I’m pro-choice but I disagreed with this piece because SCOTUS sent it back to the states, it did ban abortion.
I had an abortion during college, & it was a traumatic experience. I am older now & was blessed with two children. I can never know what life would have been like if I hadn’t had my abortion.
I’m pro-choice but I disagreed with this piece because SCOTUS sent it back to the states, it did ban abortion.
I had an abortion during college, & it was a traumatic experience. I am older now & was blessed with two children. I can never know what life would have been like if I hadn’t had my abortion.
I don’t need to share my story because it’s hard to even write about it. But I am. I’ve been a Democrat since I first voted, and over the years they went from “safe, legal, rare” to “shout your abortion.” The latter always made me uncomfortable. It didn’t make space for women like me who made the choice under duress-- who may still be wracked with guilt.
But from the Right I see no move for understanding. Though pro-life groups often promote stories like mine of women who were traumatized by their abortion -- It never takes long to read a comment dripping with cruelty -- usually by a man.
I’m sure your pain is sincere and tragic; I am sorry that you carry that with you and I pray you find relief some day.
I agree with the disingenuous nature of much of the pro-choice side. They also have a large share of ridiculous cherry-picked atrocities (like raped 10 year olds) and faked situations (like “women with ectopic pregnancies will be left to die.”). It’s all designed to paint pro-life as evil. Meanwhile they also minimize or deny the fact that a life is killed. That is where they err in “understanding.” No concern whatsoever for that innocent life. And there is little mention, if any, of the responsibility of the man & woman having consensual sex. And no mention of the father’s interests, which seems hard and wrong and lacking understanding to me.
I don’t think most arguments are designed to inflict pain, though some comments are, but the topic and reality itself are inherently fraught with pain.
I didn’t respond to this but I think it’s wrong to paint all pro-life people as evil. I’ve made it a point to listen to more people that I don’t really WANT to... because I prejudge what they’ll say. I listened to a Triggernometry episode where they talked to a pro-life doctor there and it was hard to do, but he brought up things that I could look up later. There’s no harm done by listening.
Thank you for your response, Jen. I don’t ask for anyone to accept my choice, but to keep it in mind that for some (many?) if us who’ve had an abortion, it was a decision made in a state of panic.
I agree with what you are saying. It’s not possible to talk about this issue without mentioning the other life. I know how the pro-choice side speaks about it, and it’s denialism. It’s not a mani-pedi, it’s a serious matter and the “shout your abortion” crowd does nothing to inspire compassion.
I had twins later through IVF (my eggs, husband’s sperm), and got to witness life from its earliest moments. On one side after several cycles of implanted embryos you appreciate how delicate life is, how everything can be going fine until in one moment- it’s not. I loved them as my babies since the first time I saw their ultrasounds. I cannot fathom allowing abortion for any reason in the 2nd trimester onward. I also can’t imagine a woman that far along wanting an abortion. Life of the mother, unforeseen birth defects of some level (I’m not a doctor, or an ethicist... I’ll leave those larger issues to them).
I am pro-life and also went through IVF to have my babies at age 40 and a week shy of 42. I gave all of our embryos a chance for life. Both babies were rushed to the NICU (daughter had cord around her neck and she was an emergency C-section after a day of trying to dilate. I never even got to see her before she went to the NICU. Son was a planned C-section 17 months after daughter because he was going to be large (10.2 and 21 inches) and breech. The day after his birth he had a stroke. He is ok because we saw the seizures (many don't) but I don't doubt that if the doctor knew from an ultrasound that he would suffer a stroke after birth (by detecting something wrong in the left center lobe), they would have suggested abortion. Life serves up its challenges to us all. I would love to see more adoptions.
Having said that, I would never ever suggest to know the challenges you faced in college and the reason you chose abortion. My expression of mercy, unlike in this essay, is to show my concern, as a person who believes in all life, for you despite our differences. Wishing you the best.
