jdh@hou5g.UUCP (11/07/84)
In response to the article against funding abortions for poor women: original article indented ">" >I maintain that the practice of abortion is a vicious, though perhaps >subtle, exploitation of women. { reasons follow: } >Prevention of pregnancy is a responsibility that can be shared by >both women and men. When the focus is shifted from prevention to >"postvention", women bear the risk (Japanese studies indicate it >is considerable) and unpleasantness alone. I agree that encouraging abortion places the responsibility of pregnancy prevention that much more heavily (and dangerously) on the shoulders of women. However, unless safe alternatives are made available, and unless there is a great change in the behaviour of the men who get women pregnant, the option of abortion should remain available...to poor women especially. After all, while abortion is a vicious, subtle expoitation of women, forcing women to bear children is just as vicious, a lot less subtle, and often (though not always) has a longer lasting effect. NO feminist would disagree that men and women should *both* be -- and FEEL-- responsible for not causing a pregnancy. ALL feminists would agree that women bear too much of the responsibility and too much of the pain of their child bearing capabilities. Feminists are very interested in the development of better forms of birth control that MEN can take, as well as better birth control for women. But remember, you can't make your partner take birth control. There should ALWAYS be the option of abortion in case other methods didn't work (be it her fault or his). >The young and the poor are often coerced into having abortions by >people who "know better than they do what is good for them." This is certainly true. On the other hand, what alternatives are they offered? The young are forced into "shotgun" marriages, are unable to finish high school, and are often mistreated by their husbands (who, after all, didn't want to get married). (I don't know about you, but I know people like this.) Poor women are unable to work because there is no cheap, safe child care available. Often they are unable to get enough money to support their children on welfare either. Also, poor women are sometimes sterilized without their knowledge or against their will (sometimes while having abortions). Now THIS, I think, is more vicious than abortion. >Women are denied access to information about alternatives, and are >not even given the kind of information about risks that are required >for other, similar surgical procedures. This is certainly not Always true. Planned Parenthood does give statistics on death, etc. caused by abortions and other similar surgical procedures. (Planned Parenthood also encourages birth control by women they see.) Also, as long as it is allowed, sex education in high school should help teach alternative birth control measures. >It is primarily the male medical establishment that has lined its >pockets from the millions of abortions done in recent years. The control of medicine by men has caused great concern among feminists. More vicious than abortion is the the problem of "sterilization abuse" (to steal a feminist phrase), unnecessary full or partial hysterectomies. I belong to NOW, and I know that NOW has formed coalitions with other feminist organizations, such as CARASA (Coalition for Abortion Rights and Against Sterilization Abuse) in their concern about the treatment of women by the medical profession. >the poor who are being told, in effect, "You've got to get an abortion >whether you want it or not, because we're not going to pay for caring for a >kid (assuming you'll still be on welfare)." >We hear a lot about women demanding the "right to choose," but all the >while, many women (such as are represented by NOW) don't seem to realize >that many of their sisters are subjected to pressures from a male-oriented >society that are ignoring their desires if those desires should happen to >be to give birth. Feminists are ABSOLUTELY! FOR the right to choose! with knowledge! NOW is one of the few organizations I know of that supports the right of women to have children under any circumstance. The slogan "right to choose" was created for a reason! Feminists (and NOW members among them) believe women have the right to choose to have children, even if society in general dissopproves -- even if they aren't married, even if they're lesbians... But you can't CHOOSE if the option to NOT have a child isn't also there! Also, having a child involves a lot more than just getting pregnant. It also involves being able to support yourself and the child.... for quite a few years. It involves not having the child taken away from you if you want to keep it (e.g., if the alternative to having an abortion is to bear a child, only to give it away immediately, that's not really the same as the choice to have a child). >So I guess my response to the Newsletter article is, "Join me in voting >FOR the amendment to cut off public funds for abortion." And my response is, join feminists in the fight for: better child care centers better birth control alternatives -- for women & men better sex eduation a check on sterilization abuse the choice to NOT have a child as well as the choice to HAVE a child support for women with dependent children --- for poor and not-so-poor women! p.s. It's amazing how many people AGAINST birth control education are also against not only abortion but also against access to other alternative methods of birth control.... they not *only* want to deny access to information about alternatives, but also want to get RID of the alternatives...in fact they want to get rid of every alternative but pregnancy!