearheaded the anti-abortion struggle (Faux, 2001), the Right to Life Committee has since become an ecumenical movement (Kelly, 1989 and Blanchard, 1994). Also, Cavanaugh (1986, pp. 252-253) contends that the movement‟s constituency draws from both Roman Catholicism and Protestant fundamentalism. Moreover, leaders in evangelical Protestantism constitute a formidable force in the fight against abortion rights (Falwell, 1980 and Jelen, 1992b). The Right to Life movement was seemingly caught off-guard by the Roe decision (Faux, 2001 and Blanchard, 1994), but the movement sought to mobilize with renewed vigor as its national efforts intensified. During their annual Spring meeting in 1973, American Catholic bishops made some recommendations to the National Catholic Conference regarding advancing the goal of overturning the Roe decision by the right to life movement (Blanchard, 1994 and Faux, 2001). The bishops‟ recommendations include: (a) the organization of strong right to life groups in all the states of the Union in order to provide the necessary machinery in the states in the event of a need for a 22 ratification of a proposed constitutional amendment; (b) a call to the dioceses in every state to assist in providing financial assistance to church and ecumenical efforts; (c) a call on the National Catholic Conference to assist the national Right to Life Association in any possible way and; (d) to set aside a day in each month for prayer and fasting as a reparation for the sin of abortion (Faux, 2001, p. 317). It is remarkable that the right-to-life movement has a strong grassroots organization (Rubin, 1991), as evidenced in the ubiquity of pro-life life associations in every state in the nation. The State of Louisiana, for example, has 13 right-to-life organizations with a central coordinating body as the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. There is also a pro-life organization, the Student for Life; in the tertiary institutions, the organization has its chapters in various colleges and universities in the state. Rubin (1991) makes the case that the systematic grassroots organization of anti-abortion activists enabled the movement to succeed by electing pro-life candidates, who in turn promoted the passage of restrictive abortion laws following the Supreme Court decision in Webster v Reproductive Health Services (1989). Scholars of social movements point to the necessity for pre-existing organizations and networks in any social movement mobilization that seeks to reverse existing policies (Petchescky, 1981, pp. 212-213, Mottl, 1980, Freeman, 1975 and Lo, 1982, pp. 114119).With regard to the recruitment and mobilization of individuals in the anti-abortion movement after the Roe decision, scholars also contend that the pre-existing religious networks prominently figured in the recruitment into the anti-abortion movement (Himmelstein, 1986 and Cuneo, 1989). Thus, both the Catholic and Protestant churches 23 depended on their church networks for the recruitment of pro-life members following the Roe decision (Cuneo, 1989 and Blanchard, 1994). Also, while the right to life movement is interdenominational, the organizational and financial aspects of the movement from the beginning received the support of the Catholic Church heirarchy (Petchesky, 1981, pp. 213-214). The Movement’s Strategies and Tactics In mobilization and organizational efforts following the legalization of abortion ruling by the Supreme Court, the anti-abortion movement had a plan of action toward overturning the abortion policy. Most public policies have social and political consequences. Yet the status quo abortion policy caused a considerable social change in the American society as evidenced in the existence of the movements opposing abortion. According to Hansen (1980), the pro-life activists always anticipated the negative effects of legalized abortion to include the use of abortion as a means of birth control resulting in a population decline, increased sexual promiscuity, and other related effects on the family in terms of childbearing and rearing patterns, and family orientation. Hence, the strategies of the right to life movement include: (a) issue-framing strategy (b) political strategy, (c) legislative strategy, and (4) the use of violence. Issue-framing Strategy In order to realize its purpose of structuring the public conscience in the age-long abortion issue (Kelly, 1989), the anti-abortion movement frames abortion as an issue basically centered on morality and family values, especially the sanctity of human life (Ferree, 1998 and Diamond, 1995). Thus, in a situation where the advocates of abortion 24 rights frame abortion as “right,” while the right to life activists frame abortion as a “crime” or even “murder,” Strickler and Danigelis (2002, p.191) believe that the manner in which “views on abortion become aligned with other social attitudes gauge[s] the relative success of “ opposing movements. As an example, pro-life activists in Poland tend to compare abortion with “a holocaust,” “concentration camps,” and the like to evoke horrible images and memories (Nowick, 1996, p. 24) of the evils forced on civilians by the former Nazi regime in Germany. Also, Nowick (1996) informs us that the term „fetus‟ was replaced by the term „conceived child‟ in the Polish Criminal and Civil Codes and, the change has since been embraced by the medical community in the Polish nation, irrespective of underlying ideological connotations. Curiously, Strickler and Danigelis‟ (2002, p. 187) scholarly research on the changing perspectives in people‟s attitudes toward abortion informs us that the public is less influenced by the abortion rights framework of view on abortion than by the right to life perspective. Political Strategy Petchesky (1981) argues that from the beginning, the pro-life movement was a type of political action machine that established through the church parishes and ecclesiastical communities by the clergy and the lay person as pro-life advocates to influence both local and national elections. Thus a network of the right to life committees was organized locally to (a) work toward advancing the passage of the human life amendment in the U.S. Congress; (b) monitor the abortion stance of political office holders; (c) elect pro-life advocates to the local party organization; and (d) assist political 25 candidates who will vote for a constitutional amendment of legal abortion (Petchesky, 1981, p. 213). The victory of the abortion rights advocates in the 1973 Supreme Court‟s ruling legalizing abortion served to mobilize the anti-abortion activists to protest the Court‟s decision. This was launched in other arenas of power such as Congress and the state legislatures (Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996). Such arenas of power in a democratic government are what Truman (1971, p. 519) refers to as “points of access to governmental decisions.” Hence, whereas the existence of interest groups in the nation come as the result of the pluralist nature of the United States, Truman (1971, p. 519) argues that the multiplicity of the points of access “assures various ways for interest groups to participate in the formation of policy.” Interest group theorists inform us that the U.S. Constitutional guarantees of freedom of association, speech, and the right to petition the government encourage political interests to develop and thrive (Loomis and Cigler, 1991). Moreover, American cultural values also necessitate the emergence of group interests (Loomis and Cigler, 1991). The right to life movement made a concerted, but unsuccessful effort to achieve its central goal – having Congress pass a human life amendment to the Constitution that would criminalize abortion in the nation (Faux, 2001 and Blanchard, 1994). However, when no action was taken to declare a fetus human person after sixteen long months of hearings on the proposed constitutional amendment, the pro-life movement not only shifted its effort toward state legislatures, but also worked toward electing U.S. House 26 Representatives and Senators who would support its cause (Blanchard, 1994 and Faux, 2001). According to Blanchard (1994), it was the National Pro-life Political Action Committee, formed in 1977, that was responsible for the election of pro-life politicians. It is also worthy of note that the effective grassroots and multi-state campaigns by the nation-wide pro-life organization were instrumental in the defeat of many abortion rights incumbents as well as the election of pro-life candidates to the Senate (Hershey and West, 1983 and Rubin, 1991). However, the attempt of the anti-abortion movement in the mid-1980s to garner the constitutional two-thirds of the fifty states that could call for a Constitutional Convention on the abortion issue was a failure since only nineteen states literally promised to deliver a majority of pro-life legislators (Faux, 2001). Still, the antiabortion advocates took their campaigns against abortion rights to the state legislatures, evidently succeeding in advancing restrictive abortion laws (Meyer and Staggenborg (1996). Legislative Strategy As aforementioned, the anti-abortion movement explored various arenas of power in a bid to either overturn Roe, or strictly restrict abortion laws in the states of the Union. Within the first year of the Roe decision, the movement succeeded in convincing 41 states to introduce 188 anti-abortion proposals in the legislatures, while many states also passed laws contrary to the Supreme Court‟s ruling on Roe (Faux, 2001). Further, the right to life movement, via its attorneys, studied and analyzed the varied opinions of the Supreme Court justices in the 1989 Webster v. Missouri 27 Reproductive Health Services decisions. Rubin (1991) contends that the National Right to Life Committee conceived its legislative strategy after a detailed and comprehensive study of the Webster decision. The National Right to Life Committee lawyers capitalized on Justice Sandra O‟Connor‟s opinion that a state could set some limits on abortion and to draft some model laws “that limited that circumstance[s] under which abortion could be performed” (Rubin, 1991, p. 251). Model statutes of the pro-life movement on the abortion issue include: (a) the prohibition of abortion except in the cases of life endangerment of a woman and fetal deformity or incest; (b) the requirement of the consent of the husband; (c) the requirement that 24 hours elapse between the time a woman first meets with the physician who will perform the abortion and the actual abortion service; (d) the provision of adequate and appropriate information to women about abortion and its alternatives; and (e) the requirement of parental consent in the abortion of a pregnant woman who is a minor (under eighteen or sixteen years old) (Rubin, 1991, p. 255). It is worth mentioning here that pro-life lobbyists and members of the anti-abortion movements brought the attention of the state legislators to the proposed model laws. Suffice it to say that some scholarly analyses of the dynamics of the abortion policy in the American society – especially the Webster decision, hold that the Webster decision resulted in the passage of restrictive abortion laws in some states for the first time since Roe (Cook, Jelen and Wilcox, 1993, Mooney and Mei-Hsien Lee, 1995, McCarthy, 1989, and Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996). However, while the mainstream anti-abortion movement, the NRLC with its state affiliates, has always employed institutional and non-violent means to 28 advance its pro-life goals, the Operation Rescue organization historically advocated violent strategy and tactics in its pro-life campaigns. Violent Strategy and Tactic The anti-abortion movement not only employs institutional means to press for its pro-life cause, but also uses extra-institutional means such as violent protests and picketing of abortion clinics. Although the mainstream anti-abortion movement, the National Right to Life Committee, eschews violence in its strategies and tactics, Operation Rescue is notable for violence. The Operation Rescue, established in 1986 by Randall Terry, engages in clinic blockades (Blanchard, 1994). Operation Rescue engaged in at least one act of abortion clinic blockade every weekend between October and February of 1988 and 1989 (Blanchard, 1994). In addition, the organization was also involved in about 139 protests in some 35 states that resulted in several arrests between the mid-eighties and the early nineties (Blanchard, 1994). Irrespective of the successes or failures of the anti-abortion movement previous to the emergence of Operation Rescue, the Supreme Court‟s ruling in Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 426 U.S 416 (1983) and the defeat of the Hatch-Eagton human life amendment in the same year, frustrated the anti-abortion movement. In the Akron decision, the Supreme Court held that informed consent laws, requiring that a woman be given detailed information on the development of the fetus before obtaining an abortion, was unconstitutional (Halva-Neubauer, 1993). Following that ruling and other related but unfavorable Court decisions, some pro-life activists, especially members and 29 sympathizers with Operation Rescue resorted to violence as a means of achieving their pro-life goal. Abortion Policy in Post-Roe v. Wade Decision The existing central public policy on abortion in the United States is that abortion is legal, following the 1973 Supreme Court‟s decision in Roe v. Wade. Consequently, the anti-abortion movement has not ceased in its effort to either overturn Roe or undermine it. The anti-abortion movement‟s goal and strategy, according to Faux (2001), consists of three parts: (a) to work for a Constitutional amendment that would declare that a fetus is a human person; (b) to lobby and pressure state legislatures to pass restrictive abortion laws; and (c) to seek legislation on a national level that would limit abortion funding. In October 1973, Republican Senator Jesse Helms from North Carolina added an amendment to a Foreign Aid bill that prohibited the use of American funds for abortions and abortificients (Faux, 2001 and Blanchard, 1994). According to Faux (2001, p. 319), the Helms‟ bill “passed the Senate by a vote of 54-42.” A few years later, a Republican Senator Henry Hyde from Illinois introduced bills that limited federal funding for abortions; there were eventually passed in Congress (Halva-Neubauer, 1993, p. 169 and Blanchard, 1994). The crux of the Hyde amendment limited the use of public funds (Medicaid) “for abortions for women on welfare” (Tatalovich and Schier, 1993, p.109). However, in 1980, public funding for abortion was extended to include cases of incest, rape and life endangerment of a pregnant woman (Faux, 2001, Sernett, 1984 and Blanchard, 1994) 30 Suffice to say that while the anti-abortion movement did not and has not succeeded in its bid for a Constitutional amendment as evidenced in the 1983 defeat of the Hatch-Eagton Human Life Amendment bill, it succeeded in limiting public funding for abortion via the Helms amendment of 1973 (Faux, 2001 and Blanchard 1994), and most importantly, the Hyde amendment of 1977 (Nossiff, 1995, Strickland, 1995, pp. 104-111 and Segers, 1995). It is noteworthy that this limiting of the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortion for poor women was upheld by the Supreme Court in its 1980 Harris v. McRae decision (Strickland, 1995, pp. 104-105). It is pertinent to mention that the fate of the Hyde amendment literally hangs in the balance due to the recent passage of a comprehensive Healthcare Bill on March 21, 2010, which nullified the amendment. However, President Barak Obama promised to use an Executive Order to restore the former Hyde amendment. In a critique of the Hyde amendment upheld in the Supreme Court‟s Harris v. McRae, Petchesky (1981, p.209), believes that the exclusion of Medicaid funding for abortion to women on welfare not only denied to women a right to obtain an abortion but was also “an attack on the idea of decent health care as a basic human need which the society should meet regardless of people‟s ability to pay.” Arguing that a denial of public funding under Medicaid for indigent women seeking abortion was contrary to the Roe decision, Perry (1980, p. 1114) contends that the Court‟s decision in Harris was “plainly wrong.” Spitzer (1987) also makes a case that the idea of restricting public funding for abortion favored the cause of pro-life movement. According to Spitzer (1987, p.40), in 31 1977, 25 percent of all abortions performed in the State of New York was funded with state Medicaid money. The Leeway to State Abortion Policy Various scholars believe that it was the U.S. Supreme Court‟s decisions in Webster v. Missouri Reproductive Health Services (1989) and the Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) that literally opened a window for the state legislatures to pass many regulations and restrictions on abortion (Jelen, 1992b, McCarthy, 1989, Tribe, 1990, Blanchard, 1994 and Dodson and Burnbauer, 1990). The 1989 Webster ruling implied that any “reasonably designed” (Webster, 109 S. Ct 3058) abortion restriction by any state that “permissibly furthers the state‟s interest in protecting human life” (Webster, 109 S. Ct 3057) would be constitutionally legal (McCarthy, 1989). In the Webster, the Supreme Court upheld its Roe finding that a woman had a right to obtain abortion based on the privacy reason. Nevertheless, the Webster Court conferred on the state the right to regulate and restrict abortion, regardless of the trimester period (Blanchard, 1994). Thus, while Roe gave a woman the right to choose to terminate her pregnancy in the first trimester (Rodman, 1991 and Hansen 1980), Webster eroded that right. The Webster decision gave state legislature leeway to enact legislation to impede access to abortion. The Supreme Court, via the Webster decision, permitted (a) tests for fetal viability before abortion could be carried out; (b) physicians to require parental consent in the case of minors and an alternative process such as judicial bypass; (c) the banning of the use of public funds and public facilities to perform abortions; and (4) regulation of clinics where abortions are performed (Blanchard, 1994, p. 35). 