A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
From charlatan's workspace   

Why I am an abortion doctor

quite a unique perspective

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=283931&p=1

Why I am an abortion doctor

'I can take a woman, in the biggest trouble she has ever experienced in her life, and by performing a five-minute operation, in comfort and dignity, I can give her back her life'

Garson Romalis, © Garson Romalis Published: Monday, February 04, 2008
Story Tools

What follows are remarks delivered by Canadian abortion doctor Garson Romalis on Jan. 25, at the University of Toronto Law School's Symposium to Mark the 20th Anniversary of R. vs. Morgentaler

---

I am honoured to be speaking today, and honored to call Henry Morgentaler my friend.

I have been an abortion provider since 1972. Why do I do abortions, and why do I continue to do abortions, despite two murder attempts?

The first time I started to think about abortion was in 1960, when I was in secondyear medical school. I was assigned the case of a young woman who had died of a septic abortion. She had aborted herself using slippery elm bark.

I had never heard of slippery elm. A buddy and I went down to skid row, and without too much difficulty, purchased some slippery elm bark to use as a visual aid in our presentation. Slippery elm is not sterile, and frequently contains spores of the bacteria that cause gas gangrene. It is called slippery elm because, when it gets wet, it feels slippery. This makes it easier to slide slender pieces through the cervix where they absorb water, expand, dilate the cervix, produce infection and induce abortion. The young woman in our case developed an overwhelming infection. At autopsy she had multiple abscesses throughout her body, in her brain, lungs, liver and abdomen.

I have never forgotten that case.

After I graduated from University of British Columbia medical school in 1962, I went to Chicago, where I served my internship and Ob/Gyn residency at Cook County Hospital. At that time, Cook County had about 3,000 beds, and served a mainly indigent population. If you were really sick, or really poor, or both, Cook County was where you went.

The first month of my internship was spent on Ward 41, the septic obstetrics ward. Yes, it's hard to believe now, but in those days, they had one ward dedicated exclusively to septic complications of pregnancy.

About 90% of the patients were there with complications of septic abortion. The ward had about 40 beds, in addition to extra beds which lined the halls. Each day we admitted between 10-30 septic abortion patients. We had about one death a month, usually from septic shock associated with hemorrhage.

I will never forget the 17-year-old girl lying on a stretcher with 6 feet of small bowel protruding from her vagina. She survived.

I will never forget the jaundiced woman in liver and kidney failure, in septic shock, with very severe anemia, whose life we were unable to save.

Today, in Canada and the U.S., septic shock from illegal abortion is virtually never seen. Like smallpox, it is a "disappeared disease."

I had originally been drawn to obstetrics and gynecology because I loved delivering babies. Abortion was illegal when I trained, so I did not learn how to do abortions in my residency, although I had more than my share of experience looking after illegal abortion complications.

In 1972, a couple of years after the law on abortion was liberalized, I began the practise of obstetrics and gynecology, and joined a three-man group in Vancouver. My practice partners and I believed strongly that a woman should be able to decide for herself if and when to have a baby. We were frequently asked to look after women who needed termination of pregnancy. Although I had done virtually no terminations in my training, I soon learned how. I also learned just how much demand there was for abortion services.

Providing abortion services can be quite stressful. Usually, an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy is the worst trouble the patient has ever been in in her entire life.

I remember one 18-year-old patient who desperately wanted an abortion, but felt she could not confide in her mother, who was a nurse in another Vancouver area hospital. She impressed on me how important it was that her termination remain a secret from her family. In those years, parental consent was required if the patient was less than 19 years old. I obtained the required second opinion from a colleague, and performed an abortion on her.

About two weeks, later I received a phone call from her mother. She asked me directly "Did you do an abortion on my daughter?" Visions of legal suit passed through my mind as I tried to think of how to answer her question. I decided to answer directly and truthfully. I answered with trepidation, "Yes, I did" and started to make mental preparations to call my lawyer. The mother replied: "Thank you, Doctor. Thank God there are people like you around."