I’m glad to hear that your children are okay. My twins were born at 37 weeks, and we were spared the NICU though I was worried about an early birth my whole pregnancy (37 wks is considered full term for twins.) You NICU parents are made of strong stuff. Thankfully there is so much more that can be done to help little ones survive these days... heart surgeries in utero even.
I don’t feel any I’ll will towards pro-life people. I do worry about the lack of a social safety net that most European countries have - along with abortion limits between 12-15 weeks. The US is a different situation.
I think adoption is a good solution for many, but it’s never as easy as people think it is. My good friend adopted sisters through the foster system, and they both suffered a lot of trauma at the hands of their birth families. It’s a full-time job managing the emotional problems & psychological issues that they have. She can’t work. One child was in a mental hospital for several months for suicidal tendencies. Even without mental health problems there is a deep loss for many who are adopted, I’ve read, and for the mothers who gave them up. I don’t discourage it but I think people need to be realistic and not go into it with rose colored glasses.
There are safety nets but they are under major attack right now. I donate to one such program, and while in HS my daughter volunteered, where single women raising children live in a home (called Well of Mercy) where they work to care for one another and the home, have child care and attend college. They stay there until they are ready to move into their own places. They have rules to follow (no drugs, alcohol, men at the home, etc). It's a wonderful program and if I didn't live in another state I would likely be volunteering myself.
You're right about the complications of adoption. I know many who have adopted and some even within the same family have more challenges than others.....but none have said they would rather not be born. Complications tend to be around a sense of abandonment, so more work in providing psychological supports early on is most helpful. Friends (who dated from 8th grade until college graduation -- then getting married, attempted to adopt twin boys at the age of 5. So many anger issues....one almost set the home on fire. Sadly, they couldn't continue with the adoption.
On the other hand I had a coworker who had three abortions---basically used it as contraception. She kept her fourth pregnancy and he was born with Down's syndrome. I don't know for a fact because we lost touch more than two decades ago, but I'm thinking he brought her tremendous joy and like with all children, plenty of challenges.
Undoubtedly and unfortunately. I think that is likely the larger portion. But I can imagine that there are some men who might wish to allow their child to live.
No doubt and their interests should be part of the conversation. All I'm saying is that if men were more proactive about supporting progeny, or, if society censured or penalized men who did not support instead of letting them off scot-free, like it does now, the the number of abortions might go down.
As it currently stands, most people on the pro-life side want to punish the woman for promiscuity. But no one ever suggests that any penalty be levied upon the men who are promiscuous and who cause pregnancies.
I say this is as an ardent pro-choicer. I think in the end, it is the woman's right to choose and am confortable with a reasonable time limit unless the woman's life is in danger. However, I am stung by the unequal treatment that society levies on both parties of a pregnancy. There is a huge amount of hypocrisy here that is unaddressed.
If men wish to have a say in whether an abortion occurs when a woman gets pregnant then they must also submit to punishment if they refuse to support her. The woman is being punished by being forced to bear a child she doesn't want. The man must be punished as well, otherwise, it's unequal treatment under the law.
100% would love to see men be more responsible and be held to financially support and care for their children. Also support offering vasectomies and tubal ligation to adults (even subsidized).
I am pro-life, a Christian married to a ministry leader for 32 years, with 2 family members who volunteer at prolife centers. I know hundreds of pastors & thousands of Christians. I cannot say what each of these believes, but I assure you, I’ve never heard anyone teach that women ought to be punished if they get pregnant out of wedlock. Jesus himself did not condemn the “woman caught in adultery” (and ugh, in that account there is no mention of the man who obviously must have been caught too- because the world has had double standards for way too long!). Jesus said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” And of course, none could throw any because we all do things that are wrong. That is the stance I see most prolife people having. These centers offer all kinds of support for women and would also wholeheartedly like to see men step up to their responsibilities as well. The ones you referenced who want to punish must be a small fraction. I have no animosity toward the woman in an unwanted pregnancy, I just feel compelled to see the life of the child as valuable too.