32 Consequently, Cook, Jelen and Wilcox (1993) contend that while the Webster decision caused states such as Utah and Louisiana to make restrictive abortion policies to proscribe abortions, other states passed moderate restrictive abortion laws and still others passed laws that affirmed a woman‟s right to choose to terminate her pregnancy in the light of Roe. McCarthy (1989) argues that by upholding a Missouri abortion law that prohibited the use of public facilities for abortions and banned public employees from rendering non-therapeutic abortion services to women, the Webster decision literally reshaped abortion politics. Hence, abortion became a salient issue in many state elections in 1989 and 1990 (Tribe, 1990 and Dodson and Burnbauer, 1990). Jelen (1992) believes that the Webster decision further caused an effective politicization of the abortion issue, since a variety of restrictions were made by various states. Further, another decision by the Supreme Court allowed the State of Pennsylvania to impose restrictions on legal abortion in the Planed Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992). The ruling encouraged some states, including Louisiana, to enact restrictive abortion laws (Cook, Jelen and Wilcox, 1993 and Borgmann and Weiss, 2003). In Casey, the Court upheld the Roe decision, but once again allowed states to enact restrictive abortion policies, as long as the policies no impose an “undue burden” on women who seek abortion (Cook, Jelen and Wilcox, 1993). The vagueness of the “undue burden” standard, nonetheless, does not bar state legislatures from making restrictive abortion policies, which started with the Webster decision. Furthermore, in the Casey decision the Court also declares that, “the essential holding of Roe v. Wade should be retained and once again reaffirmed, [also]…the fact 33 that a law…has the incidental effect of making it more difficult or more expensive to procure abortion cannot be enough to invalidate it” (Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 846, 847 [1992]). Evidently, the Casey decision was a victory for the antiabortion advocates, although these had hoped that the Court would overturn the1973 Roe decision by the Casey decision (Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996). However, some scholars contend that the Casey decision was a no win victory for either pro-life or pro-choice advocates, since neither Roe was overturned nor the right of the state legislatures to regulate abortion was quashed (Borgmann and Weiss, 2003 and Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996). Finally, it is worth mentioning the diminished political opportunities of the opponents to abortion rights following the election of pro-choice advocate President Bill Clinton in 1992. It is also worth noting that Supreme Court appointees by a pro-life President Ronald Reagan were instrumental to the 1989 Webster decision, which consequently led to the emergence of state-level restrictive abortion policies. In the same vein, the anti-abortion activists apparently were alarmed that, a Supreme Court reconstituted by the Clinton appointees would diminish what pro-life advocates had achieved. However, suffice it to say that the Webster and the Casey decisions effectively caused some erosion to Roe‟s right to legal abortion, since restrictive abortion laws flourish in several states of the Union. State Abortion Policy In the light of the pluralist nature of the American society and its constitutional federal system of government, interest groups develop and influence public policymaking 34 through multiple arenas of power, (Truman, 1971, and Loomis and Cigler, 1991). Hence, having failed to achieve their goals through the federal arenas of power in the Supreme Court and Congress, one is not surprised that the anti-abortion movement protested legal abortion in the state legislatures. Contextually, the governmental institutions of the Supreme Court, Congress, and the States became what Greenwald (1977, p. 305) refers to as the “countervailing centers of power.” Thus, pro-life advocates have always sought to influence abortion policy through the countervailing centers of power in American politics. As aforementioned, the anti-abortion movement suffered a defeat with the Roe decision legalizing abortion; nevertheless, that development propelled the group to organize and countermobilize. Also, the movement suffered a second upset when the Hatch-Eagton Human Life Amendment bill was defeated in Congress. Moreover, the prolife advocates‟ call for a Constitutional Convention to cause an amendment on the legal abortion was stalled when a two-thirds majority of the fifty states could not convene (Faux, 2001). Although the pro-life advocates were able to stop the public funding for abortion under Medicaid via the Hyde amendment, the pro-life felt that the chance was slim in attaining a political victory through the federal institutions. Hence, the state legislature provided an opportune arena for the pro-life advocates to press for the passage of restrictive abortion laws. It is pertinent to mention here that further discussion of the post-Roe state abortion policies is aided by Halva-Neubauer‟s (1993) scholarly work on the subject, and the Guttmacher Institute‟s (2010) updated and comprehensive research, State Policies in 35 Brief. This research also incorporates Patton‟s (2003) methodical categorization of the post-Roe state abortion policies into three parts: (a) fetus-related policies, (b) womanrelated policies, and (c) provider-related policies. Suffice it to say that a discussion on the various restrictions on abortion is made here with particular elaboration on the ones adopted by the State of Louisiana. Woman-related abortion policy The state abortion policies directly pertaining to a woman seeking abortion include: (a) public funding, (b) insurance restrictions, (c) informed consent, (d) waiting period, (e) spousal notification, (f) parental involvement, (g)”partial-birth” abortion bans, and (h) state-mandated counseling (Guttmacher Institute, 2010 and Halva-Neubauer, 1993). Public funding. Restrictions on the state funding of abortion under Medicaid was first implemented in 1977, following the Hyde amendment that prohibits the use of federal funds for abortions, except in cases of incest, rape, or life endangerment of a woman (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Some states, including Louisiana, follow the federal law that forbids funding of abortion, except in the cases of incest, rape, or life endangerment of a woman (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Insurance restriction. State insurance laws prohibit insurance companies from offering coverage for abortion, but allows them to offer coverage that includes maternity benefits to women (Halva-Neubauer, 1993). Thus, some states restrict insurance coverage of abortion in private insurance policies, and others restrict abortion coverage in insurance policies and for public employees (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). 36 Counseling and informed consent. The informed consent policy requires the physician to avail the woman seeking abortion detailed information about the gestational age of the fetus, fetal development throughout pregnancy, the risk of abortion, and the availability of some public assistance if she carries the pregnancy to term (Guttmacher, Institute, 2010 and Halva-Neubauer, 1993). Unlike some other states, the Louisiana abortion policy requires that a detailed of informed consent policy be given to a woman seeking abortion (Guttmacher, 2010). Waiting period. It is a law in many states, including Louisiana, that a woman seeking abortion should wait for at least 24 hours between the time she receives a state-mandated counseling and the abortion procedure. Parental involvement. Many states require parental notification and consent if the woman seeking abortion is a minor. The State of Louisiana requires parental consent of a minor (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). “Partial-birth” abortion. Some states, including Louisiana, have legislation banning “partial-birth abortions” except in a case of life endangerment of the woman, while in some few states, the ban does not include a health exception (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). It is pertinent to note that the bans on “partial-birth” stem from the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, although the Act does not include a health exception (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Fetus-related abortion policy The state abortion policies that directly pertain to the fetus include: (1) gestational limits, and (b) post- viability standard of care. 37 Gestational limits. Many states have abortion laws, including Louisiana, that ban abortions after fetal viability, except in the cases of life and health endangerment of a woman (Guttamacher Institute, 2010). Also, most states require the presence of a second physician during an abortion in a case of fetal viability. Post-viability standard of care. The state abortion laws concerning post-viability standard of care require the involvement of a second physician during an abortion, whose purpose should be to protect the life of the fetus (Halva-Neubauer, 1993). Provider-related abortion policy The provider-related abortion legislation in the states include: (a) conscience clauses, (b) abortion reports, and (c) physician and hospital requirements. Conscience clauses. Most states have policies that explicitly permit medical personnel or certain institutions to refuse to provide or participate in abortion without fear of retribution (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). While some states permit some medical institutions to refuse to perform abortion, some allow individual health institutions to refuse to provide abortion services. The State of Louisiana permits medical institutions and individual health care providers to refuse to provide abortion services (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Halva-Neubaeur (1993) contends that most conscience clauses were immediate protests of the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade by some states. Abortion reports. It is a policy of most states that hospitals, clinics and physician should provide regular and confidential reports to the state (Guttmacher Institute, 2010). Finally, physician and hospital requirements are also among the provider-related abortion policies in some states. Thus, many states, including Louisiana, have a policy 38 that abortion be performed by a licensed physician. Some states even require abortion services to be performed in a hospital after a specified point in pregnancy, such as the second trimester, 24 weeks, 90 days, 12 weeks, and others (Guttmacher, 2010). Thus, the foregoing literature review on the state response to the federal abortion policy shows that state legislatures have, with out a doubt, become crucial arenas of power for the pro-life movement to advance restrictive abortion policies in the American polity. Chapter III THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Under the backdrop of Blanchard‟s (1994, p. 8) contention “that no single theory is sufficient to explain the complexities of any social movement,” the theoretical framework for this study is defined by two theories: (a) deontological ethical theory, and (b) social movement theory. The former is employed to ascertain a compelling belief, ideology, or morality of the Louisiana Right to Life movement, while the latter is used to investigate the structural organization, strategies, resources, influence, and success of the pro-life movement in the State of Louisiana. Also, the raison d’etre for this „multiple framework‟ is informed by voluminous evidence in the reviewed literature, attesting that advocacy for pro-life is founded on morality, coupled withthe dynamic influence of social movement in public policymaking. Suffice it to say that the research questions and the open-ended interview questions for the study also reflect the chosen theoretical perspectives. Deontological Ethical Theory The anti-abortion or pro-life movement in the United States consistently protested the legal abortion, based on the principle of the sanctity of human life. Based on the belief that life begins at the moment of conception (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993), the pro-life advocates contend that the life of the unborn child belongs to God and therefore, it is wrong and unlawful to procure an abortion – the act being tantamount to murder or killing. Deontological ethics give absolute primacy to moral rule, and are rule-based. 40 As a scholar of deontological ethics, Lake (1986) contends that at the root of the anti-abortion movement‟s indefatigability and seeming imperviousness to compromise may be found a meta-ethical perspective that prefers a deontological ethical theory to a teleological perspective. Thus, we see that while deontological ethics are concerned with “the threshold between absolute right and wrong,” teleological ethics “acknowledge gradations of right and wrong, from heinous to unacceptable to allowable to saintly” (Lake, 1986, p. 481). Lake (1986) further informs us that the pro-life advocates, while adhering to the tenets of deontology, would accuse the pro-choice activists of being guided by teleological ethics, known to be fundamentally utilitarian. Further, Lake (1986, p. 481) maintains that, “deontological ethics are concerned with determining the rightness or wrongness of actions, while teleological ethics are concerned with determining the goodness and badness of actions.” Lake (1986) further offers a classical example to explicate these seemingly equivalent determinations of the two philosophies (deontological ethics versus teleological ethics). According to Lake (1986), “suppose that a particular abortion would produce, on balance, the greatest good for the greatest number (the traditional utilitarian criterion) by protecting maternal physical and mental health, and by reducing overpopulation and society‟s welfare burden…in such [a] case deontologists argue that obtaining an abortion would be wrong regardless of the good produced because of the existence of duties to keep promises and obey the law that exert[s] a prior and more fundamental claim upon our judgment.” On the other hand, deontological ethical theory contends that the concepts of right and wrong ought to be measured by their conformity with moral rules or laws. Hence, in the light of 41 the deontologist‟s notion of ethics as connoting the rightness or wrongness of actions, it becomes wrong for one to disobey moral rules or laws and a right thing for one to obey them. Logically, the stance of the pro-life movement on the issue of abortion stems from the deontological moral law perspective that enjoins “do not kill” (Lake, 1986, p. 482). Thus, abortion is wrong because it tantamount to the killing of the unborn innocent child. It is noteworthy that the deontological perspective corroborates researchers Kelley, Evans and Headey (1993) in a view of deductive and authoritative modes of moral reasoning. The deductive mode is also called the „regular mode,‟ because it is rule based and it is concerned with the derivation of morally correct action in particular situations from general principles that are held to be universally valid (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993). The deductive mode of moral reasoning contends that God created the world and everything in it, including human beings and their reproductive system (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993). The deductive mode further contends that God‟s creation including reproduction is good and any attempt to interfere with it in any way, including abortion, would be wrong and contrary to God‟s design (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993). Although the deductive mode of moral reasoning is in consonance with the Christian belief system, Kelley, Evans and Headey, (1993) believe that “the chain of reasoning is a common one,” that produces and sustains opposition to abortion. Another mode of moral reasoning related to the deontological theory is the authoritative mode. The authoritative mode of reasoning invokes the tenets of revered moral authority, such as the Ten Commandments, or the Pope (Kelley, Evans and 42 Headey, 1993). The authoritative mode of moral reasoning is evidenced in the Catholic hierarchy‟s persuasion of the members of the church on the morally correct stance to take on the issue of abortion (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993). While the Ten Commandments remain an outstanding and an incontrovertible moral authority, church leaders also persuade their members to make correct and right choices on issues contrary to Judeo Christian teachings, faith, and morals. Hence, based on a fundamental reliance on absolute moral rule, it is not difficult for one to understand the logical connectedness of the deductive and authoritative moral reasoning within the deontological ethical theory. Furthermore, under the backdrop of the deontological idea of an absolute moral law imperative, anti-abortion advocates hold that by virtue of the violation of the moral law against killing, “abortion is intrinsically wrong…and always wrong (Lake, 1986). Suffice it to say that this anti-abortion stance not only inhibits compromise but also calls to question the rightness or wrongness of abortion in the cases of life endangerment of the woman, rape, and incest. Social Movement Theory Scholars of social movements contend that while a burgeoning scholarship on the civil rights movements of the 1960s saw the salient development of resource mobilization and political process models, the studies on pro-abortion and anti-abortion movements initiated the emergence of research on the dynamics of social movements and countermovements (Staggenborg, 1991 and Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996). Blasi (1989) provides some descriptive characteristics of a social movement. According to Blasi 43 (1989, p. 52), social movements usually involve (a) beliefs or opinions that call for social change, (b) actions which support and sustain a social change process, (c) intentions and motives that promote the change in question, (d) interconnections among the actions and preferences of a particular population in a society, and (e) the participation of non-elites. Evidence from the reviewed literature on the anti-abortion movement to date suggests that Blasi‟s (1989) descriptive definition of a social movement reflects the features of the anti-abortion movement, except that the movement has a historically elite presence. However, the inclusion of non-elite participation in Blasi‟s (1989) definitional characteristics of social movements was perhaps informed by the unit of analysis of his study, reflecting a humble and primitive early Christianity. The anti-abortion movement is studied here in the framework of a social movement theory, because it is a consummate social movement. The Supreme Court‟s decision on Roe v. Wade (1973), consigned the anti-abortion activism to a position of a countermovement, pro-life activism in the United States as a social movement. Currently, as a countermovement, the status quo of legal abortion still holds. Moreover, a countermovement is also social movement (McAdam, McCarthy and Zald, 1988, Lo, 1982, Meyer and Staggenborg, 1996 and Mottl, 1980). Furthermore, Lo (1982, p. 108) defines a countermovement as a movement that “mobilizes against another movement.” It is unarguable that the pro-life movement in the United States has continued to mobilize citizens and like-minded anti-abortionists against the pro-choice movement since the latter‟s historic success in the 1973 Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion. In the light of Wilson‟s (1973, p. 8) view of a social movement 44 as “a conscious, collective, organized attempt” to advance a social change, another social movement scholar, Mottl (1980, p. 620), defines a countermovement as “a conscious, collective, organized attempt to resist or reverse social change.” In like manner, Meyer and Staggenborg (1996) employ Tarrow‟s (1994, pp. 3-4) view of a social movement as a movement that consists of “collective challenges by people with common purposes and solidarity in a sustained interaction with elites, opponents, and authorities,” to define a counter movement. Hence, according to Meyer and Staggenborg (1996, p. 1631), a countermovement is a movement that makes contrary claims simultaneously with those of the original movement.” In the scope of this study, as aforementioned in Chapter One, the anti-abortion or pro-life movement is discussed as a countermovement, yet whether the pro-abortion or pro-choice movement is the “original movement” in the age-long abortion issue may be contestable. Also, Tilly (1984) traces the evolution of social movement as currently perceived to the development of modern nation-states as a means of pressing claims. With regard to a countermovement, Meyer and Staggemborg (1996) are of the view that the notion of a countermovement came into being as sociologists and scholars of social movements recognized that the forms and strategies of the opposing movements of the 1960s were similar to those of organized social movements of the era. It is evidenced in history that the United States of the 1960s was replete with social movements and countermovements inclusive of anti-war protests, feminist and anti-feminist movements, anti-nuclear weapon protests, civil rights movement, anti-busing movement, and others. 45 A social movement theory suggests that movements and countermovement constitute a salient force for social change in a polity, inasmuch as movements influence public policy (Burstein, 1999, Campbell and Allen, 1994, McAdam, McCarthy and Zald, 1988 and Burstein and Linton, 2002). Thus, under the backdrop of the dynamics of the social movement theory, Mottl‟s (1980) six aspects countermovement forms are also employed to guide this study on the anti-abortion movement in Louisiana. The six aspects of the forms taken by countermovement include: (1) leadership, (2) organization, (3) ideology, (4) strategies and tactics, (5) rank and file, and (6) countermovement life cycle (Mottl, 1980). The presence of strong leadership represents one of the main life-wires of any social movement. Mottl (1980) is of the idea that leaders of a countermovement are often elites who come from existing institutions with the quest to resist a certain social change. The legalization of abortion with the Roe decision, over the past three decades, has witnessed a social change that slices across the moral, legal, and religious fabric of the American society. Kelly (1989) argues that it was American Catholic bishops who acted first, amidst the abortion controversy that the Roe decision stirred. Thus, the Roman Catholic Church in the United States used its state conferences to organize early opposition to legal abortion and the pro-abortion movement. Historically too, many scholars are of view that the leadership of the anti-abortion movement as a counter movement has its origins with the leadership of the Roman Catholicism, and later, the Protestant fundamentalism (Neitz, 1981, Merton, 1981, Petersen and Mauss, 1976 and Granberg, 1978). 