Like many of my colleagues, I had been the subject of antiabortion picketing, particularly in the 1980s. I did not like having my office and home picketed, or nails thrown into my driveway, but viewed these picketers as a nuisance, exercising their right of free speech. Being in Canada, I felt I did not have to worry about my physical security.

I had been a medical doctor for 32 years when I was shot at 7:10 a.m., Nov. 8, 1994. For over half my life, I had been providing obstetrical and gynecological care, including abortions. It is still hard for me to understand how someone could think I should be killed for helping women get safe abortions.

I had a very severe gun shot wound to my left thigh. My thigh bone was fractured, large blood vessels severed, and a large amount of my thigh muscles destroyed. I almost died several times from blood loss and multiple other complications. After about two years of physical and emotional rehabilitation, with a great deal of support from my family and the medical community, I was able to resume work on a part-time basis. I was no longer able to deliver babies or perform major gynecological surgery. I had to take security measures, but I continued to work as a gynecologist, including providing abortion services. My life had changed, but my views on choice remained unchanged, and I was continuing to enjoy practicing medicine. I told people that I was shot in the thigh, not in my sense of humour.

Six years after the shooting, on July 11, 2000, shortly after entering the clinic where I had my private office, a young man approached me. There was nothing unusual about his appearance until he suddenly got a vicious look on his face, stabbed me in the left flank area and then ran away.

This could have been a lethal injury, but fortunately no vital organs were seriously involved, and after six days of hospital observation I was able to return home. The physical implications were minor, but the security implications were major. After two murder attempts, all my security advisors concurred that I was at increased risk for another attack.

My family and I had to have some serious discussions about my future. The National Abortion Federation provided me with a very experienced personal security consultant. He moved into our home and lived with us for three days, talked with us, assessed my personality, visited the places that I worked in and gave me security advice. In those three days, he got to know me well. After he finished his evaluation, when I was dropping him off at the airport, his departing words to me were "Gary, you have to go back to work."

About two months after the stabbing, I returned to the practise of medicine, but with added security measures. Since the year 2000, I have restricted my practise exclusively to abortion provision.

These acts of terrorist violence have affected virtually every aspect of my and my family's life. Our lives have changed forever. I must live with security measures that I never dreamed about when I was learning how to deliver babies.

Let me tell you about an abortion patient I looked after recently. She was 18 years old, and 18-19 weeks pregnant. She came from a very strict, religious family. She was an only daughter, and had several brothers. She was East Indian Hindu and her boyfriend was East Indian Muslim, which did not please her parents. She told me if her parents found out she was pregnant she would be disowned and kicked out of the family home. She also told me that her brothers would murder her boyfriend, and I believed her. About an hour after her operation I and my nurse saw her and her boyfriend walking out of the clinic hand in hand, and I said to my nurse, "Look at that. We saved two lives today."

I love my work. I get enormous personal and professional satisfaction out of helping people, and that includes providing safe, comfortable, abortions. The people that I work with are extraordinary, and we all feel that we are doing important work, making a real difference in peoples' lives.

I can take an anxious woman, who is in the biggest trouble she has ever experiences in her life, and by performing a five-minute operation, in comfort and dignity, I can give her back her life.

After an abortion operation, patients frequently say "Thank You Doctor." But abortion is the only operation I know of where they also sometimes say "Thank you for what you do."

I want to tell you one last story that I think epitomizes the satisfaction I get from my privileged work. Some years ago I spoke to a class of University of British Columbia medical students. As I left the classroom, a student followed me out. She said: "Dr. Romalis, you won't remember me, but you did an abortion on me in 1992. I am a secondyear medical student now, and if it weren't for you I wouldn't be here now."

created by charlatan on Feb 04, 2008 at 11:35:24 pm     Comments: 52

print      source      versions

Comments ... #

oh goody, the abortion debate. Loosen up those fingers, I'm sure there are going to be plenty of posts on this one.

posted by tommy1 on Feb 05, 2008 at 12:02:24 am     #



"Fire!" in a crowded theater.

posted by thetoledowire_com on Feb 05, 2008 at 12:45:49 am     #



Good article...Interesting perspective...Thanks Charlatan...

posted by wombat2 on Feb 05, 2008 at 01:14:42 am     #



Too bad that guy didn't take better aim on November 8.

posted by elmahico on Feb 05, 2008 at 01:15:09 am     #



It's interesting that for such a hot button issue abortion allegedly is, you never get someone with an inside perspective talking about it. Wuddupwitdat?