I’m sorry if you have felt the sting of sexism. It has happened and it continues in some ways. I have felt it at times too. I personally think that 2 wrongs don’t make a right.
There is not an easy solution, but I appreciate having the discussion with you. Not sure if you believe in God or not, but with a kindly intent I say “May God bless you with peace and joy and love!”
You are kind and I like kind people, even when they differ from me politically. Kindness is the only way our world is going to hang together. Goddess speed to you as well!
Welll said JenR. The pro-abortion arguments, like this one by Melissa Knox, use exceedingly rare medical anomalies to justify the wanton killing of millions of unborn babies. They ignore any push to hold the male sperm donors accountable because that might also support the pro-life position.
Do let me put in a word here. Holding the man "accountable" is a separate issue--of course nobody likes deadbeat dads, who are notoriously difficult to police, and allow me to say I'm in favor of responsibility all around. But the woman who is pregnant can responsibly decide to terminate--or her doctor can advise her to do so--and I'm saying, "please have mercy on these people" and do not criminalize their decisions
Melissa, you are creating a straw man. No new state laws criminalize women who obtain abortions. Most of them are victims too. Some states defaulted to old laws as a result of the RvW decision, but I am sure those will quickly be corrected/updated.
Let’s show some mercy for the many women being coerced to have abortions, and above all mercy for the innocent unborn children!
I've seen women wait in line for abortions they desperately need, afraid because demonstrators are shouting "murderer!" at them and they want to get the procedure done and go home. I have not seen women "coerced" into having abortions. As I write, women are spending money they don't have for babysitters and gas to find a state that will allow them the abortions they need.
Melissa, Why can’t you acknowledge abortion is the killing of an innocent human life? That is what is happening. A biological fact. Again you use a straw man (evil pro-life demonstrators shouting murderer). Where does this happen? 99.9% of Abortion protestors are peaceful prayerful people. They are offering women alternatives.
It is the boyfriends and families of women in crisis pregnancies who are pushing them to end their babies life. That is where coercion exists.
I do acknowledge abortion is the killing of an innocent life. One that hasn't gotten started. It's sad. But forcing a woman who does not wish to carry to term to do so is also the killing of an innocent human life, or at the very best the gross interference with an innocent human life. As for demonstrators, the violent ones may well be in the minority--I haven't checked statistics, and I'm not in favor of violence--but I'm telling you the stories I heard from women going to the abortion clinic with an escort and hearing people shout "murderer" and duck as they threw things. I'm no fan of the "shout your abortion" crowd either--an abortion is a sad, but entirely private affair between a woman and her physician. Offering a woman an alternative is a wonderful thing to do--I admire those who provide baby car seats, diapers, formula. I object to those who tell a woman she must take this alternative and she may not decide to abort. An alternative with no other choice is not an alternative--it's compelled choice. Women who don't want to abort, whose boyfriends and families push them to do so, should be offered safe passage to obstetric care and a family who wants to adopt. But women who do not wish to go forward with a pregnancy and who know they wish to abort should be left unmolested to proceed--not harassed with pleas to change their minds. When pregnancy is tinged with fear, motherhood is tinged with fear too.
I hear this mentioned but have not seen a state law that suggests it, much less a bunch of state laws. The prosecutable person in states where abortions would be illegal are the practitioners, not the woman seeking to abort. Can you tell me which state(s) has penalties for the woman?
When a miscarriage is a crime, any medical procedure associated with it--like the D&C I had after a miscarriage, a procedure also used to abort, is criminalized. That's also happened in New York City at Catholic hospitals, for example--when the woman is miscarrying but there's still a heartbeat but the fetus is dead. On numerous occasions, doctors have waited, fearing reprisal, until the woman is in sepsis. It's not easy to say when a miscarriage is complete. When I miscarried at ten weeks, I brought what had come out of me to show the doctor; he said, "looks like everything came out" but I continued to bleed and developed an infection, so he advised and performed a D&C. Without which, incidentally, I would have been in sepsis, and infertile.
