Free Agency

Recently, a friend called to see if I would be interested in an internship with the state office of a pro-choice organization. It was the kind of opportunity that I would have jumped at two years ago, when I was first trying to find my way in the reproductive rights world, and even though I have enough experience in the field to be past the intern stage, I still thought seriously about applying.

Seriously, but briefly. Because more than my previous experience and current commitments, what was holding me back was a hesitation to work at a formal organization again. I am deeply committed to the pro-choice cause; I will jump through as many hoops as necessary to get my book published; and I admire the work that a number of these organizations do, and will gladly support them in both word and deed.

But last year, I learned the hard way that being an independent writer and working for an established organization do not always go together. That was a very disappointing, not to mention disillusioning, surprise. What was even worse was learning that I’m not the only person that has encountered such resistance and repercussions.

I understand that pro-choice organizations have very unique messaging and security concerns, and support placing limits on what information employees can about their particular workplaces. That’s just common sense, regardless of the field. But I doubt I’m the only pro-choice writer that has absolutely no interest in discussing the ins and outs of a specific organization’s policies or positions. I simply want to write about reproductive rights: why they are important, how they are being eroded, and why people should care. Such passion shouldn’t be a threat to established organizations, but too often, it is.

Is that just because of the aforementioned messaging and security issues? That’s undoubtedly part of the story, but there’s more to it than that. From what I’ve seen, the established groups operate in a very hierarchical manner, and having employees discussing the same issues as the principals, albeit in a more informal manner and to different audiences, just doesn’t seem to sit well. Is this something that could change as more long-time leaders retire? Perhaps, but that’s a long time coming. I’m more concerned with what can be done in the here and now to promote more openness and information-sharing.

My solution—to trade a salary from an established organization for the freedom to write what I want—won’t work for everyone. I was lucky to find work in a different field that I love just as much, but I’ll be the first to admit that it’s harder to keep up with pro-choice news now that I’m not in the trenches every day. But at least for now, not having to look over my shoulder every time I publish is worth it.