And I like yelling 'theater' in a crowded fire, that way everyone has their character armor ready and Harpo remembers to shut up.

posted by charlatan on Feb 05, 2008 at 01:47:50 am     #



Abortion: One dead, one wounded.

posted by Offshore on Feb 05, 2008 at 09:34:34 am     #



OK charlatan, I'll take the bait you laid out for us.

But I'll use the words of one that is so much more eloquent than I. Mr. Curtis Dahlgren:

In the May-June 1997 issue of Ms. magazine, Faye Wattleton said, "Who believes that abortion is something other than killing?" So why can’t we all just get along and agree that abortion is not "just another medical procedure"?

In his speech to the House of Representatives on September 19, 1996 Henry Hyde of Illinois said, "I finally figured out why supporters of abortion on demand fight this infanticide ban [partial-birth abortion ban] tooth and claw, because for the first time since Roe v. Wade the focus is on the baby, not the mother, not the woman but the baby, and the harm that abortion inflicts on an unborn child. . . .

"Dwight Eisenhower wrote about the loss of 1.2 million lives in World War II, and he said: 'The loss of lives that might have otherwise been creatively lived scars the mind of the civilized world'."

And it sears the soul when we justify the killing (Ms. Wattleton’s word) of more than that many unborn babies in the U.S. — EVERY YEAR — many of them four-fifths born! Do the math! "Run the numbers"! Get mad. Show the same passion over human life that you do over tax cuts! While we maybe "remember 9/11" most of us try to forget that more people die (babies) from abortion every day than died on September 11, 2001. That's just an "average"; actually half of the babies who die every week die on "Saturday" (i.e., the Sabbath): some thirteen or fourteen thousand human lives every Saturday!

We react with euphemisms and catchwords: "Freedom to choose." "Reproductive Rights." "Womens' health." "Planned Parenthood." In other words, "don’t worry be happy" — just eat, drink and be merry — for tomorrow we ALL may die?

If we can justify this we can justify post-birth abortions (and we have); and if we can justify that we can justify "assisted suicide" (and we have); and if we can justify that we can justify involuntary euthanasia (the Netherlands formalized it, and we are working on it); and if we can justify that, as Raskolnikov said in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, "Man can get used to anything, the beast!"

Americans too just turn up the "bass" on our speakers so as not to hear the silent screams, and we lose ourselves in "Entertainment du jour," as if we were kings who deserve entertaining by a joker at the snap of a finger or the click of a clacker.

By the way, Poland outlawed abortion-on-demand since Communism fell there, and women are NOT DYING FROM COAT HANGER ABORTIONS. Germany, on the other hand, liberalized abortions after the fall of Communism. You say you're still "pro-choice"? THAT'S EASY FOR YOU TO SAY WHEN YOU'RE NOT THE ONE BEING DRAWN AND QUARTERED, OR SUCKED UP A VACUUM TUBE!

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 05, 2008 at 09:58:48 am     #



Why do most people who claim to be "pro-choice" stand so strongly against "choice" in public schools and/ or social security? Hmmmmm.

posted by Postal on Feb 05, 2008 at 10:25:13 am     #



Legal or not, abortion rates similar

"A comprehensive global study of abortion has concluded that abortion rates are similar in countries where it is legal and those where it is not, suggesting that outlawing the procedure does little to deter women seeking it.

Moreover, the researchers found that abortion was safe in countries where it was legal, but dangerous in countries where it was outlawed and performed clandestinely."

posted by Chris99 on Feb 05, 2008 at 11:17:39 am     #



Inverting Postal's comment:

Why is it that so many pro-life folks support the death penalty?