I agree that women should not be prosecuted but it seems a simple thing to care for with a clearly written statute. And of course, “one side of the story sounds good until you hear the other side.” I quick googled and found an article from cbsnews and it contained this:
“National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) said in a statement that the state's murder and manslaughter laws don't apply to those who suffer miscarriages, defined as pregnancy losses that occur before 20 weeks of pregnancy.
"Even when applied to later losses," NAPW said, "Oklahoma law prohibits prosecution of the 'mother of the unborn child' unless she committed 'a crime that caused the death of the unborn child.'"
So how that can be true with a woman being incarcerated for it makes me think that it is a sticky situation and there is likely more to the story. It is impossible to tell without digging deeper. But the laws should clearly be written to make sure women are not held as criminals. I don’t see that as helping the situation. I imagine these cases are few and far between.
I think you are sensationalizing when you say “a miscarriage is a crime.” It would have to be written in the law that way. And no one would write that. Otherwise your statement is twisting a unique or murky situation into a commonplace intent of law, which it is not. Every state allows for D&C for miscarriage & I believe for the life of the mother. It is like the difference between if your child died by falling down the steps or your child died by falling down the steps because you threw them down violently. There are tragic situations and there are crimes, but it is not always evident which is the case.
The thing is, practically speaking, on the ground, women are not getting treatment for miscarriages because physicians are afraid of being sued--or, in Catholic hospitals, simply unwilling to perform D&Cs on the very slim chance that the fetus might somehow survive. Whatever state laws say, this is what's actually happening.
From the CDC report on abortion statistics: "Approximately 18% of all pregnancies in the United States end in induced abortion (6)." (data for 2019, I think- linked below)
That does not make it seem like doctors are scared or that it is difficult to obtain an abortion. Doctors are always aware that they might be sued for all sorts of reasons. That is why they have such astronomical malpractice insurance. And not enough time has passed since Depp to have new statistics, so I assume that that is your impression of what is happening because instances of it have been reported. I am very doubtful that it will have a big impact on women who are miscarrying. I just don't see that happening. Why would doctors be afraid when the laws say they can perform abortions for miscarrying women? How hard would that be to prosecute? Who is going to prosecute them at great expense and effort? Again, I agree miscarriages should be cared for to ensure the mother's health and that the laws should be written clearly to protect that. I am not worried that this will be a big threat to women's lives.
If I were a doctor, I would be more concerned to be sued by a woman's family for not treating her miscarriage and letting her die. I am sure there is a right to sue for that eventuality as well.
And I went to the article & thoughts about that but wanted to say that I am sorry for your loss and am very glad you were able to get the care you needed at that time.
I'm still hoping it will be possible to continue talking and both sides listening, while retaining women's constitutional and human rights to abortion. There is a great deal of fear now; I'm not sure why. Historically, abortion wasn't the explosive topic it is now--Leslie Rogan's book explores popular feeling in the eighteenth century: https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967nb5z5;brand=ucpress
I’m pro-choice but I disagreed with this piece because SCOTUS sent it back to the states, it did ban abortion.
I had an abortion during college, & it was a traumatic experience. I am older now & was blessed with two children. I can never know what life would have been like if I hadn’t had my abortion.
I don’t need to share my story because it’s hard to even write about it. But I am. I’ve been a Democrat since I first voted, and over the years they went from “safe, legal, rare” to “shout your abortion.” The latter always made me uncomfortable. It didn’t make space for women like me who made the choice under duress-- who may still be wracked with guilt.
But from the Right I see no move for understanding. Though pro-life groups often promote stories like mine of women who were traumatized by their abortion -- It never takes long to read a comment dripping with cruelty -- usually by a man.