46 Further, Mottl (1980) is of the notion that countermovement, like social movement, forms widespread networks of organizational affiliations that consistently press for a common claim. The anti-abortion movement in the United States for instance, has many affiliates in almost every state of the federation, irrespective of the liberal abortion stance of any state. For example, in the State of Louisiana there exist fifteen chapters of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, together with branches of the Student for Life organization in university and college campuses, as well as some church pro-life organizations. Furthermore, Mottl (1980, p. 627) encapsulates the ideology of a countermovement, like any social movement, to include the ideas about the goals of the movement, how to attain those goals, and the symbolic resources of the countermovement. The goal of the pro-life movement, as a countermovement to legal abortion and the pro-choice movement in the U.S, is to make abortion illegal. Thus, in the light of its religious belief that life begins at the moment of conception, members of the pro-life movement have always employed the principle of the sanctity of human life, calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Roe decision. Kelly (1989, p. 230) notes that the central aim of the pro-life movement is to “better structure the public conscience in the abortion controversy,” thereby advancing a public policy that respects the sanctity of human life. Suffice it to say that anti-abortion activists have always invoked the rhetoric of morality and conscience to maintain that legal abortion is wrong and tantamount to murder or homicide. 47 Another salient characteristic aspect of a social movement is that members of a countermovement employ various strategies and tactics to advance their goals. The strategies could either be institutional, such as stating their case in a court of law (the judiciary), pressing for a constitutional amendment through the Congress or the state legislature, or engaging in a non-violent protest, or an extra-institutional means such as a violent protest. Suffice it to say that unlike the mainstream anti-abortion movement, the National Right to Life Committee and its state affiliate, Operation Rescue, formed in 1984, employ violent direct action in protesting legal abortion in the nation. Furthermore, Mottl (1980) opines that a family-related countermovement, such as an anti-gay activism or an anti-abortion movement, is always active in mobilizing women. It is arguable that gender and or demographics make a difference in the support for either pro-life or pro-choice movement. Suffice it to say that the anti-abortion movement mobilizes both the elite, as well as the rank and file, in the society. Finally, the characteristic stages of a countermovement life cycle include: (a) intra-institutional and electoral resistance to change; (b) mobilization of open protest against change if the prospect for change seems inevitable; (c) the emergence of violent protest when goals are impeded; and (d) the process re-institutionalization if the countermovement succeeds or, open resistance to change if the movement is repressed (Mottl, 1980). As aforementioned, Meyer and Staggenborg (1996) contend that research on the dynamics of movements and countermovement can be credited to studies on the opposing movements of the abortion issue. Hence, this work incorporates the foregoing, 48 relevant models in studying the pro-life movement in Louisiana, following the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the United States. Chapter IV METHODOLOGY An elaborate description of the research methodology employed in this study of the Louisiana Right to Life (LARTL) movement is presented in this chapter. Thus, the research design for the study, the data collection procedure, measurement instrument, sources of data for the study, how the data are collected and analyzed and finally, what constitutes the validity of the study are all discussed in this section. As aforementioned in Chapter One, the research design for this study utilizes a qualitative approach to investigate the strategic activities of the anti-abortion movement in the State of Louisiana. The main sources for data are an open-ended interview, documents, and archival records. Research Design The research design for this work utilizes a qualitative approach of a case study to examine the strategic activities of the anti-abortion movement in the State of Louisiana, the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. A face-to-face open-ended interview of the key leaders of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation as well as documentary information of the organization, serve as the primary sources for data collection. The rationale for utilizing a qualitative approach for this study is to gain an in-depth understanding of the anti-abortion movement from leading advocates of the pro-life movement in Louisiana (Merriam, 1998 and Patton, 2002). A qualitative approach allows the researcher to understand the phenomena from the perspective of the interview respondents, and an opportunity to gain a profound 50 insight into how people construct meaning from real life experiences and activities (Merriam, 1998). Suffice it to say that the end result of this qualitative research as discussed in Chapters Five and Six comprises a thorough description that focuses on the meaning and understanding of the activities and influence of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in Louisiana, in regard to pro-life goals. Data Collection Multiple sources of data collection are employed in this study. The sources include interviews, documents, archival records, books, and journal articles. The saliency of data corroboration in data gathering methods calls for multiple sources of data collection in a qualitative research (Glesne, 1997). Also, Yin (1994, pp. 78-101) believes that evidence for qualitative research in case studies may come from six sources, inclusive of interviews, documents, archival records, physical artifact, direct observation, and participant observation. Although not all sources of data collection are necessarily relevant, the strength and reliability of qualitative study rest on the use of multiple sources of data (Yin, 1994 and Stake, 1995). Some relevant books and scholarly journal articles have served as sources of information as evidenced in the reviewed extant literature and the theoretical framework of the study. Suffice it to say that the importance of such sources is inexhaustible as seen in upcoming chapters. However, it is worth mentioning here that the study included sixteen participants or respondents that were individually interviewed between May 6 and 28, 2010, as shown in Appendix B. While the researcher interviewed most of the participants in offices, two participants were interviewed in residential homes and three others were interviewed in 51 public places such as the restaurant, coffee shop, and Capitol chapel. All participants read the Informed Consent Form as in Appendix E and volunteered their identities to be used in the study by the researcher. Hence, real names instead of pseudonyms are used in this study. Out of the sixteen interview participants, nine of the participants are members of the executive level leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL) that included the movement‟s organizational tripartite structure, the State Board of Directors, the Executive Council and the Staff. Also, out of the other seven interview participants, one is the executive director of Bioethics Defense Fund (BDF), who assists the LARTL in drafting pro-life proposals; two of the interview participants are executive directors of pro-life Pregnancy Centers in Louisiana; and four others were representatives of some church denominations in Louisiana. An open-ended interview is an invaluable source of data in a qualitative study of this nature because the method enables the researcher to “ask key respondents for the facts of a matter as well as for the respondents‟ opinions about events” (Yin, 1994, p. 84). An open-ended interview format nonetheless availed the researcher opportunity to ask the participant to propose his or her own insights into some certain developments on the subject under discussion. Evidently, agreement to such a proposition in some instances serves as a basis for further inquiry (Yin, 1194). In conducting the open-ended interview, listening to the respondent proved of value in the light of Stake (1995). In addition to listening and taking notes, the researcher recorded the interview with the permission of the respondent. However, one does not need to write verbatim the responses of the interviewee; what is meant is more important (Stake, 1995). 52 Other sources of data for this study were documents. Documentary information about the Louisiana Right to Life movement such as press releases, letters, progress reports, and announcements were invaluable in the study. Importantly, documents both augment and corroborate evidence from other sources. Further, Yin (1994) informs us that the importance of documentary information in a qualitative study include: (a) for verification of correct spellings and names of persons, organizations, or things that might have been mentioned in the course of the interview; (b) to make inferences; and (c) corroborate data from other sources. Such inferences should be used only as leads to further investigation rather than as definitive results which may become false clues. Also, in the light of Yin (1994), libraries and reference centers also provided relevant documentary information on this topical abortion issue as well as existing opposition movements, i.e., the pro-life and pro-choice movements. Yin (1994) contends that the utility of archival records varies from case study to case study and while their importance can be profound in some studies, they may be of only “passing relevance” in other studies. Simply, the utility of archival records in this study was limited to ascertaining the physical addresses and telephone numbers of some of the interview participants. Hence, archival records were sources for data collection that were of passing relevance in this study. This is because besides the use of the telephone listings of the prospective interviewees were utilized to contact them with prior information about the subject matter of the research. Other archival records such as survey data, maps, and charts (Yin, 1994) were not relevant in this qualitative study. 53 Instrumentation Research method scholars maintain that the researcher in a qualitative study becomes the instrument in the research as he or she collects the relevant data to interpret or analyzes in the light of his or her reason and experience (Patton, 2002, Creswell, 2003 and Merriam, 1998). Thus, in the light of Patton (2002), as the measurement tool in this study, my credibility contributed to the findings of the research work (Patton, 2002). However, my goal was to maintain a lack of bias in the course of data collection and analysis, irrespective of the nature of the qualitative methodology. It is worth mentioning that I am a novice in a research of this magnitude. However, I completed a full semester course on Techniques of Data Collection & Analysis (Fall 2005) under Dr. Christopher Hunte, a sociologist at Southern University in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. At the end of the course, my work entitled A Field Research on the Feeding Condition of Prison Inmates: A Case Study of the Inmates of Vermilion Parish Correctional Center was adjudged one of the best papers and subsequently selected for presentation at the 32nd Annual Meeting of the National Association of African-American Studies and the Mid-South Association in Lafayette, Louisiana (October 25-28, 2006). Also, I took some classes in the research methods field in my doctoral course work. Furthermore, besides the relevant research methodology courses taken in the course of my academic pursuit, I also completed three qualitative research works as partial fulfillments for the award of the accompanying degrees. The qualitative works include; (1) The Inevitability and the Outcome of Inner Contradiction in Karl Marx 54 (1991); (2) A Study of the Liberation Theology of Gustavo Gutierrez in the Light of the Teaching of the Church (1995); and (3) An Analysis of the Importance of the Primary Base of Support in Deracialization Theory (2006). The latest qualitative study was nominated for a national award, the 2007 CHBGS/UMI Distinguished Thesis Award. However, it is worthy of note that my research weaknesses abound as I still seek for a fair grasp of research methodologies. Hence, in the course of this research, I was humble and docile enough to heed to the academic advice of the members of my dissertation committee. Data Analysis and Interpretation Patton (2002) informs us that the process of a qualitative analysis and interpretation serves to transform the collected data into findings. The analysis and interpretation of the collected data for this study of the Louisiana Right to Life movement is done in the light of Creswell‟s (2003) guideline for qualitative data analysis and interpretation. First, I read all the collected data in order to have an in-depth “general sense” of the information and then reflected on their meaning before assigning preliminary codes. Glesne (1999, p. 135) informs us that “coding is a progressive process of sorting and defining those scraps of collected data.” Also, Schwandt (2000) describes the system of coding as a procedure in which a qualitative researcher disaggregates the data, breaks them down into manageable segments, and identifies or names the segments. The coding process is a means of developing categories or themes from the data; hence, (Creswell, 2003) informs us that a detailed analysis begins with a coding process. Thus, I 55 used the coding to generate some themes shown in Chapter Five that deal with the findings. Second, bearing in mind that the generated themes or categories are the ones that appear as major findings in a qualitative study, the themes are supported with divers relevant quotations and specific evidence from the interview and document data. Third, the themes and the description of the findings are “represented” in a qualitative narrative. Suffice it to say that in the light of Creswell‟s (2003) advice, a detailed discussion of the themes is also made and thus connected into the larger theoretical perspectives of the study. The final step in the qualitative data analysis, according to Creswell (2003, p. 194), “involves making an interpretation or meaning of the data.” Under the backdrop of my individual understanding of the subject matter of the study, the work is given a personal interpretation. In other words, the interpretation involves “lessons” I have learned from the study (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). At this juncture, it is also important to mention that a comparative analysis of the findings is made with the information in the reviewed literature and the extant contextual theories. A qualitative study of a countermovement such as the anti-abortion movement, one that is at the crux of the topical and controversial issue of abortion, will no doubt be interpreted in a manner that will elicit policy recommendations or changes in the society. Hence, the research and public policy implications of the study and some recommendations for future research are presented in Chapter Six. 56 Research Validity It is unarguable that the concept of validity defines the strength of a qualitative study (Creswell, 2003), and validation of findings literally run the gamut of a qualitative research process. The idea of validity is synonymous with the terms such as “credibility,” “trustworthiness,” and “authenticity” (Creswell, 2003). In traditional, quantitative research for example, statistical procedures are employed to ensure validity and reliability of the data (Creswell, 2003). Instead of the statistical imperative of the quantitative method, a qualitative researcher determines significance via trustworthiness (Patton, 2002). Thus, the researcher employs validation to check the trustworthiness, credibility, and accuracy of his or her findings. Creswell (2003, p. 196) suggests eight methods of validation in a qualitative study that include: triangulation, member-checking, peer debriefing, clarification of bias, using richly, thick description, presenting negative or discrepant information, and spending a prolonged time in the field. In this study the researcher employed two strategies of validation: triangulation and clarification of bias. The sociologist Babbie (2004, pp.112-113) defines triangulation as “the use of several different research methods to test the same findings.” Other research method scholars identify four types of triangulation that include: data triangulation – the triangulation of data source, analyst or investigator triangulation – triangulation by more than one person, 57 theory triangulation – triangulation of perspectives on the same qualitative data and, methodological triangulation – triangulation of methods (Yin, 1994 and Patton, 2002). Yin (1994) believes that triangulation can address the potential problem of construct validity, because the multiple sources of data essentially provide multiple examination of the same phenomenon. Yin (1994, p.33) defines construct validity as, “establishing correct operational measure for the concepts being measure.” Triangulation is a valuable, qualitative, research strategy. In order to ensure validity or trustworthiness in this study, data and theory triangulations are employed. Thus, both the data sources (open-ended interviews and documents) and the data are triangulated to build themes for research analysis. Evidently, the data from varied sources are used to support, corroborate, or negate the theoretical perspectives of the study and the extant theories in the reviewed literature. Finally, another strategy of validation that is employed in this study is the clarification of my bias as a qualitative researcher. Glesne (1999, p. 151) believes that “continual alertness to a [researcher‟s] own biases [and] subjectivity assists in producing more trustworthy interpretation.” Simply, I am a pro-life advocate doing a research on the activities and influence of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in the State of Louisiana in post-Roe v. Wade era. Chapter V FINDINGS Participant’s Profile As aforementioned in Chapter Four, this study included sixteen participants that were individually interviewed between May 6 and 28, 2010, as shown in Appendix B. While the researcher interviewed most of the participants in their offices, only two participants were interviewed in their residential homes, and three others were interviewed in public places such as the restaurant, coffee shop, and the Capitol chapel. All participants read the Informed Consent Form in Appendix E and they volunteered that their real identities should be used in the study by the researcher. Hence, real names are used in this study and not pseudonyms. Further, out of the sixteen interview participants, nine are members of the executive level leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL) that make up the movement‟s organizational tripartite structure – the State Board of Directors, the Executive Council and the Staff. Of the other seven interview participants, one is the executive director of Bioethics Defense Fund (BDF), who assists LARTL in drafting prolife proposals, two of the interview participants are executive directors of pro-life Pregnancy Centers in Louisiana, and four others are leaders of pro-life advocacy in some church denominations in Louisiana. The explicit religious connotations of the abortion controversy, as evidenced in the reviewed literature in Chapter Two, calls for the inclusion of leading church personnel in the study. Moreover, church leaders are 59 influential as opinion and political leaders on the issue of abortion (Ammermen, 1987 and Jelen, 1992b). The following are brief profiles of the participants. William S. Watkins is the President of Louisiana Right to Life and a former President of a local chapter, Terrebonne-Lafourche Right to Life Committee, Louisiana. Mr. William has been the President of the LARTL movement for more than two years, and he is also an attorney at law who practices with the firm Duval, Funderburk, Sundbery, Lovell & Watkins. Celie Clark is the Vice President of Louisiana Right to Life and a co-founder of the Terrebonne-Lafourche chapter of Right to Life. Mrs. Clark, who has been in the prolife movement since 1980, also served as the President of LARTL and was the Chairperson for the National Right to Life Convention that was held in New Orleans in 1987. Mrs. Clark is also the Director of Religious Education in St. Peter‟s Catholic Church in Covington, Louisiana. Robert E. Winn is the Founder and Treasurer of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. A retired practicing attorney at law, Mr. Winn founded LARTL in 1970 while practicing law in New Orleans. He was once the President of LARTL and the New Orleans chapter of the Right to Life and also a former Delegate to the National Right to Life Board of Directors. Peggy