(my priest excluded)

posted by historymike on Feb 05, 2008 at 01:46:54 pm     #



That is often very true, historymike. I also wonder if pro-choice movement, generally speaking, advocate legalizing drugs.

posted by Postal on Feb 05, 2008 at 03:11:43 pm     #



I struggle with the question of the morality of abortion. My church teaches that human life begins at conception, but I find almost surreal the idea that a fertilized human ovum, only 100-200 µm in diameter, is "human." Should humanity really be recognized when the implantaton of embryoblast into the lining of the uterus occurs?

Clearly a human fetus as young as 22 weeks has a chance of survival outside the womb, and I suspect that technology will continue to advance to the point where this number will drop. If we reach the point where the human uterus is no longer needed for gestation, and a fetus can grow in a machine, will we then be able to definitively say that an embryo is "human," and thus should never be terminated?

Lots of questions here that trouble me for those who insist that "conception" is equivalent to "human":

1. If a person engages in activity that causes a miscarriage - even if there was no prior knowledge of pregnancy - would that person then be guilty of involuntary manslaughter?

2. If a drug is ever developed that prevents implantation of the embryo by some chemical mechanism - as opposed to abortifacients like RU-486 - would the conception-is-life crowd be attacking this product as vehemently as the much-maligned RU-486?

3. If the revealed truth or studied opinions by the most learned scholars of one's faith system allow abotion, should other faiths be allowed to impose their definition of "life" upon them just because they happen to constitute a popular majority? What about a plurality? Suppose, too, that we Catholics become the majority American religion - should we be allowed to outlaw contraceptive devices like condoms, simply because the Pope says that wearing latex sheaths on one's penis defies God's will?

Again, I am not trying to provoke the pro-life crowd, but rather airing my own personal struggle with defining life and determining the morality of abortion.

posted by historymike on Feb 05, 2008 at 07:18:37 pm     #



First of all, I was under the impression that the owner/operator of ToledoTalk wanted less controversy, argument and inflammatory posts.

Given that people actually get shot to death over this topic, why allow it?

posted by madjack on Feb 05, 2008 at 07:28:31 pm     #



I will not and can not speak for the propietor of this forum but my take was that controversy is expected. What was sometimes missing was civility and reasoned arguments, those having been replaced replaced by personal attacks when there were no arguable facts behind the poster's position.

posted by holland on Feb 05, 2008 at 07:48:56 pm     #



To continue, from HistoryMike: If we reach the point where the human uterus is no longer needed for gestation, and a fetus can grow in a machine, will we then be able to definitively say that an embryo is "human," and thus should never be terminated?

Some of us can already state that, beyond the shadow of any doubt, the embryo is a human being and as such should be given all the rights guaranteed to the rest of US humanity by our Constitution.

I am not one such person.

When medical science advances to the point that a fertilized egg can be carried to term sans parent, we will truly be in a world of hurt.

The Royal Right to Lifers want to impose their will on the rest of the world, including those sitting comfortably on the fence. What they don't want is to have to pay for the repercussions. If you think the Middle East military action is expensive, just wait until every single abortion that could have been performed for, say, $2500 per person is abolished in favor of this new procedure at a cost of $2,500,000 per person. Then we have the orphans, who all have to live somewhere. Who's going to adopt them? Additionally there will be the inevitable population boom - baby boomers II, I suppose. Those kids will have to be fed, clothed and housed then taught to read, write and cipher. All this will cost money.

The Right to Life crowd is great at telling women what they can and cannot do with their own body. If they really think abortion is wrong, let them support the resulting children via adoption. Naturally, that's not going to happen.

I lived through the illegal abortion period, and when abortion was finally legalized I somewhat naively thought that would be the end of it. It wasn't long until the terrorist activity started.

posted by madjack on Feb 05, 2008 at 07:55:43 pm     #



Inverting Postal's comment:

Why is it that so many pro-life folks support the death penalty?

(my priest excluded)

posted by historymike on Feb 05, 2008 at 12:46:54 pm #
-----------------------------------

I am against both.

posted by Darkseid on Feb 05, 2008 at 08:59:03 pm     #



I think the standards for raising kids should be raised.