I’m sure your pain is sincere and tragic; I am sorry that you carry that with you and I pray you find relief some day.
I agree with the disingenuous nature of much of the pro-choice side. They also have a large share of ridiculous cherry-picked atrocities (like raped 10 year olds) and faked situations (like “women with ectopic pregnancies will be left to die.”). It’s all designed to paint pro-life as evil. Meanwhile they also minimize or deny the fact that a life is killed. That is where they err in “understanding.” No concern whatsoever for that innocent life. And there is little mention, if any, of the responsibility of the man & woman having consensual sex. And no mention of the father’s interests, which seems hard and wrong and lacking understanding to me.
I don’t think most arguments are designed to inflict pain, though some comments are, but the topic and reality itself are inherently fraught with pain.
I didn’t respond to this but I think it’s wrong to paint all pro-life people as evil. I’ve made it a point to listen to more people that I don’t really WANT to... because I prejudge what they’ll say. I listened to a Triggernometry episode where they talked to a pro-life doctor there and it was hard to do, but he brought up things that I could look up later. There’s no harm done by listening.
I am not painting pro-life people as evil. I think we're all pro-life, but we're not all anti-choice. I think those who are anti-abortion fail to see the consequences of anti-abortion legislation. These consequences are severe for women, for mothers, for men, because any pregnancy is tinged with fear. Here's one of many voices on the issues with banning abortion: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/18/opinion/miscarriages-abortion-ban.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuomT1JKd6J17Vw1cRCfTTMQmqxCdw_PIxftm3iWka3DKDm8SiOMNAo6B_EGKYKt4bNIpxTWSS9JadbYlQ-Zuz-hZekZkTU-ovp6A0twjEhkClLiSDCkwzo6fGvcx6yPrZW20b7t2ze225UvWdWbgW_HA1XR1JhJupcRlaV76inQOk6uVRbF3iMJsnqt0XuAMTjgFZSCLv_jtGk8-bI3ANkeAn1FwD-JJWjjTnsqe4qYCcmhRCVHGTHB54wUs-Y8WeYNXbOukcUlWKIepiq4RC2doMI6iG5QxIoDXnL5purPMwgee_YRXk3v2plZOEGzVcrWLkg&smid=url-share
Thank you for your response, Jen. I don’t ask for anyone to accept my choice, but to keep it in mind that for some (many?) if us who’ve had an abortion, it was a decision made in a state of panic.
I agree with what you are saying. It’s not possible to talk about this issue without mentioning the other life. I know how the pro-choice side speaks about it, and it’s denialism. It’s not a mani-pedi, it’s a serious matter and the “shout your abortion” crowd does nothing to inspire compassion.
I had twins later through IVF (my eggs, husband’s sperm), and got to witness life from its earliest moments. On one side after several cycles of implanted embryos you appreciate how delicate life is, how everything can be going fine until in one moment- it’s not. I loved them as my babies since the first time I saw their ultrasounds. I cannot fathom allowing abortion for any reason in the 2nd trimester onward. I also can’t imagine a woman that far along wanting an abortion. Life of the mother, unforeseen birth defects of some level (I’m not a doctor, or an ethicist... I’ll leave those larger issues to them).
I am pro-life and also went through IVF to have my babies at age 40 and a week shy of 42. I gave all of our embryos a chance for life. Both babies were rushed to the NICU (daughter had cord around her neck and she was an emergency C-section after a day of trying to dilate. I never even got to see her before she went to the NICU. Son was a planned C-section 17 months after daughter because he was going to be large (10.2 and 21 inches) and breech. The day after his birth he had a stroke. He is ok because we saw the seizures (many don't) but I don't doubt that if the doctor knew from an ultrasound that he would suffer a stroke after birth (by detecting something wrong in the left center lobe), they would have suggested abortion. Life serves up its challenges to us all. I would love to see more adoptions.