Kenny has remained the Executive Secretary of the Louisiana Right to Life since 1985. Mrs. Kenny has been actively involved in both the Louisiana State and the national legislatures regarding abortion issues for more than twenty years. She is also the 60 Director of the Louisiana Pro-Life Council in the Archdiocese of New Orleans, Louisiana. Sharon Ryan Rodi is the Louisiana Right to Life Delegate to the National Right to Life Board of Directors. Michelle Gorney is the At-Large Director of the Louisiana Right to Life movement and a founding member of St. Tammany Right to Life. A persuasive pro-life speaker, Mrs. Gorney is a dedicated Hospice nurse and has been in the LARTL movement for more than twenty years. Dr. W. Al Krotoski is the At-Large Director of the Louisiana Right to Life and Medical Advisor for the movement. A former president of the LARTL, Dr. Krotoski has severally testified before the Louisiana State Legislature on pro-life issues. Dr. Krotoski has been actively pro-life since his medical school days, as a co-founder and President of The Hippocratic Resource a statewide organization of health professionals. Members of the organization practice their medical profession in the light of the solemn dictates of the Hippocratic Oath. Krotoski is also the medical advisor for the Louisiana Governor‟s Program on Abstinence and a member of the Baton Rouge Catholic Diocesan Respect for Life Board. A retired and renowned medical doctor and a medical scientist, Krotoski is an immunologist/immunochemist and was a 1989 Nobel Prize nominee. Benjamin Clapper is the Executive Director of Louisiana Right to Life Federation who also founded the Louisiana Students for Life (LSL) in 2005. The aim of the LSL is to educate, network, and activate pro-life students in Louisiana and the greater Southeast. Mr. Clapper has been an active pro-life advocate since his high school days and has been 61 the Executive Director of the movement for two years. A pro-life coordinator per excellence, Mr. Clapper is not only a brilliant and a successful lobbyist for LARTL movement, but also a pro-life speaker on behalf of the LARTL movement in Louisiana and the Southeast. Allison Lattie was a paid staff member and the Youth Director in the Louisiana Right to Life Federation when the researcher conducted an interview with her on May 6, 2010. However, Ms. Lattie stopped working with the Louisiana Right to Life on May 30, 2010. Dorinda C. Bordlee is an attorney at law and the Executive Director of the Bioethics Defense Fund (BDF). A leader in legal theories who drafts legislation that protects women and unborn children and a defender of such legislation in courts when the abortion industry files suits, Attorney Bordlee has been in the pro-life movement for more than fifteen years. Attorney Bordlee assists LARTL in crafting and drafting pro-life proposals in the light of the legislative goal of the pro-life movement in Louisiana. Barbara Thomas is the President and the Founder of a pro-life pregnancy care center (North Baton Rouge Women’s Help Center) in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Mrs. Thomas, who founded the Center about eighteen years ago, has been an active pro-life advocate all her life. Angie Thomas is an attorney at law and the Executive Director of a pro-life pregnancy care center (Woman’s New Life Center) in Metairie, Louisiana. Attorney Thomas, who has been pro-life all her life, has worked for the pregnancy care center for more than eight years and has been the Executive Director of the Center for two years. 62 Leslie Ellison is a representative of the leadership of Gideon Christian Fellowship International in New Orleans and the Director of the Government Apostolic Ministry on Pro-Life Issues. Karol Meynard is the Director of the Office of Pro-Life Issues for the Catholic Diocese of Lafayette, Louisiana. Mrs. Meynard who has worked for the diocese for more than twenty years has been the Director of the Office of Pro-Life for nine years. Kathy Owen is the Director of the Office of Pro-Life Issues for the Catholic Diocese of Lake Charles, Louisiana. Mrs. Owen, who has been pro-life all her life, has been the diocesan Director of the Office of Pro-Life for six years. Lastly, John L. Yeats is a Baptist Theologian and the Director of Communications for the Louisiana Baptist Convention (LBC). Dr. Yeats, who is also a pastor and a prolife lobbyist, occasionally testifies before the Louisiana State Legislature on pro-life issues. Description of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation The Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL) is an affiliate of the United States National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), and it is the mainstream pro-life movement in Louisiana. The LARTL was founded in 1970 by a renowned New Orleans Attorney, Robert E. Winn, and the movement works through legislation and education to advance and sustain the right to life in the State of Louisiana by opposing abortion, euthanasia, human cloning, and human embryonic stem cell research (ESCR). However, this investigation deals with the pro-life movement‟s educational and legislative 63 endeavors on the issue of abortion in the State of Louisiana since the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. A mainstream pro-life movement in the State, the Louisiana Right to Life has “loosely affiliate chapters” that include: (1) Terrebonne-Lafourche Right to Life Association, (2) Southeast Louisiana Right to Life, (3) Shreveport-Bossier Right to Life, (4) St. Tammany Right to Life, (5) St. Landry Right to Life, (6) Sacred Right to Life, (7) Rapids Right to Life, (8) Maurice Right to Life, (10) New Orleans Right to Life, (11) Iberia Right to Life, (12) Eunice Right to Life, (13) Bayou Right to Life, (14) Baton Rouge Right to Life, and (15) the Acadiana Right to Life Committee. According to the executive director of the Louisiana Right to Life, the chapters “are loosely affiliated to the LARTL, meaning that if we (LARTL) are sued, they wouldn‟t be sued and if they are sued, we wouldn‟t be sued. It is not legally affiliated but affiliated in just a mission....We are in the same mission and we work together for different things. So, we are affiliated in that sense” (Oral Interview with Benjamin Clapper, May 6, 2010). However, the chapters are extensions of LARTL and the National Right to Life Committee. Organizationally, LARTL has a tripartite leadership structure: (1) the State Board of Directors, (2) the Executive Council, and (3) the Staff. According to the movement‟s website, the State Board of Directors is made up of representatives from each of the Right to Life chapters in Louisiana whose function is to oversee the progress of the movement. The Executive Council is comprised of the President, Vice President, Executive Secretary, Treasurer, the Delegate to the National Right to Life Board of Directors, the At-Large Director, and Medical Advisor. The staff is comprised of the Executive Director 64 and the Youths Director who are the only paid employees of the Louisiana Right to life, while other leaders are volunteers for the movement. Thus, the members of the executive council and the staff often meet to discuss and develop the activities of the pro-life movement. Research Question One What are the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation in the State of Louisiana, and what strategies does it employ to advance those goals? Emergent Theme: The Quest for Change Research Question One investigated the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation regarding abortion policy in the State of Louisiana and the strategies the movement employs in attaining the goals. All respondents indicated that the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life movement include: (a) to work toward overturning the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court‟s decision that legalized abortion, (b) to advance anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the State of Louisiana, and (c) “to make abortion unthinkable” and “undesirable,” thereby protecting the life of the unborn child in the womb of the mother (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Research Question One also probes the pro-life movement‟s strategies for attaining the goals which, according to the respondents, include: (a) legislation and (b) education. Thus, the quest for change, the emergent theme about the goals and strategies of the Louisiana Right to Life, became apparent as the researcher learned about the functional capabilities of the leadership of the movement from the respondents and some available documents. 65 The president of the Louisiana Right to Life, William Watkins, described the goals of the movement as: To reduce the number of abortions specifically, to prevent the spread of abortion clinics; to pass pro-life legislation [in the Louisiana State Legislature]; to make it difficult for abortion to be available; to educate, to raise awareness about how illogical, illegal, and immoral abortion is. In like manner, the secretary of the movement, Peggy Kenny said: It is our everyday goal to change hearts and minds; protecting life whether in the womb or not. Abortion may always be legal. The goal is to make abortion unthinkable. That is, it becomes a non-choice…. To overturn Roe v. Wade ….Never in the history, well… other than slavery, never in the history of our nation have we given one class of people, women, the right to kill. The absolute right in law to take the life of that unwanted unborn child. Further, the executive director of the Louisiana Right to Life, Benjamin Clapper, summarized the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life and the strategies for attaining the goals as: To make abortion illegal and unthinkable through law and education. To make the Louisiana Right to Life to be a vehicle to accomplish that change. 66 Thus, while the education strategy is principally aimed at training youth to be future leaders on pro-life issues and making abortion unthinkable, the legislative strategy is geared toward advancing restrictive abortion policies in the State of Louisiana. It is worthy of mention here that the effectiveness of the strategies and the important achievements of the movement in Louisiana are given an in-depth exploration in Research Questions Three and Four. However, the optimism of the leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life that the pro-life movement is the vehicle to accomplish the change of making abortion illegal and unthinkable corroborates the characteristic goal of every social movement in the light of social movement theory. Some of the reviewed extant literature informs us that at the crux of the social movement theory is the idea to advance a change in a polity. For example, Blasi (1989) is of the view that social movements involve organized opinions and actions that call for change. Also, while Wilson (1973, p. 8) defines a social movement as “a conscious, collective, organized attempt” to advance a social change, Mottl (1980, p. 62) maintains that a countermovement is “a conscious, collective, organized attempt to resist or reverse social change.” Suffice it to say that Louisiana Right to Life is a countermovement to both the state and national pro-choice movements (NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, PPFA, etc.) and the status quo legal abortion that stemmed from the Roe v. Wade decision. Although, the respondents saw the Louisiana Right to Life movement as a means of resisting or reversing the status quo of legal abortion, the leadership of the movement is aware of the supremacy of the United States Constitution over state laws. Hence, 67 acknowledging the limits of the state‟s legal power regarding abortion policy while proffering the strategies of the pro-life movement, Mr. Clapper said: Well…You know, I talk about the goal but it gets a little trickier when you talk about strategies, because the Supreme Court doesn‟t allow us (Louisiana State) to go straight at the issue, you know, to make abortion illegal. Because the Supreme Court has said it is a Constitutional right to have an abortion and so we as a State are not able to pass laws that make abortion illegal even though Louisiana has laws that say upon the overturn of Roe v. Wade, abortion will be illegal in Louisiana. So legally, our strategy is called incrementalism…we are to chip away at abortion rights from legal perspective….Where we have to pass laws that work away at the right to abortion in our society. Suffice it to say that a model of incrementalism is implicated in the Louisiana Right to Life legislative strategy of advancing restrictions on abortion in the State. However, the pro-life movement is not a public policymaking institution, such as the judiciary, the state or national legislatures. The theory or model of incrementalism which was advanced by Charles Lindblom and espoused by like scholars holds that policymaking is characterized by “severe constraints on information and consensus,” resulting in incremental outcomes or policy-shift (Lindblom, 1980 and Hayes, 1991). Thus in the light of Charles Lindblom, the idea of incrementalism calls for a gradual occurrence of significant change in policy. Suffice it to say that the advancement of such a gradual change in policy regarding abortion regulation in Louisiana has been made possible owing to the Supreme Court 68 decisions in the 1989 Webster v. Missouri Reproductive Health Services and the 1992 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey that ruled for state interest in protecting the life of the unborn child. Nonetheless, legal abortion is still a national policy in the United States. Further, the incremental restrictive abortion legislation which the Louisiana Right to Life has been able to influence in the state as the researcher later explores in Research Questions Three and Four has been made possible, owing to the movement‟s resort to press for its goals in the state legislative arena. Once the Supreme Court that legalized abortion in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision later conferred on the state the right to regulate and restrict abortion, regardless of the trimester period in the Webster and Casey decisions, the Louisiana Right to Life movement has aggressively pursued one of its major goals of advancing restrictive abortion laws in the Louisiana State Legislature. This strategy is also implicated in the pluralist composition of the American society and its constitutional federal system of government, whereby interest groups develop and influence public policy through multiple arenas of power (Loomis and Cigler, 1991 and Truman, 1971). Thus, having seen that it is apparently not yet possible to overturn Roe or criminalize abortion through the federal arenas of power as in the Supreme Court and Congress, the Louisiana Right to Life movement has been protesting legal abortion in the Louisiana State Legislature by lobbying legislators to pass restrictive abortion laws. The leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life is prompted by the constitutionality of abortion in the nation to resort to making abortion “unthinkable” and “undesirable” via the education of youth in particular and the public in general, and by lobbying the 69 Louisiana State legislators to advance restrictive abortion legislation. With regard to the education strategy, Mr. Clapper said: Our goal is to educate both the youths and adults, as many as we can, on what abortion is and the value of human life so that they can then educate as many people as possible….Youth and adult education is how we believe we have to arrive at those things [the goals of the movement]. A lot of our effort specifically…we try to educate the youths as much as we can…to raise and train new pro-life leaders to follow after us. The Louisiana Right to Life education strategy is epitomized in the establishment of the movement‟s Louisiana Camp Joshua (LCJ) in 2008, with its first camp in the city of Baton Rouge. The LCJ is a weekend camp that is designed to train high school students to be future leaders in pro-life issues “through education and leadership skills” (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Also, according to the movement‟s website, the material for education and leadership skill in the LCJ is presented to students in the light of Christian pro-life teaching and the camp “is open to people of all religious denominations” (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). It is pertinent to note that while the leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life is mostly made up of Catholic Christians, the respondents maintained that the movement is neither catholic nor protestant but “non-sectarian.” Hence, Mr. Clapper indicated: Louisiana Right to Life is not a Catholic or a Protestant…yeah, ecumenical. But the more legal term is, non-sectarian; meaning that we are not founded on one religious belief or denomination 70 and we are not restricted to working with one denomination. We believe that anyone, no matter what their religious background is, can come to understand that abortion is an offense to human life and we should work to stop it. Thus, that the LCJ‟s material for education and leadership skill is taught to students in light of the Christian doctrine on abortion corroborates the incontestable views of many scholars that opposition to abortion has a religious undertone (Ammerman, 1987 and Jelen, 1992b). The Christian mode of teaching in the LCJ also corroborates the views of some scholars that historically, anti-abortion movements have been championed by both the Catholic and Protestant churches in the United States following the Roe v. Wade decision (Cavanaugh, 1986 and Blanchard, 1994). Also, the LCJ students obtain leadership training from well-informed pro-life advocates and learn in the camp‟s “apologetics session,” how to debate and defend their pro-life stance before anyone (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Thus, students not only learn the techniques of persuasive speaking but also learn the negative effects of abortion on abortive women from a panel of speakers. Students are availed the opportunity to meet with some pro-life advocates such as those who work in crisis pregnancy centers (CPC) and some pro-life state legislators. Suffice it to say that the Louisiana State legislators are often invited to the camp to teach students how the legislature works and the importance of pro-life leadership in a policymaking institution like the legislature. 71 Another aspect of the education strategy of the Louisiana Right to Life is the establishment of the Joshua Leadership Institute (JLI). According to the movement‟s website, the JLI prepares students on not only how to be pro-life student activists, but also how one can start and maintain a pro-life group (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Pro-life activities at the JLI are not limited to abortion, as the activities include issues about euthanasia and stem cell research. Thus, the JLI is more “action-oriented” as it builds upon the skills students learned at the LCJ. Remarkably, at the JLI event that was held in Baton Rouge between July 11 and 16, 2010, a former abortionist trainee, now pro-life obstetrician gynecologist, John Bruschalski, was one of the speakers that addressed the students (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Still, the Louisiana Right to Life Federation educates the public and raises awareness on the dangers of abortion and the value of protecting the human life in the womb via bill boards, radio, television advertisements, electronic mail networking, Choose Life License Plates and media appearances. The forgoing investigation of the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life and the strategies of attaining those goals which the researcher analyzes in the light of the quest to advance change in the society addresses the Research Question One. Thus, as indicated by the respondents, the Louisiana Right to Life is a vehicle that brings a change in the society on the issue of abortion by lobbying the Louisiana State legislators to pass restrictive abortion laws and by “changing the hearts and minds” of people through education. However the next logical question that ought to be addressed is the propelling 72 belief or ideology of the movement in its quest to advance a change in abortion politics in Louisiana. Research Question Two What is the underlying belief or ideology that drives the pro-life movement? Emergent Theme: Abortion as Murder that Negates the Sanctity of Human Life Research Question Two encapsulates some of the open-ended interview questions in Appendix A that include: (a) Why did you decide to become a pro-life advocate? (b) What do you consider to be your task as a pro-life advocate? (c) What is your view of abortion? (d) What motivates you to be against abortion? The research question investigates the belief or ideology that drives the Louisiana Right to Life movement. All respondents alluded to the idea that abortion is intrinsically evil and wrong coupled with a belief in the sanctity of human life. According to the executive secretary of Louisiana Right to Life, Mrs. Kenny: Abortion is the killing of the unborn [human being in the womb and it is]…a crime against humanity just as slavery and the holocaust. Another respondent used the definition of abortion to address the belief that motivates the Louisiana Right to Life. According to Mr. Clapper: Abortion by definition, is taking of human life. [It] is the intentional taking of human life. I believe that by definition it is murder. It is unjustified. 