Reading the American Past: Printed Page 306

DOCUMENT 30–3

Norma McCorvey Explains How She Became “Roe” of Roe v. Wade

Norma McCorvey, who became the “Roe” of Roe v. Wade, grew up in Houston, Texas. After giving birth to two children when she was in her late teens — both given up for adoption — she sought an abortion when she was 21 and pregnant with her third child. Since abortions were illegal in Texas, she was directed to a Dallas attorney who filed the legal case that resulted in Roe v. Wade in 1973. In a legal affidavit of 2000, excerpted below, McCorvey described her involvement in the case and accused her attorneys and the Supreme Court of misleading her and other American women about the realities of abortion. By the time she filed the affidavit, McCorvey had lived in Dallas for many years in a long-term lesbian relationship, converted to Christianity, become active in the antiabortion (or pro-life) movement, converted to Roman Catholicism, and renounced lesbianism. McCorvey's affidavit highlights the personal story behind the famous Supreme Court case and describes some of the issues that generated passionate debate between pro-choice and pro-life advocates, that is, between supporters and opponents of Roe v. Wade.

Affidavit, United States District Court, District of New Jersey, 2000

My name is Norma McCorvey, and I reside in Dallas, Texas. I was the woman designated as “Jane Roe” as plaintiff in Roe v. Wade, the United States Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United States. ...

Because of my role in Roe v. Wade, how that decision came about, and my experiences working at abortion clinics, I can provide the Court with information and a perspective unavailable from other sources. ... My case was wrongfully decided and has caused great harm to the women and children of our nation. ...

Virtually the entire basis for Roe v. Wade was built upon false assumptions. No meaningful trial to determine the real facts was ever held. The misrepresentations and deceptions that plagued Roe v. Wade ... show why there is a dire necessity for a trial to ensure that the true facts regarding the nature of abortion and the interests of women are heard. ... [W]e obtained a decision in Roe v. Wade based upon what abortion advocates wanted women to be able to do, not what women were truly capable of. ...

While the experience of being Jane Roe over the past twenty-seven years has been very difficult, my life has been filled with hardship from the beginning. Although I was an emotionally abused child, and a sexually abused teenager, I believe the worst abuse was inflicted by the judicial system. In retrospect, I was exploited by two self-interested attorneys. Worse, the courts, without looking into my true circumstances and taking the time to decide the real impact abortion would have upon women, I feel used me to justify legalization of terminating the lives [of] over thirty-five million babies. Although on an intellectual level I know I was exploited, the responsibility I feel for this tragedy is overwhelming. Because the courts allowed my case to proceed without my testimony, without ever explaining to me the reality of abortion, without being cross-examined on my erroneous perception of what ... abortion really is, a tragic mistake was made by the courts. ...

Prior to my pregnancy with the “Roe” baby, I gave birth to two other children. My first, a daughter, was adopted by my mother. It is difficult to part with my child, yet I have always been comforted by the fact that my daughter is alive and cared for. My second daughter was raised by her father, a young intern at Baylor Methodist Medical School. He was kind enough to want to get married and make a home, but I wasn't ready for that kind of commitment. Later, when I became pregnant with the “Roe” baby, I was really in a predicament. My mother expressed her disapproval of my having given birth out of wedlock. She told me how irresponsible I had been. My mother made it clear that she was not going to take care of another baby.

Certain that I was pregnant, I waited for a while before I went to the doctor. While I was waiting to be examined, I questioned the ladies there about whether they knew where a woman could go to have an abortion. A lady told me where an illegal clinic was located and told me that it would cost $250.00. Following our discussion, I told the doctor that I wanted to have an abortion, but he refused stating that abortion was illegal. He didn't believe in abortion and gave me the phone number of an adoption attorney.

When I had saved about two hundred dollars, I took a cross-town bus to the illegal clinic, which turned out to be a dentist's office that had been closed down the previous week. For some reason, I felt relieved yet angry at the same time. All my emotions were peaking; first, I was angry, then I was happy, and then I'd cry. From the abortion clinic, I took the bus to my dad's apartment and decided to speak with the adoption attorney. The adoption attorney set up the meeting and referred me to Sarah Weddington, the attorney who represented me in Roe v. Wade.

Although Weddington and I were about the same age, our lives were quite different. She was a young attorney, and I was homeless and lived in a park. Unconcerned about politics, I sold flowers and an underground newspaper describing the types and availability of illegal narcotics. I am not proud of my jobs. At the time I sought simply to survive.

Following the adoption attorney's introduction, Weddington invited me out to dinner. I agreed. At our initial meeting, I met with Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, her friend. Both Weddington and Coffee had recently finished law school and they wanted to bring a class action suit against the State of Texas to legalize abortion, not nationally. We discussed the case over a few pitchers of beer and pizza at a small restaurant in Dallas.