Having said that, I would never ever suggest to know the challenges you faced in college and the reason you chose abortion. My expression of mercy, unlike in this essay, is to show my concern, as a person who believes in all life, for you despite our differences. Wishing you the best.
I’m glad to hear that your children are okay. My twins were born at 37 weeks, and we were spared the NICU though I was worried about an early birth my whole pregnancy (37 wks is considered full term for twins.) You NICU parents are made of strong stuff. Thankfully there is so much more that can be done to help little ones survive these days... heart surgeries in utero even.
I don’t feel any I’ll will towards pro-life people. I do worry about the lack of a social safety net that most European countries have - along with abortion limits between 12-15 weeks. The US is a different situation.
I think adoption is a good solution for many, but it’s never as easy as people think it is. My good friend adopted sisters through the foster system, and they both suffered a lot of trauma at the hands of their birth families. It’s a full-time job managing the emotional problems & psychological issues that they have. She can’t work. One child was in a mental hospital for several months for suicidal tendencies. Even without mental health problems there is a deep loss for many who are adopted, I’ve read, and for the mothers who gave them up. I don’t discourage it but I think people need to be realistic and not go into it with rose colored glasses.
There are safety nets but they are under major attack right now. I donate to one such program, and while in HS my daughter volunteered, where single women raising children live in a home (called Well of Mercy) where they work to care for one another and the home, have child care and attend college. They stay there until they are ready to move into their own places. They have rules to follow (no drugs, alcohol, men at the home, etc). It's a wonderful program and if I didn't live in another state I would likely be volunteering myself.
You're right about the complications of adoption. I know many who have adopted and some even within the same family have more challenges than others.....but none have said they would rather not be born. Complications tend to be around a sense of abandonment, so more work in providing psychological supports early on is most helpful. Friends (who dated from 8th grade until college graduation -- then getting married, attempted to adopt twin boys at the age of 5. So many anger issues....one almost set the home on fire. Sadly, they couldn't continue with the adoption.
On the other hand I had a coworker who had three abortions---basically used it as contraception. She kept her fourth pregnancy and he was born with Down's syndrome. I don't know for a fact because we lost touch more than two decades ago, but I'm thinking he brought her tremendous joy and like with all children, plenty of challenges.
Father's interest? I have no doubt that many abortions occur due to the father's lack of interest.
Undoubtedly and unfortunately. I think that is likely the larger portion. But I can imagine that there are some men who might wish to allow their child to live.
No doubt and their interests should be part of the conversation. All I'm saying is that if men were more proactive about supporting progeny, or, if society censured or penalized men who did not support instead of letting them off scot-free, like it does now, the the number of abortions might go down.
As it currently stands, most people on the pro-life side want to punish the woman for promiscuity. But no one ever suggests that any penalty be levied upon the men who are promiscuous and who cause pregnancies.
I say this is as an ardent pro-choicer. I think in the end, it is the woman's right to choose and am confortable with a reasonable time limit unless the woman's life is in danger. However, I am stung by the unequal treatment that society levies on both parties of a pregnancy. There is a huge amount of hypocrisy here that is unaddressed.
If men wish to have a say in whether an abortion occurs when a woman gets pregnant then they must also submit to punishment if they refuse to support her. The woman is being punished by being forced to bear a child she doesn't want. The man must be punished as well, otherwise, it's unequal treatment under the law.
100% would love to see men be more responsible and be held to financially support and care for their children. Also support offering vasectomies and tubal ligation to adults (even subsidized).
I am pro-life, a Christian married to a ministry leader for 32 years, with 2 family members who volunteer at prolife centers. I know hundreds of pastors & thousands of Christians. I cannot say what each of these believes, but I assure you, I’ve never heard anyone teach that women ought to be punished if they get pregnant out of wedlock. Jesus himself did not condemn the “woman caught in adultery” (and ugh, in that account there is no mention of the man who obviously must have been caught too- because the world has had double standards for way too long!). Jesus said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” And of course, none could throw any because we all do things that are wrong. That is the stance I see most prolife people having. These centers offer all kinds of support for women and would also wholeheartedly like to see men step up to their responsibilities as well. The ones you referenced who want to punish must be a small fraction. I have no animosity toward the woman in an unwanted pregnancy, I just feel compelled to see the life of the child as valuable too.