73 Also, in his response to why he decided to become a pro-life advocate, Clapper said: Because I came to know and believe that life is being destroyed by abortion…I felt it was a calling…. The president of Louisiana Right to Life, William Watkins, was of the opinion that, “Abortion is the killing of an innocent baby for the convenience of the potential parent,” and that he was motivated to be against abortion “because it is not okay to kill a baby that is inside or outside her mother‟s womb.” Further, in his response as to why he decided to be a pro-life advocate, the atlarge director and medical advisor of Louisiana Right to Life, Dr. Al Krotoski, said: Based on my study background; embryology [and] moral and pastoral theology books I also read, abortion is a very serious sin… As a physician, I studied the biology of human beings, embryology and the development [of the human fetus]…Abortion is the taking of a human life. I recognized that abortion was evil in itself. Krotoski emphasized the wrongfulness of abortion when the researcher probed further on his views of abortion. According to Krotoski: In the simplest term, it [abortion] is the taking of a developing human life. It is killing the child in utero. Krotoski also said that he was motivated to be pro-life because of “the truth of human development from the moment of fertilization.” Another respondent, the at-large director of Louisiana Right to Life, Michelle Gorney indicated that it is “God [who] gives life and only God can take life….Intentional taking 74 of innocent life is wrong, no matter what.” Also, Gorney said that she is motivated by her “faith” to be against abortion. The director of the Office of Pro-life in the Catholic Diocese of Lake Charles in Louisiana, Kathy Owen, maintained that life begins at the moment of conception in the womb, and abortion is intrinsically evil and wrong. In the same vein, the director of communications and a lobbyist for the Louisiana Baptist Convention, John Y. Yeats, was of the view that “abortion is the termination of the life in the womb.” Yeats also said that he was motivated to be anti-abortion owing to three reasons: [First,] my God; [second,] the intelligence of knowing that life is precious and is worthy of respect; [third,] to look at the face of a child, to know, that child would not be here if it were not for the faith to believe that life is precious. It is also pertinent to note that the founder of the Louisiana Right to Life, Robert Winn, said that he decided to become a pro-life advocate, because of his “religious convictions.” Winn indicated that abortion is “immoral, barbaric [and] inhuman. It is the killing of [an] innocent human being.” Thus, all respondents indicated that abortion is wrong and ought to be curbed. The foregoing responses of some of the interview participants represent the ideas and views of all respondents in the study. The researcher makes a brief rendition of diverse and relevant quotations from the interview respondents, in the light of Creswell‟s (2003) methodology. Thus, Creswell (2003) instructs qualitative researchers to support the emergent themes of their investigation with divers and relevant quotations. The 75 underlying belief or ideology that drives the Louisiana Right to Life is the movement‟s idea of abortion as being an intrinsic evil and wrong and the belief in the sanctity of human life. Thus, the findings corroborate some theories and principles in the extant literature that deal with the issue of abortion. The respondents‟ views that abortion is the killing of an unborn child in the womb and hence wrong, together with the idea that it is God who gives life and it is only God who has the right to take someone‟s life, supports and corroborates the theory of moral reasoning in the deontological ethical theory. According to Lake (1986) the deontological ethical theory is concerned with whether an action is right or wrong, and hence holds that the proper measure of morality is whether an action conforms to moral rules. Deontological ethics focus on moral rules and insist that while it is right to obey the rules, it is wrong to disobey them (Lake, 1986). Essentially, the Louisiana Right to Life movement is ideologically deontological, since it is the moral rule: “Do not kill” that drives its anti-abortion stance. Hence, to procure an abortion is to commit murder, which is contrary to the injunction: “Do not kill.” Another aspect of the theory of moral reasoning that is implicated in the respondents‟ views and hence, the underlying ideology that drives the Louisiana Right to Life is the authoritative mode of moral reasoning. The authoritative mode of moral reasoning invokes the doctrine of “some legitimated moral authority,” and it is concerned with an appeal to religious dogma (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993). Hence, while the founder of the Louisiana Right to Life, Winn, said that he is a pro-life advocate because of his religious convictions, the medical advisor for the movement, Krotoski, said that he 76 is anti-abortion, because the moral and pastoral theology literature he read as a medical student informed him that abortion is a serious sin. Also, yet another respondent, Yeats, said that it was his study of the Scriptures (the Holy Bible) that informed his decision to be anti-abortion. The president of a crisis pregnancy center, Barbara Thomas, said that “Abortion is ungodly; it is against the Word of God.” The finding also corroborates Kelley, Evans and Headey‟s (1993, p. 589) finding “that deductive reasoning from Christian belief is the most important source of opposition to abortion….” Suffice it to say that although the Louisiana Right to Life is non-sectarian, its leadership is made up of Christian religious people, who adhere to the legitimated moral authority of their Scriptures. Furthermore, as the researcher enunciated in Chapter Three that dealing with the theoretical framework of the study, the deductive mode of reasoning holds that God created the world and everything in it, including human beings, and the reproductive system. The deductive mode further holds that God‟s creation, including human reproduction, is good and any attempt to interfere with it in any way including abortion is wrong (Kelley, Evans and Headey, 1993). The idea that abortion is an intrinsic evil and hence wrong, which is the underlying ideology that drives the Louisiana Right to Life movement is also found in the respondents‟ views that a human fetus or an embryo is a human person from the moment of conception. For example, Krotoski said that he is motivated to be anti-abortion, owing to his knowledge of “the truth of human development from the moment of fertilization.” The foregoing findings and the accompanying analysis nonetheless show that respect for the sanctity of human life also drives the Louisiana Right to Life movement. 77 Research Question Three Has the pro-life movement in Louisiana influenced any anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the State? Emergent Theme: Restrictive Abortion Policy Research Question Three investigated whether or not the Louisiana Right to Life movement has influenced any anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the State of Louisiana. All respondents indicated that the pro-life movement has indeed influenced the Louisiana legislature in making pro-life laws for the state. According to Secretary Kenny: We [Louisiana Right to Life] have probably influenced every single anti-abortion or pro-life law in the state since the Supreme Court decision [in Roe v. Wade]. Some of the anti-abortion or restrictive abortion laws the pro-life movement has influenced in Louisiana as corroborated in the responses of the interview participants and the “Louisiana Pro-Life Body of Laws” in the Louisiana Right to Life‟s website, and also evidenced in the Louisiana Revised Statute (La. R.S.) include: Human Life Protection Act of 2006: Also known as Trigger Law, this law makes abortion illegal in the State of Louisiana except in the case of life endangerment of the mother, when the Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court or by a constitutional amendment. 78 Women‟s Right to Know: The State of Louisiana mandates that a woman seeking to obtain abortion must wait 24 hours in-between the time she makes her first visit to the abortion facility and the actual abortion procedure. The law also provides that the woman who is about to obtain an abortion must be informed about the abortion procedure, gestational age of the fetus, fetal development, the risks of abortion and the availability of other public assistance agencies that offer an abortion alternative if she decides to carry the pregnancy to term. The law mandates that the woman be given a booklet that contains the counseling and informed consent requirements entitled Abortion: Making a Decision. Partial Birth Abortion Ban: In the light of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, which was upheld in the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Gonzalez v. Carhart, Louisiana prohibits partial-birth abortions, except in a case of life endangerment of the mother. Conscience Clauses: Louisiana law provides that hospitals and individual healthcare providers have the right to refuse to do abortion. Also, hospitals and individuals cannot be denied governmental assistance for refusing to do abortion. The State of Louisiana prohibits the use of state public funds for abortion. Physician and Hospital Requirements: It is a Louisiana law that an abortion facility must be licensed and the abortionist must be a licensed physician who must determine viability of the fetus. 79 Parental Consent: The State of Louisiana prohibits abortions on minors without parental consent or judicial consent (judicial bypass). Post-viability Standard of Care: Louisiana State law mandates the involvement of a second physician, if abortion is post-viability. Abortion Reports: It is Louisiana law that hospitals, clinics and physician performing abortion must provide regular and confidential reports to the state. Human Experimentation: The State of Louisiana prohibits experimentation on an unborn child or a child after abortion. Feticide: It is a crime in the State of Louisiana for any person other than the mother of the child to terminate the life of the child in utero. The Louisiana law prohibits an intentional failure to sustain the life and health of an aborted viable fetus. The State of Louisiana forbids abortion counseling in Public School of Health Centers, and also forbids information on abortion or abortificient in Family Planning Services by the state. The latest restrictive abortion bills that the leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life is lobbying for passage in the state legislature are: (a) the Ultrasound Before Abortion Act (SB 528) and (b) the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out (HB 1247). It is also worth mentioning that the researcher attended one of the legislative sessions of the Louisiana State House of Representatives on June 16, 2010, during which the Ultrasound Before Abortion bill (SB 528) was due for vote. On that day, the Ultrasound bill passed the House by a vote of 80- 80 1. The Ultrasound bill, which had previously passed the State Senate by a vote of 33-4 on May 18, 2010, was authored by Democratic Senator Sharon Weston Broome from Baton Rouge. Senator Broome is a pro-life Democrat who champions the cause of the pro-life movement in Louisiana, although she is not officially affiliated with the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. The Ultrasound bill was supported and sponsored by the pro-life movement (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). The Ultrasound Before Abortion Act was signed into law by Governor Bobby Jindal in July 6, 2010. The Ultrasound Act, which is an amendment to the abortion informed consent law, gives a woman the right to have medically accurate information about her health and the life of her unborn child before an abortion. While the former abortion informed consent law required that ultrasound be performed after the 20th week of pregnancy, the Ultrasound Act allows a woman considering abortion the opportunity to have an ultrasound (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Also, the Ultrasound Act avails the woman the opportunity to receive information about the ultrasound and see the ultrasound. Suffice it to say that the underlying reason for the Ultrasound Act is to discourage a woman from obtaining abortion and to opt for either parenting or adoption by another person or an agency. Another pro-life bill which the Louisiana Right to Life lobbied for passage in the state legislature is the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out bill (HB 1247). The bill was authored by Republican Representative Frank Hoffman from West Monroe, and was supported and sponsored by the LARTL. The Abortion Insurance Opt-Out bill passed the House by a vote of 76-13, subsequently passed the State Senate by a marginal vote of 28-3 in June 81 14, 2010, and was signed into law by the governor in July 6, 2010 (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). The Opt-Out bill legally excludes the State of Louisiana from the federally subsidized abortion insurance plans as contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 that was signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 23, 2010. Thus with the signing of the Abortion Opt-Out bill into law on July 6, 2010, by the Louisiana State Governor, Bob Jindal, Louisiana became the fourth state after Mississippi, Tennessee, and Missouri to opt out of the federal governmentsubsidized abortion coverage (Louisiana Right to Life Federation, 2010). Other means through which the Louisiana Right to Life movement influences abortion policy in the state include: (a) the Louisiana candidate questionnaire, (b) testifying before the State legislature, (c) drafting anti-abortion policies, and (d) lobbying the State legislators. The Louisiana Right to Life does not endorse a political candidate seeking a political office in either the national, state, or local government levels, and it does not yet have a political action committee (PAC). But the pro-life movement influences abortion policy in Louisiana via the Louisiana candidate questionnaire, as shown in Appendix C. The questionnaire, which the Louisiana Right to Life movement prepares and sends to political candidates in the state probes the candidate‟s stance on the issue of abortion for the Louisiana electorate‟s knowledge. In elaborating on how the movement influences anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the state, Mrs. Kenny said: …I think, you know, you influence that [abortion policy] in a number of ways. First, you‟ve got to elect pro-life people…. 82 It is so important for people to care about this issue. So, we do a kind of questionnaire, and every time members are running for the Legislature, we send the questionnaire [to them]. We say: we‟re gonna make this available to your constituencies. So they know upfront this is gonna be made available on the website, as newspaper ads, whatever, so you know how the candidates for public office answered the Louisiana Right to Life questionnaire. Then, we post those results, and people say; “mm…because he answered the question on pro-life, he is the one or she is the one that I want to represent me.” So you know, you influence things like that. You don‟t tell people how to vote…. You are simply saying; this is how the candidates running for office in your district have answered the questionnaire… So, our influence I think is that we do the questionnaire… we are tabulating those results and we are making those results known [to the electorate]. As aforementioned, Appendix C shows the Louisiana candidate questionnaire that was given to the researcher by the Secretary of the pro-life movement. The questionnaire for a candidate‟s abortion stance serves the dual purpose of persuading the electorate to support a pro-life candidate, as well as dissuading the electorate from electing a prochoice political office seeker in Louisiana. 83 With regard to the question about the nature of the relationship that exists between the pro-life movement and the Louisiana state politicians, one of the respondents, Attorney Bordlee said: If you [politicians] want to be elected to state office, you have to be pro-life; you [politicians] need to support pro-life movement. Also, Watkins was of the view that the “majority of the [Louisiana] population is pro-life [and the majority] of the elected representatives are pro-life” too. Thus, the Louisiana Right to Life influences anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policy in the state when the political positions of the candidates on the issue of abortion are made known to the public through the media. And consequently, the majority pro-life electorate votes for a pro-life legislator or governor who will eventually cause the passage of restrictive laws in the State Legislature. Further, the Louisiana Right to Life movement influences anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the state by testifying in the Louisiana State Legislature. The leadership of the LARTL usually testifies in the legislative sessions that deal with abortion issues. The leadership occasionally testifies in the State Capitol as well on the merits of building and sustaining a culture of life via the protection of the human embryo, and the demerits of abortion whenever a related bill is pending in the State Legislature. Another means whereby the leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life influences anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policy in Louisiana is by drafting pro-life proposals or bills and submitting them to a pro-life legislator for onward introduction in any of the legislative chambers (the State Senate or House of Representatives). The executive 84 director of Bioethics Defense Fund (BDF), Dorinda Bordlee, assists the leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in drafting restrictive abortion proposals that are meant to be considered in the state legislature. According to the movement‟s Secretary Kenny: Up until 1995, there were really no informed consent laws in Louisiana that dealt with abortion. And so in 1995, I worked with Dorinda Bordlee to pass a Woman‟s Right to Know law which was an informed consent provision for abortion in Louisiana Law that required the abortionist (himself or herself) to give the woman all the necessary information about fetal development, the gestational age of the baby she was considering aborting, the method of abortion that will be used, the long and short term side effects of abortion…the long and short term effects associated with child birth, the fact that the father of the baby was liable for the support of this child and should she choose not to have the abortion that she could withdraw her consent at any time for the abortion. And that there will be a 24-hour waiting period from the time the pregnancy was confirmed and the time this information was given to her. There had to be a 24-hour wait for her to have the abortion if after receiving all this information both verbally and in printed form, as well as a listing of the agencies that were available to help her, should she decide to bring the pregnancy to term. 85 As aforementioned, pro-life proposals on abortion issues are given to a pro-life legislator in either of the two legislative branches – the State Senate or House of Representatives for introduction in the light of the legislative policy process. Hence the crafting and drafting of restrictive abortion proposals becomes one of the means the Louisiana Right to Life movement uses to influence abortion policy in the State of Louisiana. Lastly, the Louisiana Right to Life influences abortion policy in Louisiana by lobbying both the state governor and the legislators to pass favorable laws that support the goal of the movement. The executive director of the movement also functions as a lobbyist in the State Capitol for the Louisiana Right to Life, as the movement has no other officially-designated, paid lobbyist. According to Mrs. Gorney: We [the Louisiana Right to Life] definitely go and lobby at the Legislature. We used to have a full time paid lobbyist but we don‟t anymore, and that is what Ben [the executive director, Clapper] does. One of the things Ben does. He goes to the Legislature every day when they are in session and talks to the congressmen…. Corroborating the views of other respondents on the issues of how the Louisiana Right to Life influences the advancement of abortion policy in the state, Mrs. Rodi said: All the pro-life laws that have been adopted in Louisiana…, [the] pro-life movement [LARTL] has been involved in drafting and lobbying for all that. I spent many, many, many [sic] days lobbying in Baton Rouge [in the State Capitol]. 