nap@druxo.UUCP (Parsons) (10/26/84)
The following was posted in dr.clubs because it related to an article
circulated by the WISE (Women's Issues, Status, and Environment) Club at
Denver's AT&T Information Systems. I have been asked to post it to
net.politics, so am doing so.
One comment, however...these thoughts are in reference only to the
"convenience abortions" which make up over 99% of all abortions done in the
past 15 years. They are not intended to deal with the difficult issues of
rape, incest, abnormal pregnancies, etc.
****
One of the issues on the ballot this fall is one that, if passed, will
prohibit the use of taxes for abortions. In the last issue of the "WISE
Newsletter," there was an article entitled "Anti-Abortion Ballot
Initiative" in which we were urged to "Join in the effort to defeat the
proposed amendment."
Although such organizations as NOW have popularized the idea that a
feminist stance requires a pro-abortion stance, there IS another point of
view. Since the newsletter expressed one side of the issue, I would like
to publicize the other, seldom-considered, side a little.
I maintain that the practice of abortion is a vicious, though perhaps
subtle, exploitation of women. Consider the following:
+ 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.
Granted that abortion is, in the opinion of many, a lesser
consequence than the bearing of a child, the fact is that it is still
women who face it alone. Why aren't we demanding that men take equal
responsibility instead of demanding the right to bear it all
ourselves?
+ The young and the poor are often coerced into having abortions by
people who "know better than they do what is good for them."
In their eagerness to procure the right to choose, proponents of
abortion seem to have created a situation in which many are denied
(via covert and overt pressures) the right to choose to give birth
rather than abort their babies.
+ 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. If there are risks, do we
really want that information withheld?
+ It is primarily the male medical establishment that has lined its
pockets from the millions of abortions done in recent years. Is it
so cynical to suspect a connection between their profits and the
coercion brought to bear when a woman seeks information?
With respect to the tax cutoff amendment, one of my concerns has to do with
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)." (This is not hypothetical; I
know of women to whom this has happened.) The cost of welfare must be
dealt with, but must it be at the expense of personal freedom to choose?
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.
So I guess my response to the Newsletter article is, "Join me in voting FOR
the amendment to cut off public funds for abortion."
P.S. This represents my personal opinion, and in no way reflects a position
of WISE or anyone else connected in any way with WISE.