I’m sorry if you have felt the sting of sexism. It has happened and it continues in some ways. I have felt it at times too. I personally think that 2 wrongs don’t make a right.
There is not an easy solution, but I appreciate having the discussion with you. Not sure if you believe in God or not, but with a kindly intent I say “May God bless you with peace and joy and love!”
You are kind and I like kind people, even when they differ from me politically. Kindness is the only way our world is going to hang together. Goddess speed to you as well!
Welll said JenR. The pro-abortion arguments, like this one by Melissa Knox, use exceedingly rare medical anomalies to justify the wanton killing of millions of unborn babies. They ignore any push to hold the male sperm donors accountable because that might also support the pro-life position.
Do let me put in a word here. Holding the man "accountable" is a separate issue--of course nobody likes deadbeat dads, who are notoriously difficult to police, and allow me to say I'm in favor of responsibility all around. But the woman who is pregnant can responsibly decide to terminate--or her doctor can advise her to do so--and I'm saying, "please have mercy on these people" and do not criminalize their decisions
Melissa, you are creating a straw man. No new state laws criminalize women who obtain abortions. Most of them are victims too. Some states defaulted to old laws as a result of the RvW decision, but I am sure those will quickly be corrected/updated.
Let’s show some mercy for the many women being coerced to have abortions, and above all mercy for the innocent unborn children!
I've seen women wait in line for abortions they desperately need, afraid because demonstrators are shouting "murderer!" at them and they want to get the procedure done and go home. I have not seen women "coerced" into having abortions. As I write, women are spending money they don't have for babysitters and gas to find a state that will allow them the abortions they need.
Melissa, Why can’t you acknowledge abortion is the killing of an innocent human life? That is what is happening. A biological fact. Again you use a straw man (evil pro-life demonstrators shouting murderer). Where does this happen? 99.9% of Abortion protestors are peaceful prayerful people. They are offering women alternatives.
It is the boyfriends and families of women in crisis pregnancies who are pushing them to end their babies life. That is where coercion exists.
I do acknowledge abortion is the killing of an innocent life. One that hasn't gotten started. It's sad. But forcing a woman who does not wish to carry to term to do so is also the killing of an innocent human life, or at the very best the gross interference with an innocent human life. As for demonstrators, the violent ones may well be in the minority--I haven't checked statistics, and I'm not in favor of violence--but I'm telling you the stories I heard from women going to the abortion clinic with an escort and hearing people shout "murderer" and duck as they threw things. I'm no fan of the "shout your abortion" crowd either--an abortion is a sad, but entirely private affair between a woman and her physician. Offering a woman an alternative is a wonderful thing to do--I admire those who provide baby car seats, diapers, formula. I object to those who tell a woman she must take this alternative and she may not decide to abort. An alternative with no other choice is not an alternative--it's compelled choice. Women who don't want to abort, whose boyfriends and families push them to do so, should be offered safe passage to obstetric care and a family who wants to adopt. But women who do not wish to go forward with a pregnancy and who know they wish to abort should be left unmolested to proceed--not harassed with pleas to change their minds. When pregnancy is tinged with fear, motherhood is tinged with fear too.
I hear this mentioned but have not seen a state law that suggests it, much less a bunch of state laws. The prosecutable person in states where abortions would be illegal are the practitioners, not the woman seeking to abort. Can you tell me which state(s) has penalties for the woman?