86 The foregoing corroboratory responses and documentary information address Research Question Three, which investigates the influence of the Louisiana Right to Life on abortion policy and how the movement influences the policies. Research Question Four What successes has the Louisiana Right to Life movement achieved in the State regarding its pro-life goals and activities? Emergent Theme: An Alternative to Abortion Research question four investigated the accomplishments of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in the State of Louisiana regarding its pro-life activities. The findings show that the movement has made substantial effort in regulating abortion, supporting pregnancy care centers and adoption agencies as alternatives to abortion, and educating a new generation of youths who teach and raise awareness about abortion issues. The substantial effort Louisiana Right to Life has made in regulating abortion in Louisiana is evidenced in the litany of anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies the movement has so far influenced in the state, addressed in Research Question Three. In other words, the success of the pro-life movement is literally defined by its influence as we have seen in the foregoing investigation and analysis. Hence, according to Mr. Clapper: The important achievement [of the LARTL] is passing legislation that has offered more material options to women seeking abortion; that is, giving women in that situation ability to rethink what they are doing and show them there is no one choice in the 87 situation; there are other choices. That is definitely a good, positive [achievement]. Also, corroborating the saliency of availing women complete information about implication of abortion via legislation, as a major achievement of the Louisiana Right to Life movement, Mrs. Kenny said: We [Louisiana Right to Life Federation] carefully studied the Pennsylvania Law [the 1992 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey] and based on that we worked with Americans United for Life and brought forward …a model legislation on informed consent which we called a Woman’s Right to Know Law. We asked three very powerful women legislators: a black legislator, Sharon Weston Broome who is…a Democrat, Shirley Bowler, a Republican; [and] Sydnie Mae Durand, a Democrat… , three women-powerful, good, strong, pro-life women. And we got the Women‟s Right to Know law passed in 1995. That was a huge…it was a huge accomplishment, because…it put abortionists on notice here, that, okay you‟re gonna do this procedure, [but] a woman has to fully understand what it is that she is doing. It has helped women to understand that in spite of what people in the abortion facility may tell them, this is not a blob of tissue. Twenty-one days after conception, there is a little fragile heart that is beating inside this woman‟s body in form of a human being. It was very exciting to be a part of that…. 88 Suffice it to say that the Woman‟s Right to Know law has been a very important achievement for the pro-life movement, because of the tendency of the dictates of the informed consent law to dissuade a woman from seeking abortion and opting for an alternative. The woman‟s alternative to abortion is either to carry her pregnancy to term for keeps, or give up the child for adoption by a relative or an agency. Further, another achievement of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, according to the interview respondents, is evidenced in the support the movement gives to adoption agencies in the state. The pro-life movement successfully lobbied the Louisiana State Government for financial assistance to the pro-life pregnancy centers in Louisiana. Thus according to Mr. Clapper: You know, the State gives 1.5 million dollars a year to the Life Choices Project, which is basically 1.5 million dollars to pregnancy centers that are offering alternatives to abortion. You know, I think that‟s a great thing that has been accomplished. We [the Louisiana Right to Life Federation] accomplished that about 10 years ago. It is pertinent to note that the establishment of the Life Choices Project in the State and the attendant partial funding of the Pregnancy Centers attests to the foregoing data and analysis that Louisiana is a pro-life state that is sympathetic to the pro-life movement. Another aspect of the achievement of the Louisiana Right to Life is seen in the area of education. As we have previously investigated on the education strategy of the 89 pro-life movement, all respondents attested to the establishment of the Louisiana Camp Joshua (LCJ) and the Joshua Leadership Institute (JLI) as a huge influence on both youths and adults regarding pro-life issues. According to Clapper: Recent accomplishment I think is, you know, we have really been able to raise a new generation of high school and college students committed to educating their peers and raising awareness with their peers about the issue of abortion. I think that‟s a good accomplishment. Thus, the establishment of the LCJ and the JLI by the Louisiana Right to Life with the „catch them young‟ idea attests to the leadership acumen of the leaders of the pro-life movement, and also supports the saliency of education to any successful social movement. Lastly, the successes of the legislative and educational strategies of the Louisiana Right to Life movement are also evidenced in the State of Louisiana, being ranked among the most pro-life states in the United States by the Americans United for Life (AUL), and also being ranked among the least by the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) in supporting pro-choice legislation. Hence, according to Mrs. Kenny: The strategies [of the LARTL movement] are very effective. The NARAL, National Abortion Rights Action League, as a matter of fact, gives Louisiana an „F‟. They gave us an „F‟ because we are so very successful in [advancing] pro-life legislation. Corroborating Kenny‟s views, another respondent, Bordlee said: In fifteen years that I have been in the movement…, Louisiana 90 has led the nation in achievements; you know…, we are rated number one by pro-life groups and we are rated last by pro-choice groups. As aforementioned, the fact that the Louisiana State Legislature has often advanced antiabortion or restrictive abortion laws is also corroborated in a recent publication by the Americans United for Life (AUL). In the AUL‟s (2010) Defending Life 2010: A State-byState Legal Guide, Louisiana ranks number one among the nation‟s fifty states in the pursuit and implementation of restrictive abortion policies. Hence, according to AUL (2010, p. 617) “Louisiana maintains some of the most comprehensive and protective regulations regarding the health and safety of women seeking abortions and the protection of the unborn.” Thus, in the light of the Research Question Four, the achievements of the Louisiana Right to Life are not only indicated in successful educational strategy that informs the public on the merits of adoption and the demerits of abortion, and the myriad of restrictive abortion policies the movement has influenced in Louisiana, but also, in the state‟s primus ranking among other states in regulating abortion. Research Question Five What are the sources of support for the Louisiana Right to Life Federation and who funds the movement? Emergent Theme: Voluntarism Research Question Five investigates the sources of support for the Louisiana Right to Life Federation and how the movement is funded. All respondents indicated that the executive officer and the youth director of the Louisiana Right to Life are the only 91 paid staff, while other leaders and those who work for the movement are volunteers. The profiles of the interview participants, seen in the beginning of this chapter, literally reflect the enormous human resources with which the pro-life movement is endowed. Thus with the exception of the executive director and the youth director, every other person in the executive leadership level is a volunteer for the pro-life movement. The leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life is comprised of lawyers (both retired and practicing), medical professionals, and people from all walks of life who volunteer their resources, which include time, energy and money to advance the goals of the pro-life movement. Also, respondents indicate that the Louisiana Right to Life Federation is funded by donations from various individuals and private businesses. Further, one should not lose sight of the voluntary activities of other foot soldiers in the pro-life movement, especially the youths who are ubiquitously scattered in the various university and college campuses and parish chapters in the State of Louisiana. Hence, in light of the views of the respondents, the notion of voluntarism serves as the emergent theme that addresses Research Question Five. The saliency of voluntarism in Louisiana Right to Life movement is also underscored by Dr. Krotoski in his response to the question about the sources of support for the pro-life movement. Hence, Krotoski said: Donations…, that is financial support. But you have to recognize voluntarism. The time spent as volunteers by young people, if there is a way it would be converted into dollars…, that will be huge. 92 The Secretary of the movement, Kenny, also said that: Financial support [for the Louisiana Right to Life] comes from individuals, individual donations. Ben [the executive director]… looks for corporate donations as well because we have, umh, Louisiana Right to Life is set up, one, as an association and secondarily, as a separate 501(c) [3] non-profit educational. So... he solicits donations. Some people do an every life every month donation. Mostly, it comes in from a yearly or twice yearly solicitations. There are one or two donors who give substantial, make substantial contributions and so, all of those things help. We have never been as good as we could be, I think, at raising money for the pro-life cause in Louisiana and yet we‟ve always managed to get the job done. You know….We have such a good, we have a good volunteer base. It is not surprising that a not-for-profit interest group such as the Louisiana Right to Life Federation is literally sustained by the voluntary altruism of its members and those who are sympathetic to the goals of the movement. The characteristic voluntary altruism manifested by pro-life advocates in the Louisiana Right to Life movement corroborates Smith‟s (2000) empirical research finding on the sources of support and effectiveness of grassroots associations. However, Smith‟s unit of analysis (voluntary association) is comparatively smaller and local to the Louisiana pro-life movement. 93 The respondents also indicated that while the Louisiana Right to Life movement is financially supported by individual donors and private businesses, it is not funded by either the State or any Church. Hence in his response to the sources of support for the Right to Life, the executive director of the movement, Clapper, said: Completely private donors…. You know…, we don‟t get any state money, any church money….You know, the Catholic Church…none of the churches, I mean, they have their own kind of pro-life advocacy works. But we don‟t get money from churches. You know, families, private individuals [and] sometimes private businesses, you know, would contribute to us. From the foregoing, one is apt to understand that it is the acts of voluntarism and donations from individuals and private businesses that address Research Question Five. On the other hand, when the researcher further inquired on why the Louisiana Right to Life movement does not solicit funds from either the state or the church, the executive director of the pro-life movement indicated that the movement is neither affiliated with the state or any church, but if any of the entities offers money to the movement, such a favor would be considered “on a case by case basis.” Finally, inasmuch as the Louisiana Right to Life Federation is not funded by the State of Louisiana, the pro-life movement has a tacit support from the state government. For example, Republican Governor Bob Jindal is pro-life in political and religious stance, and he not only has signed all restrictive abortion bills into law that reached his desk, but who also once hosted a pro-life reception ceremony in the Governor‟s Mansion. The 94 researcher was one of the pro-life advocates together with others from the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, pro-life pregnancy centers, adoption agencies, and various Right to Life chapters in Louisiana whose members attended the Choose Life Reception at the Governor‟s Mansion in Baton Rouge to honor pro-life legislators on Pro-Life Day (June 2, 2010). Although the governor could not be present due to a necessary attendance at an emergency meeting regarding the infamous 2010 British Petroleum (BP) oil spill in the Louisiana Gulf of Mexico, he was represented by a member of his staff, Daniel Kirk. Chapter VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH Summary The purpose of this research was to study the goals, ideology, organization and activities of the anti-abortion movement in the State of Louisiana. Also, the study aimed at ascertaining the influence of the pro-life movement on the issue of abortion in Louisiana and the public policy implications of those successes, or lack thereof, the movement has advanced in Louisiana regarding its pro-life activities. Since, no specific research work had been done on the pro-life movement in Louisiana, and owing to the United States national policy on abortion stemming from the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, the reviewed literature dealt with the dynamics of the anti-abortion movement in the U.S. in general in pre and post Roe v. Wade eras. Also, the reviewed literature explored the dynamics of abortion policy, including the states‟ leeway to abortion regulations, irrespective of the status quo of legal abortion in post-Roe v. Wade. Further, under the backdrop of the deontological ethical theory and social movement perspective, this study investigated the goals, propelling belief or ideology, strategic activities, and the influence of the Louisiana Right to Life (LARTL) movement in the State of Louisiana. In order to make an in-depth study of the pro-life movement, the following research questions were examined: (1) What are the goals of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation in the State of Louisiana, and what strategies does it employ to advance the goals? 96 (2) What is the underlying belief or ideology that drives the pro-life movement? (3) Has the pro-life movement in Louisiana influenced any anti-abortion or restrictive abortion policies in the State? (4) What successes has the Louisiana Right to Life movement achieved in the State regarding its pro-life goals and activities? (5) What are the sources of support for the Louisiana Right to Life Federation and who funds the movement? The research questions were generated from a list of twenty-four open-ended interview questions in Appendix A. The interview participants included members of the executive level leadership of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation, executive directors of pro-life pregnancy centers, the executive director of Bioethics Defense Fund, and leaders of some church denominations in Louisiana. In the light of the dictates of a scientific qualitative research methodology as presented in Chapter Four, the coding process elicited common themes that were used for further detailed analysis. These emergent themes included; (a) the quest for change, (b) abortion as murder that negates the sanctity of human life, (c) restrictive abortion policy, (d) alternatives to abortion, and (e) voluntarism. In order to ensure the validity in the study, multiple sources of data including the interviews and documentary sources were triangulated with the theories and principles that are relevant to the study. Suffice it to say that the data from the varied sources were used to support or corroborate the theoretical perspectives of the study, and the extant theories and relevant principles in the reviewed literature. 97 Furthermore, it is pertinent to note, in the light of the aforementioned emergent themes, that the study addressed the research questions for investigation. Thus, while the goal of the Louisiana Right to Life movement is to advance change on the issue of abortion policy in State of Louisiana via legislative and educational strategies, the driving ideology of the pro-life movement is embedded in the notion that abortion is tantamount to murder and hence, wrong. Also, the LARTL movement employs certain methods to influence abortion policy in Louisiana, such as the Louisiana candidate questionnaire in Appendix C, testifying before the State Legislature, drafting anti-abortion proposals or bills, and lobbying the state legislators. The success of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in the State regarding its pro-life goals and strategies are evident in the myriads of anti-abortion or restrictive abortion legislation supported and sponsored by the movement, as extensively examined in Chapter Five. Suffice it to say that the leadership of the LARTL movement often benefits from the pro bono assistance of the executive director of the Bioethics Defense Fund by means of drafting pro-life legislation via pro-life legislator for onward introduction in the Louisiana State Legislature. With regard to the sources of support for the LARTL, the pro-life movement is funded with donations from individuals and private businesses and supported by its solid volunteer base, as attested to by the interview respondents. Conclusions The foregoing data and analysis inform us that this study has effectively addressed the research questions it set out to investigate via data sources and theory 98 triangulations. This investigation nonetheless demonstrates that the interest of the researcher in studying the Louisiana Right to Life movement is no different from that of many scholarly social movements which, according to McAdam, McCarthy, and Zald (1988, p. 727), “stems from their belief that movements represent an important force for social change.” Admittedly, the social change is less evident in the context of the current status quo of legal abortion in the United States. However, as has been demonstrated in this study, the change is evident in the many restrictive abortion policies the pro-life movement has influenced in Louisiana and the pro-life education it promotes in the area. Hence, such strange bedfellows as the NARAL Pro-Choice America and Americans United for Life (AUL) evidently acknowledge that Louisiana has been among the prominent states in the Union that have aggressively pursued and implemented restrictive abortion policies in the United States –a development that Roe v. Wade never anticipated thirty-eight years ago. Research Implications There are two research implications of this study: First, the research serves as a pioneer qualitative study on anti-abortion movement in Louisiana. Many works deal with public opinion on the controversial issue of abortion. Yet there is a dearth of literature dealing with the leadership, organization, participants, and the influences of the Right to Life movement in the society, with no apparent work on the influence and dynamics of the pro-life movement in the context of Louisiana. Second, this research on pro-life movement also adds to the preceding extant theoretical works that deal with the dynamics of social movement and countermovement. 