Draft talk:Abortion-rights violence

There is a clear rationale for creating this page in the wake of 2022 media discussions around the existence of or potential for violation in reaction to the likely overturning of Roe v. Wade, including commentary from the White House and leaders of both pro-abortion rights and anti-abortion groups. The topic clearly meets notability guidelines and is currently the subject of extensive coverage in the United States, including by mainstream sources (i.e., not just by specifically anti-abortion publications).Revfulop1994 (talk) 17:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

See examples of relevant discussion here in mainstream media sources:

• https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/10/democrats-caution-prochoice-protestors-violence/
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/11/abortion-choice-roe-dodds-confrontation/

This page should not be speedily deleted for the following reasons:

- In the context of the 2022 likely overturning of Roe v. Wade, violence at pro-abortion rights demonstrations or by pro-abortion rights groups has become a topic of discussion in a way that it has not been in the past:

• https://www.spectator.com.au/2022/05/will-the-ripples-from-roe-v-wade-reach-australia/
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/10/democrats-caution-prochoice-protestors-violence/
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/11/abortion-choice-roe-dodds-/
• https://www.axios.com/2022/05/09/white-house-abortion-rights-protests-supreme-court
• https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/09/politics/abortion-protests-supreme-court-justices/index.html
• https://khn.org/morning-breakout/safety-concerns-for-justices-prompt-senate-action/

Note also:

• Current article is substantially better sourced with mostly mainstream and reliable news sources frequently quoted in other articles relating to abortion.
• Recent examples of incidents in 2022 make this topic currently newsworthy and noteworthy in the context of Wikipedia's guidelines.
• This topic is verifiable through extensive coverage by reliable sources quoted in this article.
• Aspects of this topic have been the subject of academic research (e.g., the role of violence in radical left groups, such as in Germany.)
• Even if there is a discussion to be had about the relative incidence of pro-abortion rights vs. anti-abortion violence, that does not seem to preclude a discussion on their own merits about each topic.Revfulop1994 (talk) 17:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@StAnselm: welcome back in 2022! I just read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-abortion violence and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-abortion rights violence; the rationales for deletion are, how you say? 👨‍🍳💋 Elizium23 (talk) 15:31, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

The sexual assault accounted below seems out of scope, and potentially OR/synthesis trying to an call the assault "pro abortion" because it was committed by a disgraced abortion provider. –Zfish118^⋉talk 17:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

• 1978-1980: A woman in the care of abortion provider Ronald Tauber died as a result of a perforated uterus during her abortion procedure; his license was suspended, admitting privileges were revoked, and he was charged with manslaughter. In 1980, after moving from Orlando to Detroit, he raped a 6-year-old girl; he was released on bail and assaulted a 12-year-old girl. Tauber was convicted for sexual assault and sentenced to 12-50 years imprisonment in the case of the rape; charges such as indecent exposure, attempted kidnapping, and manslaughter were dropped or dismissed. Tauber filed a malpractice suit against his psychologist for failing to prevent the sexual assaults, after Tauber's attempted insanity plea failed to prevent his imprisonment. According to Tauber, a civil judgement of $210,000 was awarded to the 6-year-old girl he raped.

Since this article is in draft space, I would appreciate if sources were restored, and maked with failed verification or reliable source tags as appropriate (rather than left deleted with a citation needed tag). This would help ensure content can be edited to match the source, or help research additional sources. –Zfish118^⋉talk 15:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Went and restored the sources. This is not a comment on the appropriateness of the sources; just an aid towards vetting the content of the draft. –Zfish118^⋉talk

Of course we apply WP:V and WP:RS in draft space... Horse Eye's Back (talk) 19:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I am removing following statements for now:

• The attack was supported by a reporter at pro-abortion rights publication Rewire, who called for "more of this."^[1] –Zfish118^⋉talk 19:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

• 2021: A purported anti-abortion group called Jane's Revenge threatened continued attacks on anti-abortion establishments if they did not cease operations. Communications from the group were reportedly relayed to an investigative reporter through an anonymous third party.^[2] –Zfish118^⋉talk 19:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Concerns about the content cannot be discussed in any rational manner unless the disputed text is visible. Two editors believe the content does not warrant wholesale removal. The contents is, besides, in draft space, so is only slightly more available than if it were solely available in the edit history. Please discuss specific concerns. –Zfish118^⋉talk 03:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The content is in the article history. I've never had someone claim that the text has to be live on the page to be discussed on talk, why would that be the case? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Is this ready to re-submit? Bearian (talk) 23:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't think so... Notability hasn't actually been established because we don't have sources which talk about the topic as a whole just individual incidents. I'm pretty sure that reliable sources which cover it as a discrete topic do exist, but I've had a hard time finding them because the vast vast vast majority of work in this area is about Anti-abortion violence which comes up for the same searches. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:10, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

I didn't see this mentioned elsewhere on the Talk page, but there was an article from a little while back titled “If Abortions Aren’t Safe, Neither Are You:” A Mixed-Method Study of Jane’s Revenge and Other Post-Dobbs Militancy by a criminology professor (published in the Journal for Deradicalization): https://jd.journals.publicknowledgeproject.org/index.php/jd/article/download/671/389 So that would seem to fit the criteria for a reliable source as was as point to being notable enough to prompt academic study.

A paper with a very similar title and topic was published by a researcher at Harvard: “If Abortions Aren’t Safe, Neither Are You”: Public Support for Violent Tactics in U.S. Abortion Politics https://jkertzer.sites.fas.harvard.edu/Research_files/Abortion-KCMZ.pdf

The specific group "Jane's Revenge" has been reported about in Newseek: https://www.newsweek.com/what-janes-revenge-abortion-rights-group-vows-night-rage-over-roe-1718919

Reporting about a more general phenomenon of pro-abortion violence also appeared in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/11/pro-choice-militants-pregnancy-crisis-centers-attacks-us FactWeaverDelta (talk) 19:06, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

It looks like the main obstacle identified in prior reviews is that the sources do not treat “abortion-rights violence” as a clearly defined, standalone phenomenon, but instead discuss individual incidents or specific groups.

To address that concern, it may be worth refocusing the article more narrowly around a topic that is directly treated in reliable secondary sources. For example, several sources (including academic and major news coverage that I mention here) specifically analyze post-2022 militancy and groups such as Jane’s Revenge, rather than the broader concept as a whole.

A revised scope along those lines would:

• Align more closely with how the literature actually frames the subject
• Avoid synthesis concerns about grouping disparate incidents under a broad label
• Strengthen the case for notability by tying the article to sources that explicitly analyze the phenomenon

If there’s agreement, I can't say I have all the time in the world to devote to it, but I’d be willing to help restructure the draft around that narrower framing so it better reflects the available sourcing. FactWeaverDelta (talk) 19:16, 30 March 2026 (UTC)