Sending kids to substandard schools, feeding the chemicals/milk/foods unfit for growing healthy kids, and blindly drugging and giving kids shots should be considered abuse. Or at least negligent/incompetent parenting.

It seems kids are lucky to have 1 parent who at least half-ass cares about them, let alone 2 that really do.

I think the goal is a higher quality of people not a higher quantity of damaged goods. The people who say they want the best for their kids, usually really don't.

posted by charlatan on Feb 05, 2008 at 11:35:57 pm     #



I find it interesting how many times the subject was changed here in this post (I counted 9). It's almost like people don't want to face the reality of what an abortion really is. Either that or they just don't care. Oh, and by the way, not all pro-lifers believe it the death penalty or advocate war. That kind of generalization is typical of the ignorant, but who am I to judge someone's character based on one comment made on a public forum?

Look, talking and dancing all around it doesn't change what it is one bit. See for yourself.

Abortion Procedures

PS: I should mention that I never said anything about making it a federal law to ban abortions. States are supposed to make that call, not the "Supreme" Court.

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 01:30:33 pm     #



Ever wonder what it'd look like if you did an ultrasound on a baby and an abortion at the same time?

www.silentscream.org

posted by billy on Feb 06, 2008 at 02:15:38 pm     #



I think it should be the woman's choice, but I do wish they would chose to give them to the state. We have plenty of facilities to put them into until an adoptive parent, or parents can be found. And if the state choses wrongly, and the kid ends up in an environment of physical, or sexual abuse, so what. Lots of kids go through that. At least the little bastard is alive, and might be able to enjoy his adulthood.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 06, 2008 at 02:22:07 pm     #



Recently seen t-shirt: If the fetus you save is gay, will you still fight for its rights?

posted by Offshore on Feb 06, 2008 at 02:31:45 pm     #



How about this? We outlaw abortion, and have all those who oppose abortion register in a "lottery". Every child that any parents don't want to raise could be put up for adoption from this pool of "tender hearts". Once you have your new kid you don't have to worry about "winning" the lottery until the entire pool has been exhausted. That way those who really oppose abortion can "put up, or shut up".

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 06, 2008 at 02:36:03 pm     #



If it appeases the court, I'll never have an abortion.

How can people bring a kid in the world when they have even thought of abortion?

How can you bring a kid in the world without significant cash reserves?

By any enlightened standards most parents abuse and neglect their kids in both little and large ways. Even the people who get a little constipated over abortion.

Vascectomies could be offered at cost, condoms at cost, or a nice edcuational campaign on the downsides of pregnancy... strech marks, depression, immobility, sickness, fatigue, hemorhhoids...

With all the controls available on reproduction, it's a travesty that abortions even happen.

At the same token, it wouldn't be hard to induce a miscarriage...Kroger sells everything you need for that.

posted by charlatan on Feb 06, 2008 at 02:36:10 pm     #



This link, http://www.ohiocathconf.org/I/AB/2006_DOH_Abortion_Report1.pdf, gives some information about abortion in Ohio. I was under the impression that people of color had the greatest percentage of abortions. This is not true from the statistics (at least for Ohio), and women 20-24 seems to have the largest percentage of abortions. On another site 74% of the respondents gave their poverty as a reason for abortion. Maybe we have to consider awarding each pregnant woman $1,000 or more per month per child to keep them from aborting, if this is important.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 06, 2008 at 02:58:29 pm     #



Keep talking folks. Keep diverting your eyes from the disgusting ugly truth. Don't look at the pictures or the videos of the little innocent unborn baby writhing in pain as she's ripped apart piece by piece or had her skin burned off with a salt solution. No, that would be too horrible. It's so much easier to pretend it's just a simple medical procedure that is eliminating a piece of unwanted tissue.