99 Scholars of social movement have observed that while the civil rights movements of the 1960s in the United States caused the emergence of studies on political process and mobilization models, the pro-choice and pro-life movements were responsible for the scholarly interest on the dynamics of movements and countermovement. This research on the pro-life movement in Louisiana is also a contribution to the social movement scholarship. Public Policy Implications The truism in democratic politics that social movement organizations and interest groups influence public policy is evident in the political activities of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in the State of Louisiana. Abortion is still legal in the United States following the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. Nevertheless, the pro-life movement consistently circumvents the leeway the same Court granted to states in its later decisions in the 1989 Webster v. Missouri Reproductive Health Services and the 1992 Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. In a direct action of countermovement, those who adhere to the pro-life view continue relentlessly to lobby and influence the Louisiana State Legislature toward layering many regulations on abortion. In the Webster and Casey decisions, the Supreme Court signaled that states do have an interest in the protection of the unborn human life. Thus, the pro-life movement has virtually supported and sponsored all restrictive abortion policies in Louisiana, according to an extensive investigation by the researcher. Another aspect of the policy consequence of the Louisiana Right to Life movement is found in the saliency of the Louisiana Candidate Questionnaire. Yet by 100 preparing the questionnaires and distributing them to the Louisiana political office seekers, with the subsequent collection and publication of the candidates‟ responses to inform the electorate about their positions on the issue of abortion, the LARTL movement makes incremental advance on a continuous basis. The LARTL does not yet have a political action committee (PAC). In addition, the LARTL coalition indirectly makes demands of political candidates, mobilizes pro-life voters and articulates citizen‟s policy preferences regarding the issue of abortion in Louisiana. Hence, with regard to the issue of morality policy of abortion in Louisiana, the indispensability of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in influencing restrictive abortion policies in the State corroborates Hansen‟s (1991) contention on the saliency of interest groups in influencing public policy, as well as Tilly‟s (1984) case that social movements make legislative action possible in the polity. Recommendations for Future Research This qualitative case study investigated the goal, ideology, strategic activities, and influence of the Louisiana Right to Life movement in Louisiana. Although the findings from this study are not generalizable, owing to the nature of the employed research method, the findings still could lead future scholars to investigate the strategic activities and influence of further anti-abortion movements in other states of the Union, as well as those countries with national laws that legalize abortion on demand. Most importantly, the findings of this study suggest some directions for future study on the anti-abortion movement in Louisiana. 101 First, future research should investigate the modus operandi of other pro-life advocacy organizations in Louisiana, such as the Louisiana Family Forum, Louisiana Operation Outcry, and the Louisiana chapter of Silent No More. Also, the researcher recommends an in-depth study of the activities and influence of the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops (LCCB) regarding the issue of abortion in Louisiana. The saliency of an in-depth investigation of the activities of the Church and the clergy, as indicated in the reviewed literature in this study, is underscored by the historical interest of the Church in morality policy and abortion. Second, future studies should examine the activities and the influence of prochoice advocates in Louisiana. Although, pro-choice advocacy in Louisiana is comparatively marginal as evident from the findings, an in-depth study of a pro-choice movement in Louisiana such as the Planned Parenthood would nonetheless throw more light on the strength and weakness of the opposing movement, the pro-life movement. Finally, the findings in this study show that one of the important achievements of the Louisiana Right to Life movement is the influencing of the passage of much legislation that has offered more material options to women seeking abortion, as evidenced in the Woman‟s Right to Know Law of 1995. Indeed, this law has been a very important achievement for the pro-life movement, because of the tendency of the informed consent provision to dissuade a woman from seeking abortion and opting for an alternative. The woman‟s alternative to abortion is either to carry her pregnancy to term for keep or give up the child for adoption by either a relative or an adoption agency via a crisis pregnancy center (CPC). Hence, it is worth recommending that future research 102 should also include an elaborate study of the modus operandi of the pro-life pregnancy centers in the State of Louisiana. REFERENCES 103 104 REFERENCES Americans United for Life. (2010). Defending Life 2010: A State-by-State Legal Guide to Abortion, Bioethics, and the End of Life. Washington, D.C.: AUL Legal Guide. Ammerman, N. (1987). Bible Believers: Fundamentalists in the Modern World. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Babbie, E. (2004). The Practice of Social Research (10th Ed.), Australia: Thomson Wadsworth. Blanchard, D. A. (1994). The Anti-Abortion Movement and the Rise of the Religious Right: From Polite to Fiery Protest. New York: Twayne Publishers. Blasi, A. (1989). Early Christianity as a Social Movement. New York: Peter Lang. Borgmann, C. & Weiss, C. (2003). Beyond Apocalypse and Apology: A Moral Defense of Abortion. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 35, 40-43. Burstein, P. (1999). Social Movement and Public Policy. In M. Guini, D. McAdam & C. Tilly (Eds.), How Social Movements Matter (pp. 3-21), Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. Burstein, P. & Linton, A. (2002). The Impact of Political Parties, Interest groups, and Social Movement Organizations on Public Policy: Some Recent Evidence and Theoretical Concern. Social Forces, 81, 381-408. Campell, J. & Allen, M.P. (1994). The Political Economy of Revenue Extraction in the Modern State: A Time Series Analysis of U.S. Income Taxes, 1916-1986. Social Forces, 72, 643-669. Canon, B.C. & Johnson, C.A. (1999). Judicial Policies: Implementation and Impact. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. Caron, S.M. (1989). Race, Class, and Reproduction: The Evolution of Reproductive Policy in the United States, 1800-1999. Ph.D. Dissertation. Clark University. Cavanaugh, M.A. (1986). Secularization and the Politics of Traditionalism: The Case of the Right-to-Life Movement. Sociological Forum, 1, 251-283. Clapper, B. (2010). Governor Jindal Signs Pro-Life Bills into Law: Ultrasound and Opt-Out Bills Headline 2010 Pro-Life Laws. Retrieved July 8, 2010, from http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/uploads/.doc/pr_july7_2010_billsigned.pdf. 105 Cook, A., Jelen, T.G., & Wilcox, C. (1993). Catholicism and Abortion Attitudes in the American States: A Contextual Analysis. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 223-230. Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd Ed.), Thousand Oaks: Sage. Cuneo, M. (1989). Catholics Against the Church: Anti-Abortion Protest in Toronto 1969-1985. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Diamond, S. (1995). Roads to Dominion. New York: Guilford. Dillon, M. (1993). Argumentative Complexity of Abortion Discourse. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 305-314. Dodson, D. & Burnbauer, L. (1990). Election 1989: The Abortion Issue in New Jersey and Virginia. New Brunswick: Eagleton Institute of Politics. Ericson, F. (1986). Qualitative Methods in Research on Teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd Edition, pp. 119-161), New York: Macmillan. Farber, D.A. & Nowak, J.E. (1990). Beyond the Roe Debate: Judicial Experience with the 1980‟s “Reasonableness” Test. Virginia Law Review, 76,519-538. Falwell, J. (1980). Listen America! New York: Doubleday. Faux, M. (2001). Roe v. Wade: The Untold Story of the Landmark Supreme Court Decision that made Abortion Legal. New York: Coopers Square Press. Ferree, M.M. (1998). The Framing Context between Pro-life and Pro-choice Movements. A Paper Presented at the Conference on Politics and the Media. University of Nebraska. April 24. Freeman, J. (1975). The Politics of Women’s Liberation. New York: McKay. Glesne, C. (1997). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction (2nd Ed.), New York: Longman. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An introduction (3rd Ed.), New York: Longman. 106 Gormley, W.T., Jr. (1986). Regulatory Issue Networks in a Federal System. Polity, 18, 595-620. Granberg, D. (1978). Pro-life or Reflection of Conservative Ideology? An Analysis of Opposition to Legalized Abortion. Sociology and Social Research, 62, 41-429. Greenwald, C. (1977). Group Power. New York: Praeger. Guttmacher Institute. (2010). State Policies in Brief. Retrieved February 1, 2010, from http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spib/spib_AOLpdf. Guttmacher Institute. (2010). State fact about Abortion. Retrieved February 1, 2010, from http.//www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/pdf/Louisiana.pdf. Halva-Neubauer, G.A. (1993). The States after Roe: No “Paper Tiger.” In M.L Googin (Ed.), Understanding the New Politics of Abortion (pp. 167-189), Newbury Park: Sage. Hansen, J.M. (1991). Gaining Access: Congress and Farm Lobby, 1919-1981. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hansen, S.B. (1980). State Implementation of Supreme Court Decisions: Abortion Rates since Roe v. Wade. The Journal of Politics, 42, 372-395. Hayes, M.T. (1991). Incrementalism and Public Policy. New York: Longman. Hershey, M.R. & West, D. (1983). Single-Issue Politics: Prolife Groups and the 1980 Senate Campaigns. In A.J. Cigler and B.A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest Group Politics (1st Ed., pp., 31-59). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. Himmelstein, J.L. (1986). The Social Basis of Antifeminism: Religious Networks and Culture. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 25, 1-15. Jelen, T.G. (1992b). The Clergy and Abortion. Review of Religious Research 34, 132-151. Kelley, J., Evans, M.D.R., & Headey, B. (1993). Moral Reasoning and Political Conflict: The Abortion Controversy. The British Journal of Sociology, 44, 589-612. Kelly, J. (1989). Ecumenism and Abortion: A Case Study of Pluralism, Privatization and the Public Conscience. Review of Religious Research, 30, 225-235. 107 Lake, R.A. (1986). The Metaethical Framework of Anti-Abortion Rhetoric. Sign, 11, 478-499. Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. Lindblom, C.E. (1980). The Policymaking Process (2nd Ed.), New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Lo, C.Y.H. (1982). Countermovements and Conservative Movements in the Contemporary U.S. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 107-134. Loomis, B.A. & Cigler, A.J. (1991). Introduction: The Changing Nature of Interest Group Politics. In A.J. Cigler & B.A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest Group Politics (3rd Ed., pp.1-32), Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. Louisiana Right to Life Federation. (2010). Louisiana Pro-Life Body of Laws. Retrieved June 6, 2010, from http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/legislation/louisiana-pro-life-body-oflaws.htnl. Louisiana Right to Life Federation. (2010). Our Pro-Life Legislative Highlights. Retrieved June 6, 2010, from http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/legislations/our-pro-lifelegislative-highlights.html. Louisiana Right to Life Federation. (2010). Chapters. Retrieved June 6, 2010, from http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/chapters.html. Louisiana Right to Life Federation. (2010). Louisiana Camp Joshua. Retrieved June 7, 2010, from http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/youth/camp-joshua.html. Louisiana Right to Life Federtion. (2010). Joshua Leadership Institute. Retrieved July 17, 2010, from http://www.prolifelouisiana.org/youth/jli.html. Luker, K. (1984). Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. Berkeley: University of California Press. McAdam, D., McCarthy, J., & Zald, M. (1988). Social Movements. In N.J. Smelster (Ed.), Handbook of Sociology (pp. 695-737), Newbury Park: Sage. McCarthy, A.C. (1989). The Prohibition of Abortion Counseling and Referral in Federally-funded Family Planning Clinics. California Law Review, 77, 11811210. Means, C. (1970). A Historian‟s View. In R. Hall (Ed.), Abortion in a Changing World (pp. 16-24), New York: Columbia. 108 Merrian, S.B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education (2nd Ed.), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Merton, A.H. (1981). Enemies of Choice: The Right to Life Movement and its Threat to Abortion. Boston: Beacon. Meyer, D.S. & Staggenborg, S. (1996). Movements, Countermovements, and the Structure of Political Opportunities. The American Journal of Sociology, 101, 1628-1660. Mohr, J.C. (1978). Abortion in America: The Origins and Evolution of National Policy. New York: Oxford University Press. Mooney, C.Z. (2001). The Public Clash of Private Values: The Politics of Morality Policy. In C.Z. Mooney (Ed.), The Public Clash of Private Values. New York: Chatham House. Mooney, C.Z. & Lee, M. (1995). Legislating Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-Roe Abortion Regulation Reform. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 599-627. Mottl, T.L. (1980). The Analysis of Countermovements.” Social Problems, 27, 620635. NARAL Pro-Choice America. (2010). Press Releases. Retrieved April 22, 2010, from http//www/prochoiceamerica.org/media/press-releases. Neitz, M.J. (1981). Family, State and God: Ideology of the Right to Life Movement. Sociological Analysis, 42, 265-276. Nossiff, R. (1995). Pennsylvania: The Impact of Party Organization and Religious Lobbying. In M.C. Segers & T.A. Byrnes (Ed.), Abortion Politics in American States (pp. 16-28), New York: M.E. Sharpe. Nowicka, W. (1996). Roman Catholic Fundamentalism Against Women‟s Reproductive Rights in Poland. Reproductive Health Matters, 4, 21-29. Patton, D. (2007). The Supreme Court and Morality Policy Adoption in the American States: The Impact of Constitutional Context. Political Research Quarterly 60, 468-488. Patton, D. (2003). The Effect of U.S. Supreme Court Intervention on the Innovation and Diffusion of Post-Roe Abortion policies in the American States, 1973-2000. Ph.D. 109 Dissertation. University of Kentucky. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd Ed.), Thousand Oaks: Sage. Perry, H.L. (1995). A Theoretical Analysis of National Black Politics in the United States. In H.L. Perry (Ed.), Blacks and the American Political System (pp. 11-37), Gainsville: University Press of Florida. Perry, M.J. (1980). “Why the Supreme Court was Plainly Wrong in the Hyde Amendment Case: A Brief Comment on Harris v. McRae.” Stanford Law Review, 32, 1113-1128. Petchesky, R.P. (1981). Antiabortion, Antifeminism, and the Rise of the New Right. Feminist Studies, 17, 206-246. Petchesky, R.P. (1984). Abortion and Women’s Choice: The State, Sexuality, and Reproductive Freedom. New York: Longman. Peterson, L.R. and Mauss, A.L. (1976). Religion and the “Right to Life:” Correlates of Opposition to Abortion. Sociological Analysis, 37, 243-254. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. 505 U.S. 833, (1992). Rodman, H. (1991). Should Parental Involvement Be Required for Minors‟ Abortion? Family Relations, 40, 155-160. Roe v. Wade. 410 U.S. 113, (1973). Rubin, A. (1991). Interest Groups and Abortion Politics in the Post-Webster Era. In A.J. Cigler & B.A. Loomis (Eds.), Interest Group Politics. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. Schwandt, T.A. (2000). Three Epistemological Stances for Qualitative Inquiry: Interpretation, Hermeneutics, and Social Constructivism. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd Ed., pp. 189-213), Thousand Oak: Sage. Segers, M.C. (1995). The Pro-Choice Movement Post-Casey: Preserving Access. In M.C. Segers & T.A. Bynes (Eds.), Abortion Politics in American States (pp. 225-245), New York: M.E. Sharpe. Segers, M.C. & T.A. Bynes. (1995). Introduction: Abortion Politics in American States. 110 In M.C. Segers & T.A. Bynes (Eds.), Abortion in American States (pp. 1-15), New York: M.E. Sharpe. Sernett, M.C. (1984). The Efficacy of Religious Participation in the National Debates over Abolition and Abortion. The Journal of Religion, 64, 205-220. Smith, D.H. (2000). Grassroots Associations. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Spitzer, R.J. (1987). The Right to Life Movement and the Third Party Politics. New York: Greenwood Press. Staggenborg, S. (1991). The Pro-Choice Movement. New York: Oxford University Press. Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Steinhoff, P.G. & Diamond, M. (1977). Abortion Politics: The Hawaii Experience. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. Strickland, R.A. (1995). North Carolina: One Liberal Law in the South. In M.C. Segers & T.A. Byrnes (Eds.), Abortion Politics in American States (pp. 102-126), New York: M.E. Sharpe. Strickler, J. & Danigelis, N.L. (2002). Changing Frameworks in Attitudes toward Abortion. Sociological Forum, 17, 187-201. Tarrow, S.G. (1994). Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Actions, and Mass Politics in the Modern States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tatalovich, R. & Schier, D. (1993). The Persistence of Ideological Cleavage in Voting on Abortion Legislation in the House of Representatives, 1973-1988. In M.L. Goggin (Ed.), Understanding the New Politics of Abortion (pp. 109-122), Newbury Park: Sage. Tilly, C. (1984). Social Movements and National Politics. In C. Bright & S. Harding (Eds.), Statemaking and Social Movement (pp. 297-317). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Tribe, L.H. (1990). Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes. New York: Norton. Truman, D. (1971). The Governmental Process (2nd Ed.), New York: Knopf. Turner, R.H. & Killian, L.M. (1972). Collective Behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. 111 Webster v. Missouri Reproductive Health Services. 492 U.S. 490, (1989). West T. (2008). Louisiana Revised Statutes. Public Health and Safety. 22B: Section 40: 1061-40: 1299.69. Wilson, J. (1973). Introduction to Social Movements. New York: Basic Books. Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd Ed.), Thousand Oaks: Sage. . APPENDICES 112 113 APPENDIX A Interview Guide 114 APPENDIX A Interview Guide 1. Why did you decide to become a pro-life advocate? 2. What do you consider to be your task as a pro-life advocate? 3. Would you consider yourself a Protestant (Evangelical, Pentecostal, Baptist), Catholic, Fundamentalist, Charismatic or an Interdenominational? 4. What is the goal of the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 5. What strategy or strategies does the pro-life movement employ in pursuing its goal in Louisiana? 6. How effective is the movement‟s strategy or strategies? 7. What would you say are the important achievements of the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 8. What do you think are the problems of the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 9. What would you say are your greatest frustrations in being pro-life? 10. How is the pro-life movement organized in Louisiana? 11. How often do the various chapters have meetings? Interview Guide (Continued) 12 What are the demographics (categories of people) that make up the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 13 What are the sources of support for the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 14 Who funds the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 115 15 How does the pro-life movement relate with politicians and government officials in Louisiana? 16 Has the pro-life movement influenced any antiabortion or restrictive abortion laws in the State of Louisiana? 17 What is your view of abortion? 18 What motivates you to be against abortion? 19 What is the pro-life movement doing to educate people on the issue of abortion? 20 Please, tell me under what circumstance you think that a pregnant woman should obtain an abortion 21 Abortion has been legal in the United States since the Supreme Court‟s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that was based on the privacy reason. Do you think that obtaining abortion would be made illegal in the nation someday? 22 What is your view of the pro-choice advocates? Interview Guide (Continued) 23 How popular is the pro-life movement in Louisiana? 