Some pro-choice professors at the University of Michigan have decided that the best way to fight the pro-life movement is to encourage abortionists to be vocal about the gruesome details of the procedure. From Campus Reform:

Professor Lisa A. Martin, et al. published an article in the most recent issue of Social Science and Medicine, where they explain that abortion providers “self-censor” in order to avoid discussing sensitive issues such as “multiple abortions, grief after abortion, [and] the economics of abortion.”

Martin and her colleagues go on to note that many abortion providers face severe backlash for speaking up about these issues, but argue that failing to do so “results in costs to the movement itself.”

“One consequence is that nuanced public depictions of abortion workers are rare,” Martin explains, adding that “the absence of providers’ voices has created a vacuum in which stereotypical caricatures may dominate the public discourse.”

Indeed, the four authors claims that neglecting to talk about the “difficult aspects of abortion work [could] ultimately weaken the abortion rights movement,” referencing an argument initially made by the late Norma Leah McCorvey Nelson (the “Roe” in Roe v. Wade, who eventually became an anti-abortion activist.)

The paper elaborates that “while participants often commented about their pride in their work, many also identified moral uncertainties about whether or not providing abortions was always a good thing.”

“I still to this day say to myself I hope I’m doing the right thing. That never goes away,” said one abortion provider. “There’s part of this where you need some validation [that] what you’re doing is right.”

Another abortion provider expressed concern that she worked in an “abortion mill,” as anti-abortion activists call it. “It’s like a slaughterhouse—it’s like—line ‘em up and kill ‘em and then go on to the next one—I feel like that sometimes.”