Weddington, Coffee, and I were drinking beer and trying to come up with a pseudonym for me. I had heard that whenever women were having illegal abortions, they wouldn't carry any identification with them. An unidentifiable woman was often referred to as Jane Doe. So we were trying to come up with something that would rhyme with “Doe.” After three or four pitchers of beer, we started with the letter “a” and eventually we reached “r” and agreed on “Roe.” Then I asked “What about Jane for the first name?” Janie used to be my imaginary friend as a child. I told them about her and how she always wanted to do good things for people, and it was decided — I became Jane Roe, by the stroke of a pen.

The young lawyers told me that they had spoken with two or three other women about being in the case, but they didn't fit their criteria. Although I did know what “criteria” meant, I asked them if I had what it is that it took to be in their suit. They said yes, “You're white. You're young, pregnant, and you want an abortion.” At that time, I didn't know their full intent. Only that they wanted to make abortion legal and they thought I'd be a good plaintiff. I came for the food, and they led me to believe that they could help me get an abortion.

During our meeting, they questioned me, “Norma don't you think that abortion should be legal?” Unsure, I responded that I did not know. In fact, I did not know what the term “abortion” really meant. Back in 1970, no one discussed abortion. It was taboo, and so too was the subject of abortion. ... “Abortion,” to me, meant “going back” to the condition of not being pregnant. I never looked the word up in the dictionary until after I had already signed the affidavit. I was very naive. For their part, my lawyers lied to me about the nature of abortion. Weddington convinced me that “It's just a piece of tissue. You just missed your period.” I didn't know during the Roe v. Wade case that the life of a human being was terminated. ...

My lawyers never discussed what an abortion is, other than to make the misrepresentation that “it's only tissue.” I never understood that the child was already in existence. I never understood that the child was a complete separate human being. I was under the false impression that abortion somehow reversed the process and prevented the child from coming into existence. In the two to three years during the case no one, including my lawyers told me that an abortion is actually terminating the life of an actual human being. The courts never took any testimony about this and I heard nothing which shed light on what abortion really was.

In 1972, Sarah Weddington argued in the courts, presumptuously on my behalf, that women should be allowed to obtain a legal abortion. The courts did not ask whether I knew what I was asking for. ... Weddington and the other supporters of abortion used me and my circumstance to urge the courts to legalize abortion without any meaningful trial which addressed the humanity of the baby, and what abortion would do to women. At that time, I was a street person. I lived, worked, and panhandled out on the streets. My totally powerless circumstance made it easy for them to use me. My presence was a necessary evil. My real interests were not their concern.

As the class action plaintiff in the most controversial U.S. Supreme Court case of the twentieth century, I only met with the attorneys twice. Once over pizza and beer, when I was told that my baby was only “tissue.” The other time at Coffee's office to sign the affidavit. No other personal contacts. I was never invited into court. I never testified. I was never present before any court on any level, and I was never at any hearing on my case. The entire case was an abstraction. The facts about abortion were never heard. Totally excluded from every aspect and every issue of the case, I found out about the decision from the newspaper just like the rest of the country. In a way my exclusion, and the exclusion of real meaningful findings of fact in Roe v. Wade, is symbolic of the way the women of the nation and their experiences with abortion have been ignored in a national debate by the abortion industry. ...

My personal involvement in Roe v. Wade was not my only experience with abortion. Unskilled and uneducated, with alcohol and drug problems, finding and holding a job was always a problem for me. But with my notoriety, abortion facilities, usually paying a dollar an hour more than minimum wage, were always willing to add Jane Roe to their ranks. ...

I worked in several abortion facilities over the years ... and they were all the same with respect to the condition of the facilities and the “counseling” the women receive. One clinic where I worked in 1995 was typical: Light fixtures and plaster falling from the ceiling; rat droppings over the sinks; backed up sinks; and blood splattered on the walls. But the most distressing room in the facility was the “parts room.” Aborted babies were stored here. There were dead babies and baby parts stacked like cordwood. ... Veterinary clinics I have seen are cleaner and more regulated than the abortion clinics I worked in.

While all the facilities were much the same, the abortion doctors in the various clinics where I worked were very representative of abortionists in general. The abortionists I knew were usually of foreign descent with the perception that the lax abortion laws in the United States present a fertile money-making opportunity. One abortionist, in particular, would sometimes operate bare-chested, and sometimes shoeless with his shirt off, and earned a six-figure income. ...

The lack of counseling provided the women was perhaps the greatest tragedy. Early in my abortion career, it became evident that the “counselors” and the abortionists were there for only one reason — to sell abortions. The extent of the abortionists' counseling was, “Do you want an abortion? Ok, you sign here and we give you abortion.” ... There was nothing more. There was never an explanation of the procedure. No one even explained to the mother that the child already existed and the life of a human was being terminated. No one ever explained that there were options to abortion, that financial help was available, or that the child was ... unique and irreplaceable. No one ever explained that there were psychological and physical risks of harm to the mother. There was never time for the mother to reflect or to consult with anyone who could offer her help or an alternative. There was no informed consent. In my opinion, the only thing the abortion doctors and clinics cared about was making money. No abortion clinic cared about the women involved. As far as I could tell, every woman had the name of Jane Roe.

From Norma McCorvey Affidavit, United States District Court, District of New Jersey, March 15, 2000.

Questions for Reading and Discussion