24 How do you compare your effort in advancing the goal of the prolife movement in Louisiana with any other pro-life movement in any of the states in the nation? APPENDIX B Interview Participants 116 117 APPENDIX B Interview Participants Name and Phone Number Williams S. Watkins 985-876-6410 Affiliation Position Place of Interview President Date Interviewed 5/13/2010 Louisiana Right to Life Federation Celie Clark 985-630-2227 Louisiana Right to Life Federation Vice President 5/19/2010 Peggy Kenny 504-834-5433 Louisiana Right to Life Federation Executive Secretary 5/6/2010 Office at the Ministry Center, St. Peter‟s Church Covington, Louisiana LARTL Office in Metairie, Louisiana Robert E. Win 985-792-5077 Louisiana Right to Life Federation Treasurer 5/19/2010 Sharon Ryan Rodi 504-454-5050 Louisiana Right to Life Federation Michelle Gorney 985-882-7210 W. Al Krotoski 225-769-7496 Louisiana Right to Life Federation Louisiana Right to Life Federation Delegate to the 5/28/2010 National Right to Life Board of Directors At-Large 5/17/2010 Director Benjamin Clapper 504-228-4273 Louisiana Right to Life Federation At Large Director and Medical Advisor 5/14/2010 Executive Director and Lobbyist 5/6/2010 117 Office in Houma, Louisiana Ministry Center at St. Peter‟s Church Covington, Louisiana Residential Home in Metairie, Louisiana Residential Home in Lacombe, Louisiana Ce Ce‟s Community Coffee Shop near Perkins/Bluebonnet Intersection in Baton Rouge, Louisiana LARTL Office in Metairie, Louisiana 118 Interview Participants (Continued) Name and Phone Number Allison Lattie 504-835-6520 Dorinda C. Bordlee 504-231-7234 Barbara Thomas 225-324-7013 Angie Thomas 504-296-0323 504-831-3117 Leslie Ellison 504-812-9376 Karol Meynard 337-261-5607 Kathy Owen 337-439-7400 Ext. 313 John L. Yeats 318-664-5646 318-448-3402 Affiliation Position Date Interviewed 5/6/2010 Place of Interview LARTL Office in Metairie, Louisiana Office in Metairie, Louisiana Office in Baton Rouge, Louisiana Louisiana Right to Life Federation Bioethics Defense Fund Youth Director Executive Director 5/6/2010 North Baton Rouge Women‟s Help Center (a prolife crisis pregnancy center) Women‟s New Life Center (a pro-life crisis pregnancy center) Gideon Christian Fellowship International, New Orleans Catholic Diocese of Lafayette, Louisiana Catholic Diocese of Lake Charles, Louisiana Louisiana Baptist Convention President 5/27/2010 Executive Director 5/28/2010 Office in Metairie, Louisiana Director of the Office of the Government Ministry on ProLife Issues Director of the Office of ProLife Issues 5/26/2010 Louisiana State Capitol Chapel in Baton Rouge 5/24/2010 Office in Lafayette, Louisiana Director of the Office of ProLife Issues 5/18/2010 Office in Lake Charles, Louisiana Director of 5/26/2010 Communications, Pastor and Lobbyist In a Restaurant near the State Capitol, Baton Rouge. APPENDIX C Louisiana Candidate Questionnaire 119 120 APPENDIX C Louisiana Candidate Questionnaire Please complete this form by mm/dd/yy and FAX to 504-835-6522 On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two abortion cases: Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. In its ruling, the Court ignored the duly enacted abortion laws of all 50 states, and established a new national policy. The effect was to strike down all state abortion laws and legalize abortion-on-demand for all nine months of pregnancy. This decision can be overturned by Court reversal or by a constitutional amendment. Responses will be compiled and circulated as a Position Statement to voters in your district via our website, e-mail, and/or direct mail. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. When Roe vs. Wade is overturned and the decision to protect unborn human life is returned to the states, would you vote for a law that would prohibit abortions, except to save the life of the mother? ____YES____NO 2. If it was not possible to pass such a law, would you vote for a law that would prohibit abortions, except to save the life of the mother, when the pregnancy is the result of forcible rape or when the pregnancy of a minor is the result of incest, with strict reporting requirements? ____YES ____NO 3. a. Would you vote for a law that would prohibit the use of abortion as a means of birth control? ____YES ____NO b. Would you vote for a law that would prohibit abortion for sex selection? ____YES ____NO 4. Would you vote for an "informed consent" law requiring that doctors provide information on the development of the unborn child, alternatives to abortion, and medical risks of abortion, with a 24-hour waiting period, before an abortion can be performed? ("Woman's Right to Know Law" passed and signed into law in 1995 La. Legislative session.) ____YES ____NO 121 Louisiana Candidate Questionnaire (Continued) 5. Would you vote for a law that prohibits ALL human cloning, including the cloning of human embryos for harmful experimentation? ____YES ____NO 6. Would you vote to fund pregnancy counseling centers that provide alternatives to abortion and do not counsel or refer for abortions? (Funded in Louisiana as the “Life Choice” Project since 2000). _____YES _____NO 7. Would you oppose the establishment and/or funding of "HEALTH" clinics (known as School Based Clinics) in secondary schools, unless they are explicitly prohibited from performing abortion counseling or referring to any entity, which counsels for, refers for, or does abortions? ____YES ____NO 8. Would you vote for a law to prohibit the use of state facilities from performing abortions not necessary to save the Life of the mother, and to prohibit state employees from performing, referring or counseling for abortions, other than those necessary to save the life of the mother? ____YES ____NO 9. Would you vote for a law to prohibit the use of tax dollars for abortion other than to save the life of the mother? ___YES ____NO 10. Would you oppose legislation that allows physician assisted suicide? ____YES ____NO 11. Would you oppose any legislation that would weaken or repeal existing restrictions in Louisiana Abortion Law? __YES _____NO Signature of Candidate: _____________________________Date: _____________ email:_________________________ 122 Louisiana Candidate Questionnaire (Continued) Please print or type name: ___________________________________Address: ________________________________ City: ______________________________ ZIP: ____________(House/Senate District)____________Office)__________ PLEASE FAX YOUR RESPONSE TO (504) 835-6522 – If you have any questions regarding this questionnaire, please call Peg Kenny, toll-free 1-866-463-5433 or at the local telephone 834-5433. APPENDIX D A Letter of Request to Participate in an Interview for Study 123 124 APPENDIX D A Letter of Request to Participate in an Interview for Study Emmanuel Okwaraocha Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy, Higgins Hall Room # 412 Southern University Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70813 Dear …, A Request to Participate in an Interview for Study I am a graduate student working on my doctoral dissertation at Southern University in Baton Rouge. As part of the requirements for the program, I have to conduct a research study. The topic of my research is Anti-Abortion Movement in PostRoe v. Wade Louisiana: A Qualitative Study. Your name was provided to me through a referral from a member of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. The data collection process for my study will include an open-ended interview of, some of the prominent members of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. I am requesting for your participation in the interview. The interview will take only a small amount of your valuable time and, your participation is voluntary. I would greatly appreciate your participation as the process is very crucial to my study. I am enclosing a list of the questionnaire to acquaint you more on the subject prior to our face-to-face meeting for the interview. The interview will be conducted between May and June, 2010. I would like you to choose any date, time, and place that will be convenient for you for the interview. Thank you for your assistance in this important study. If you have any questions about this research, please contact me at 337-280-4246 or use the above address for a reply. Yours Sincerely, Emmanuel Okwaraocha Doctoral Research Student. APPENDIX E Informed Consent Form 125 126 APPENDIX E Informed Consent Form Researcher: Emmanuel Okwaraocha Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs Higgins Hall Room 412 Southern University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70813. E-mail: americeo@hotmail.com Phone: 337-280-4246 Emmanuel Okwaraocha, a graduate student in the Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs at Southern University in Baton Rouge, Louisiana is doing a study on prolife movement. The title of the research project is Anti-Abortion Movement in Post-Roe v. Wade Louisiana: A Qualitative Study and it will involve an open-ended interview of some adult members of the Louisiana Right to Life Federation. The purpose of the research is to study the leadership, organization, propelling belief or ideology and, the strategic activities of the anti-abortion movement in Louisiana. The study is also aimed at ascertaining the political implications of the activities of the movement in the State and the public policy implications of the successes, if any, the movement has advanced in Louisiana regarding its prolife activities. The possible discomfort for participating in this study is that the interview will take a small amount of your time about 45 to 50 minutes. Your identity will not be disclosed and pseudonyms will be used in the interview unless you would want your real names to be used. The study records will be kept as confidential as possible. The results of the interview will be coded and kept in locked files at all times. Although this research may not benefit you directly, it will be beneficial to the society in general. The study will serve as a pioneer qualitative research work that has never been done on anti-abortion movement in the State of Louisiana. The study will be a salient contribution to the anti-abortion movement scholarship and hence, will also be of benefit to the academic community. Your participation in the study is voluntary and you are free to withdraw from the interview at any time. If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research volunteer in this study or you want to report a research-related injury, contact Dr. Patrick Carriere, Ph.D., Chairperson, Institutional Research Oversight Committee, P.O. Box 11241, Southern University –Baton Rouge, 127 Informed Consent Form (Continued) Baton Rouge, LA 70813-1241; Voice 225-771-5290; Facsimile 225-771-5721; E-mail – carrier@engr.subr.edu The study has been discussed with me and all my questions have been answered. I understand that additional questions regarding the study should be directed to the study researcher. I agree with the terms above and acknowledge that I have been given a copy of the consent form. I understand that I have not waived any of my legal rights by signing this form. __________________________________________ Signature of Volunteer Date Emmanuel Okwaraocha Signature of Person Administering Informed Consent Date Emmanuel Okwaraocha Signature of Principal Researcher Date APPENDIX F Initial Approval Form for Non-Exempt Research 128 129 VITA VITA Emmanuel Okwaraocha, is the second son and the third child of the Nnaomadiebube Stephen Okwaraocha and Ezinne Josephine Okwaraocha (nee Ugbala) family of Obiohia in Nigeria. A proud son of a noble family and a grandson of a famous and the legendary community leader, Okwaraocha Ukachukwu, Okwaraocha had his high school education at St. Mary Seminary Umuowa in Imo State and college education at St. Joseph Major Seminary Ikot-Ekpene in Akwa-Ibom State, and Seat of Wisdom Seminary Owerri in Imo State, Nigeria. Okwaraocha entered the Seminary formation at a very young age, and holds degrees in Philosophy (1991) and Sacred Theology (1995) from Pontifical Urbanian University Rome. He also holds a degree in Social Science (2006), from the Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs, Southern University in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Philosophy, Okwaraocha did a 55-page research project entitled The Inevitability and the Outcome of Inner Contradiction in Karl Marx, for the Sacred Theology degree, he did a 67-page research work entitled A Study of the Liberation Theology of Gustavo Gutierrez in the Light of the Teaching of the Church, and for the degree in Social Science, he wrote a 74-page thesis entitled An Analysis of the Importance of the Primary Base of Support in Deracialization Theory. A theologian, social scientist, and policy analyst, Okwaraocha is a veteran guest news analyst and social commentator to the Imo State Broadcasting Corporation (IBC) Owerri in Nigeria, and a contributor to various newspapers and magazines including The xi Nigerian Statesman, The Sunday Statesman, The Leader, The Forum newspapers, and Tell magazine. As a guest writer to the IBC, Okwaraocha has contributed about fifty articles that deal with politics, economy, public policy, education, religion, science and technology. Some of the sample broadcast works by Emmanuel Okwaraocha include: (1) Why a National Conference is Imperative for Nigeria broadcast November 21, 2001, (2) The Federal Government’s Privatization Exercise: A Call for Imo State to Participate Actively broadcast October 13, 2001, (3) Probing the Nigeria’s Past and Healing the Society via the Human Rights Violation and Investigation Commission (HRVC) broadcast March 5, 2001 (4) Sharia and Islamic Legal System as a Threat to Nigeria’s Corporate Existence broadcast July 2, 2000, (5) Gas Flaring and its Implications on the Nigerian Economy broadcast May 18, 1999, (6) The Urgent Task before the Legislature and the Executive in the New Civilian Government in Nigeria broadcast March 16, 1999, (7) Commemorating the World Food Day (Oct. 16, 1998) and Re-Appraising Agricultural Development in Nigeria broadcast October 26, 1998, (8) Curbing Financial Recklessness in the Nigeria’s Apex Bank, the CBN: Autonomy is the Answer broadcast September 7, 1998, (9) High Drop Rates and the Decline in Male Enrolment in Secondary Schools: A Future Complete Exclusion of Ndi-Igbo by Ndi-Igbo themselves from Leadership Positions in Nigeria broadcast March 12, 1998, (10) The 1998 Federal “Budget of Transition:” Faithful Implementation will be more Lauded broadcast January 26, 1998, (11) Multiple Fees in Our State-Owned Tertiary Institutions: The Bane of Education and National Development in Nigeria broadcast October 23, 1997, and others. xii Also, Okwaraocha‟s published articles in the Nigerian Newspapers include: (1) “Industrializing Imo” in Sunday Statesman vol. XX August 12, 2001, (2) “The Merit in the Agitation for Resource Control” in The Leader vol. XLIII July 2001, (3) “Wanted: A Broad-based Igbo Political Party” in Sunday Statesman vol. XX June 24, 2001, and others. Emmanuel Okwaraocha was a panelist in the 4th Women in Africa and the African Diaspora (WAAD) International Conference that was held in Abuja, Nigeria (August 3-8 2009), and he presented a paper entitled Gendered Inequalities and Access to Education: Evidence from Nigeria. Also, while Okwaraocha‟s Master‟s thesis entitled An Analysis of the Importance of the Primary Base of Support in Deracialization Theory was nominated by the Southern University Graduate School for a national award, the 2007 CHBG/UMI Distinguished Thesis Award, another of his research paper entitled A Field Research on the Feeding Condition of Prison Inmates of Vermilion Parish (County) Correctional Center was nominated by the Chair of the Sociology Department, Southern University in Baton Rouge, for presentation at the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Sociological Association (MSSA) in Lafayette, Louisiana (October 25-28, 2006). Finally, Okwaraocha was a member of the Panel that, in October 2005, successfully interviewed the Honorable Mayor of Baton Rouge, Mr. Melvin “Kip Holden, on his achievements and failures in mayoral campaigns and governance, and a deracialization strategy that won him the mayoral seat. xiii APPROVAL FOR SCHOLARLY DISSEMINATION The author grants to the Southern University Library the right to reproduce, by appropriate methods, upon request, any or all potions of this dissertation. It is understood that “request” consists of the agreement, on the part of the requesting party, that said reproduction is for his personal use and the subsequent reproduction will not occur without approval of the author of this dissertation. The author of this dissertation reserves the right to publish freely, in the literature, at any time, any or all portions of this dissertation. Author________________________ Date__________________________ xiv [...]... restrictions in the pre -Roe v Wade era the movement s mobilization and organization in the post- Roe v Wade decision – (a) background, (b) organization and countermobilization, the movement s strategies and tactics – (a) issue-framing strategy, (b) political strategy, (c) legislative strategy, and (d) violent strategy and tactics, abortion policy in post- Roe v Wade, the leeway to state abortion policy, state abortion. .. dynamics of abortion policy and the anti- abortion movement include: abortion restrictions in the pre -Roe v Wade era the movement s mobilization and organization in the post- Roe v Wade decision, incorporating a background b organization and countermobilization the movement s strategies and tactics comprising a issue-framing strategy b political strategy c legislative strategy d violent strategy and tactic... development, as there are some active anti- abortion movements in the area that strategically aim at advancing restrictive abortion policies in the State, and even overturning the Roe decision As aforementioned, the Louisiana Right to Life movement is the subject of investigation in this study Scholars of social movements and interest groups believe that these advocacies do not spring up spontaneously in a society,... findings in this case study are unique to the context and may not be generalized Finally, the concept that a qualitative researcher becomes the measurement instrument in a qualitative study (Patton, 2002 and Merriam 1998) brings to the fore an inherent human negative prejudice or bias A possible bias on my part as a pro-life advocate researching an anti- abortion movement surely constitutes a limitation... say that the Supreme Court Roe decision legalizing abortion was a win for the pro-choice movement against the anti- abortion movements However, the following section deals with the mobilization and organization of the antiabortion movements following the Roe decision Mobilization and Organization in the Post- Roe v Wade Decision Background The relevant literature regarding the dynamic developments in. ..ABSTRACT Okwaraocha Emmanuel, Ph.D Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs Southern University and A & M College Baton Rouge, Louisiana December, 2010 ANTI- ABORTION MOVEMENT IN POST- ROE v WADE LOUISIANA: A QUALITATIVE STUDY Major Professor: Dr James S Larson The 1973 Supreme Court landmark decision in Roe v Wade legalized abortion in the United States, triggering an unprecedented... dynamics of abortion policy in the post- Roe v Wade decision the leeway to state abortion policy state abortion policy, defining a woman-related abortion policy b fetus-related abortion policy c provider-related abortion policy 13 The Dynamics of the Anti- abortion Movement Abortion Restrictions in the Pre -Roe v Wade Era Considerable literature examines the development of the abortion regulations and... is a dearth of qualitative research to examine the numerous oppositional organizations against legal abortion in the various states of the Union This work is aimed at studying the strategic activities of the anti- abortion movement in the State of Louisiana, the Louisiana Right to Life Federation (LARTL) My focus on Louisiana is not only informed by the state‟s restrictive laws on legal abortion but also... study the leadership, organization, and the propelling ideology of the Louisiana Right to Life (LARTL) movement in the State of Louisiana The study also investigates the pro-life movement in terms of strategies, influence, activities, and public policy implications in the State of Louisiana Findings are drawn from a triangulation of documentary information and data, data from interviews and archival... physician be involved in the service after fetal viability; public funding – public funding for abortion is limited to life endangerment, rape, and incest; private insurance coverage – coverage of abortion in private insurance plans is restricted to cases that pertain to life endangerment and; parental involvement – the state requires the consent of one or both of the parents of a minor before an abortion ... post- viability standard of care 37 Gestational limits Many states have abortion laws, including Louisiana, that ban abortions after fetal viability, except in the cases of life and health endangerment... State of Louisiana is no exception to this development, as there are some active anti- abortion movements in the area that strategically aim at advancing restrictive abortion policies in the State,... (LARTL) movement in the State of Louisiana The study is also aimed at ascertaining whether the pro-life movement has influenced any anti- abortion or restrictive abortion policies in Louisiana and