Put your fingers in your ears - Lalalalallalalala...I don't hear you...llalalalalalala

I know this is an atomic-hot topic, but can you just admit how incredibly horrific abortion is? It's OK to admit it. No one is going to do anything to you or take anything away from you for having even just a little bit of human emotion about admitting that the process of an abortion of a human baby is horrible. It doesn't mean you have to change your mind about it being legal or illegal - just admit it's horrible please.
Thank you.

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 03:06:49 pm     #



"Maybe we have to consider awarding each pregnant woman $1,000 or more per month per child to keep them from aborting, if this is important."

How could you even consider "rewarding" someone for not killing their baby? Oh, and not to mention the "if this is important" part of your statement! OMG! WTF is wrong with you? You are kidding right? Please tell me you're kidding.

Here's a thought, use birth control (whatever method - you choose), and your freedom from the burdens (ie expenses, stress, life committment) of having a child is your reward. Sound sensible?

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 03:17:14 pm     #



FatBabe44, it is horrific. It is also horrific when a child is beaten to death by the mother's boyfriend, or scalded in really hot water in a bath-tub, or cooked in a microwave. Shit happens. Abortions are terrible, but there are ways to get rid of kids after they're born. It happens. Too bad the anti-abortionists don't pay as much attention to kids after they're born than before they are born. Maybe we wouldn't have the child abuse (even from priests) that we read about in the paper every day.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 06, 2008 at 03:21:19 pm     #



This link, http://www.odh.ohio.gov/ASSETS/71A7AED862D84812A104DA1F40C62A52/2007_cfr_1.pdf, raises some questions for me. I know abortion is horrible. Sometimes choices are made between horrible outcomes. If abortion ended, and these children were born to their mothers what would happen? Would they come into a loving environment (most of these women are unmarried according to statistics) or one where the woman's boyfriend looks upon this child as a burden in their relationship. How many of these children would wind up as stories in The Toledo Blade about another woman who cares more for her lover than her child. Proposing that these women be on birth control is a fool's dream. Many of them believe the hype about how dangerous birth control pills are, or that the use of a physical birth control device spoils the "spontaneity" of love. So we'll always have out-of-wedlock births unil mandatory birth-control is instituted (which is never). So we can live with the horror of abortion, or (to me) the worse horror of reading of many more children being killed by abusive parents or jealous boy/girl friends.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 06, 2008 at 03:55:58 pm     #



Old_brdy said: "Too bad the anti-abortionists don't pay as much attention to kids after they're born than before they are born. Maybe we wouldn't have the child abuse (even from priests) that we read about in the paper every day."

Your attempt to redirect does not make a point in your favor. Who in the hell do you think you are to decide that I, or any other "anti-abortionist", don't care or pay attention to child abuse?!

That was one of the most incredibly ignorant remarks I've heard yet. Oh, and the throwing in the priest reference at the end was cute too. I suppose you think I'm going to be defending those degenerates, or feel some sort of guilt since I'm a Christian? I think it's actually just another one of your ridiculous stereotyping statements. After all, we're all the same, right?

I have noticed that you do like to lump groups of people into a bundle and put a label on them. Obviously since I'm a Christian and a Conservative, I must also be a hate-mongering, child abuse supporter who wants everybody dead that doesn't do what I say? Is that where you're going with that?

Please tell me if I've misread your comment. If I have, then I'll apologize for going at you with that.

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 05:55:37 pm     #



Abortion Statistics:

WORLDWIDE

Number of abortions per year: Approximately 46 Million
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 126,000

Where abortions occur:
78% of all abortions are obtained in developing countries and 22% occur in developed countries.

Legality of abortion:
About 26 million women obtain legal abortions each year, while an additional 20 million abortions are obtained in countries where it is restricted or prohibited by law.

Abortion averages:
Worldwide, the lifetime average is about 1 abortion per woman.
Copyright 1999-2000, The Alan Guttmacher Institute. (www.agi-usa.org)

UNITED STATES
Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700

Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.

Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.

Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.

Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.

Abortion coverage:
48% of all abortion facilities provide services after the 12th week of pregnancy. 9 in 10 managed care plans routinely cover abortion or provide limited coverage. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds, virtually all of which are state funds. 16 states (CA, CT, HI, ED, IL, MA , MD, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) pay for abortions for some poor women.

