Trending
The same political machine that sees no difference between a handgun and an assault rifle now endorses laws that see no difference among an abortion at 6 weeks, 15 weeks or 20 weeks. At 6 weeks the cluster of cells that will later form the human heart are capable of emitting a pulse but that is not a heart. The heart will be formed later.
At 15 weeks the fetus begins to adopt a human-like form and Roe- era laws respected this as the deadline for most abortions in which the mother's life was not in jeopardy. At 20 weeks the human fetus does have a chance of survival and these cases require serious consultation with a doctor, a patient and the family as often the termination is choosing between the life of the mother and the child with great pain on all sides.
Even the critical care units that perform miraculous work in saving premature babies have to make decisions each day about whether a pre-term baby has a chance of surviving and that standard is 20-22 weeks in most cases.
Some "pregnancies" also happen outside the uterus and these are called "ectopic" pregnancies occurring most often in the fallopian tubes which connect the ovaries to the uterus. Such pregnancies have zero chance of growing as there is not room and they represent a medical emergency for the woman. In some states the restrictive laws are written with so little knowledge by the state legislators that even an ectopic pregnancy cannot be ended by a doctor without incurring criminal charges. Such is the ill-informed nature of the restrictive laws that litter state houses across the country.
Laws based on hysteria of the religious right rather than scientific facts and clear thinking. Perhaps the most frightening aspect of the recent Supreme Court ruling that appears to effectively strike down the 50-year-old Roe v. Wade decision making abortion legal, is the fact that in some states a woman can be investigated and charged if she is unable to prove that she had a "spontaneous" abortion. Such abortions often occur when there is something wrong with the developing fetus and has been construed as nature's way of correcting this. Unfortunately, the very same medication that is used to help the woman who experiences a natural abortion or miscarriage deal with the hormonal changes is also used to induce abortion. This combination of medications has been labeled the "morning-after pill."
This is not the only invasion of privacy that the Supreme Court has decided is acceptable. In his majority opinion, Judge Clarence Thomas suggested that the court's next step should be to look at the constitutionality of contraception as it is not mentioned in the constitution. He evidently believes that contraception which prevents a woman's egg from being inseminated by the male sperm is a form of abortion as well. Following this "logic," every month when a female of child-bearing age does not conceive she is allowing a "potential life" to be "wasted." Really? Could the man be more ignorant? This kind of thinking is a definite "throw-back" to the time when the only value a woman had was to be "barefoot and pregnant" preferably in the kitchen.
This argument assumes that human sexuality is only for procreation and any other expression is not only unnecessary but could be a crime as well. The irony exists that the very repressive movement that espouses these restrictive laws is the same group that opposes parental leave, universal daycare and child health care.
The concern is not for the children who are "lost" through legal and safe abortion but the concern is that women have become too powerful in this country. Since the advent of the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 and the routine use of contraceptives (even by Catholics, wink, wink); women have joined the workforce in greater and greater numbers. Women have risen to positions of power in business and industry. Women enter graduate schools to prepare for these positions in larger numbers than their male counterparts and some guys just can't stand it! Nothing will change in this country until women have more power, not less.
Woman are able to look at issues in a measured way that places common sense restrictions on abortion while respecting a woman and family's right to choose when to have a child.
The children deserve nothing less. Every child should be a wanted child that can be cared for by a community that recognizes that being a parent is not a duty but a privilege but not one that should be forced upon anyone.
Once again the extreme right has succeeded in making a complex issue way too simple by ignoring basic biology. No one is advocating for the destruction of viable human life but the standard of "viability" has been well-established by medical science.
Only those who cling to a hysterical view of life and who are being used by political operatives are being duped into forcing victims of rape or incest to carry a baby to term rather than have an "early stage" abortion. The victimization in such cases is not limited to the twelve-year-old who is not ready to become a parent but to the child they are forced to have.
Furthermore, childbirth itself is not without risk, especially to the young body of a pre-teen or teen. In conclusion, this issue is too important to leave to the varieties of state legislatures.
The United States House and Senate need to hold hearings and develop legislation that deal with the issues of human reproduction and privacy rights in a reasoned way, based on science not hysteria. Most developed democracies have done so and the women and families of the United States deserve no less from their elected representatives. Vote on November 8.
Teresa R. Porter
Marietta, Ohio