In both Oklahoma and Georgia, women have been jailed for having miscarriages. Here's one link, but there are others: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544
When a miscarriage is a crime, any medical procedure associated with it--like the D&C I had after a miscarriage, a procedure also used to abort, is criminalized. That's also happened in New York City at Catholic hospitals, for example--when the woman is miscarrying but there's still a heartbeat but the fetus is dead. On numerous occasions, doctors have waited, fearing reprisal, until the woman is in sepsis. It's not easy to say when a miscarriage is complete. When I miscarried at ten weeks, I brought what had come out of me to show the doctor; he said, "looks like everything came out" but I continued to bleed and developed an infection, so he advised and performed a D&C. Without which, incidentally, I would have been in sepsis, and infertile.
I agree that women should not be prosecuted but it seems a simple thing to care for with a clearly written statute. And of course, “one side of the story sounds good until you hear the other side.” I quick googled and found an article from cbsnews and it contained this:
“National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW) said in a statement that the state's murder and manslaughter laws don't apply to those who suffer miscarriages, defined as pregnancy losses that occur before 20 weeks of pregnancy.
"Even when applied to later losses," NAPW said, "Oklahoma law prohibits prosecution of the 'mother of the unborn child' unless she committed 'a crime that caused the death of the unborn child.'"
So how that can be true with a woman being incarcerated for it makes me think that it is a sticky situation and there is likely more to the story. It is impossible to tell without digging deeper. But the laws should clearly be written to make sure women are not held as criminals. I don’t see that as helping the situation. I imagine these cases are few and far between.
I think you are sensationalizing when you say “a miscarriage is a crime.” It would have to be written in the law that way. And no one would write that. Otherwise your statement is twisting a unique or murky situation into a commonplace intent of law, which it is not. Every state allows for D&C for miscarriage & I believe for the life of the mother. It is like the difference between if your child died by falling down the steps or your child died by falling down the steps because you threw them down violently. There are tragic situations and there are crimes, but it is not always evident which is the case.
The thing is, practically speaking, on the ground, women are not getting treatment for miscarriages because physicians are afraid of being sued--or, in Catholic hospitals, simply unwilling to perform D&Cs on the very slim chance that the fetus might somehow survive. Whatever state laws say, this is what's actually happening.
From the CDC report on abortion statistics: "Approximately 18% of all pregnancies in the United States end in induced abortion (6)." (data for 2019, I think- linked below)
That does not make it seem like doctors are scared or that it is difficult to obtain an abortion. Doctors are always aware that they might be sued for all sorts of reasons. That is why they have such astronomical malpractice insurance. And not enough time has passed since Depp to have new statistics, so I assume that that is your impression of what is happening because instances of it have been reported. I am very doubtful that it will have a big impact on women who are miscarrying. I just don't see that happening. Why would doctors be afraid when the laws say they can perform abortions for miscarrying women? How hard would that be to prosecute? Who is going to prosecute them at great expense and effort? Again, I agree miscarriages should be cared for to ensure the mother's health and that the laws should be written clearly to protect that. I am not worried that this will be a big threat to women's lives.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ss7009a1.htm
These statistics were published in 2021, which means they concern a period of time pre-dating 2021.
Things are different now!
Yes, noted. We can only speculate what will happen in the future. Thanks for taking time to discuss the important issues surrounding it.
If I were a doctor, I would be more concerned to be sued by a woman's family for not treating her miscarriage and letting her die. I am sure there is a right to sue for that eventuality as well.
And I went to the article & thoughts about that but wanted to say that I am sorry for your loss and am very glad you were able to get the care you needed at that time.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brittany-poolaw-manslaughter-miscarriage-pregnancy/
I'm still hoping it will be possible to continue talking and both sides listening, while retaining women's constitutional and human rights to abortion. There is a great deal of fear now; I'm not sure why. Historically, abortion wasn't the explosive topic it is now--Leslie Rogan's book explores popular feeling in the eighteenth century: https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967nb5z5;brand=ucpress
Ugh - first paragraph should read “it did not ban abortion.”
(I guessed that from context, but thanks for confirming)