FX documentary on Norma McCorvey omits key Catholic sources who knew her best

[Michie]

Years ago, a pro-life activist told me that her movement had several dirty little secrets — as in people who had been on the abortion-rights side of the equation, then flipped to the other side but were impossible to deal with or had weird lifestyles.

One such personality was Norma McCorvey, the “Jane Roe” of the famous 1973 U.S. Supreme Court Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

Shortly before McCorvey died in 2017, she consented to being part of a documentary that just aired on FX Networks (I saw it on Hulu) last week. McCorvey’s “deathbed” assertions first hit the Los Angeles Times:

When Norma McCorvey, the anonymous plaintiff in the landmark Roe vs. Wade case, came out against abortion in 1995, it stunned the world and represented a huge symbolic victory for abortion opponents: “Jane Roe” had gone to the other side. For the remainder of her life, McCorvey worked to overturn the law that bore her name.

But it was all a lie, McCorvey says in a documentary filmed in the months before her death in 2017, claiming she only did it because she was paid by antiabortion groups including Operation Rescue.

“I was the big fish. I think it was a mutual thing. I took their money and they’d put me out in front of the cameras and tell me what to say. That’s what I’d say,” she says in “AKA Jane Roe,” which premieres Friday on FX. “It was all an act. I did it well too. I am a good actress.”

Many of us religion reporters who were working in the 1990s also interviewed McCorvey. There is no way she was putting on an act when I talked with her and I know other journalists who’d say the same thing. The most gaping hole in this story is linked to McCorvey’s conversion to Catholicism and the wealth of evidence that she sincerely practiced that faith.

Continued below
FX documentary on Norma McCorvey omits key Catholic sources who knew her best — GetReligion

 

[Michie]

So, more questions are left unanswered than answered here. When McCorvey talks about getting paid, was that for her activism or just some kind of occasional retainer? As the National Review notes:

It is worth noting a few reasons to doubt the spin that media outlets are putting on these revelations. For one thing, it isn’t at all unusual for activists or public speakers to receive compensation for their work — in fact, it would be more surprising to find out that she wasn’t paid for everything she did. The testimony of public figures with personal experience is especially valuable, and it shouldn’t be considered especially controversial that those figures are often hired to promote the message that their experience supports. The fact that McCorvey was paid to speak about her change of heart doesn’t, in itself, mean that her conversion was insincere or motivated by financial considerations.

Consider, too, her subsequent conversion to Catholicism, her choice to speak with a priest on the day she died, and her decision to have a Catholic funeral. Presumably she wasn’t paid to do any of that.

So here we have footage filmed in May 2016, nine months before McCorvey’s death, and some notable personalities who should have been interviewed about her, but were not. Abby Johnson says she talked with McCorvey mere days before she died and heard nothing on the line of the I-was-paid mantra that McCorvey told FX.

Also, the documentary is coy about one important thing. To get access to McCorvey, surely they had to pay up too? We call that “checkbook journalism” and ethical news organizations don’t offer money to their interviewees.

When pressed by the Washington Post, the film’s producer admitted he paid her a “modest licensing fee” for use of family photos and documentary footage.

Hmmmm. Professionals in the journalism business aren’t supposed to do even that. So, FX also paid her as well, making themselves as complicit as the people that they criticize.

Transparency is everything. Next time, FX, use the same standards on yourselves.

 

[LizaMarie]

None of these articles or documentaries(which I haven't watched) seem to quote those in the Pro life movement who knew her. (Such as Father Frank Pavone, etc)
Also, they keep painting Rob Shrenk as a conservative pro-life he is not any longer. He left the pro-life movement and is now solidly pro choice and pro LGBTQ/same sex marriage in the Church.
I can't help but wonder if he has an agenda.

 

[Michie]

I watched it but it was quite obvious they were not telling the entirety of the story.

None of these articles or documentaries(which I haven't watched) seem to quote those in the Pro life movement who knew her. (Such as Father Frank Pavone, etc)
Also, they keep painting Rob Shrenk as a conservative pro-life he is not any longer. He left the pro-life movement and is now solidly pro choice and pro LGBTQ/same sex marriage in the Church.
I can't help but wonder if he has an agenda.

 

[LizaMarie]

It just irritates me, they should have at least shown both sides.
Nevertheless, even if she was just "playing" the pro-life side(which I doubt)it doesn't change the fact of what abortion is and the fact that it is wrong. If she was doing that, that is on her, not the pro-life movement.