© Copyright 1998, The Alan Guttmacher Institute. (www.agi-usa.org)
© Copyright 1997, The Alan Guttmacher Institute. (www.agi-usa.org)
© Copyright 1995, Family Planning Perspectives
© Copyright 1988, Family Planning Perspectives

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 06:13:05 pm     #



FatBabe, have you actually read the Roe v. Wade decision? Do you understand why abortion is legal?

Abortion is legal. I don't think it's horrible, and I've seen the photos, the films, the advertisements by the anti-freedom folks. Making abortion against the law is not going to work. Case in point, look at the pre-abortion days, review prohibition and tell me how well the (just say no!) drug laws are working.

Case closed.

If you really want to change the number of abortions performed in the US, you can start by paying pregnant women to carry the fetus to term, then you can adopt the results. But I'm guessing you don't want to do that. I'm guessing that you, as OSEB suggests, just want to keep your lazy butt welded to the sofa and complain about the evils of freedom.

Now if I'm wrong, then tell me just how many children you've adopted and raised as your own.

posted by madjack on Feb 06, 2008 at 07:10:29 pm     #



I also lived through the days of illegal abortion. I believe in the right to choose - with a caveat. I do not believe in abortions after 12 weeks. I'd say not after 8 weeks, but realistically, many women don't even know they are pregnant until after 8 weeks (A side bar: Most of the most pre-natal damage is done; ie: birth defects - from over the counter cold preparations, etc.). I do not believe any woman should be allowed to get an abortion after 12 weeks. By 12 weeks, they KNOW for the most part & it's time to make up their minds & get off the fence. I do not believe anybody owns the right to tell a woman what she may do with her body. I also believe in the right to die when I choose. There are already so many unwanted kids that need homes, and I doubt all the pro-lifer's will step up to adopt these unwanted babies. Talk is cheap - walk the damned walk & adopt a few. Yes, abortion is horrific. No question. However, most women who have abortions are not having for frivolous reason. Having & raising kids is very expensive - especially hard on a single mom, with a disappearing dad. I've seen & know too many young girls with kids & no daddy in the picture - their lives stopped cold, often never to re-start again in any educated, productive way. Too many end up marrying the first guy who'll take a woman with kids - who often is abusive & only tolerates the child. When that one doesn't work out, they repeat history, again & again as their financial situation worsens & the need for income sets in. My daughter knows a girl who has 3 kids under the age of 5 who lived in her car for a year. I think perhaps abortion may have been a better option - through the eyes of those little kids living in a cold car in Ohio. A couple of years ago, I drove one of my daughter's friends to have an abortion - but I asked her hard questions first, and made her look at the ugly parts. But in the end, it was her choise. It is the woman who has to live with the consequences - the guilt, remorse as years pass. (and they do, usually). I honestly thought since the passage of Roe v Wade this was settled.

posted by starling02 on Feb 06, 2008 at 07:11:53 pm     #



Starling - Once again I get blasted for something I never said. I NEVER said abortion should be made illegal. I never said it. Someone please show me where I said it. I believe in free will as much as I believe that women should look at and seriously consider every option and aspect of the consequences of all their choices.

Nice speech though. I look forward to hearing you give it to God in person. I wonder if all the excuses or justifications will make all those babies feel better about being ripped apart. It's funny, I don't recall that even President Bush used that many excuses for going to war, but America sure hasn't stopped bitching about that (A little off topic, but makes a point).

PS: Thank you for acknowledging that abortion is horrific. I did read your post.

PSS: Now everyone is going to assume I'm a George Bush fan. I'm NOT!

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 07:35:57 pm     #



I neglected to mention above that this ONCE AGAIN relates to something I have reiterated in length on a different thread of this forum about taking responsibility for the consequences of your actions.

I don't need to adopt anybody's baby. I didn't tell the mother (or the father) to have sex without love and commitment for one another, without a prophylactic, or a secure income to support the baby that is a strong possibility as a result. But I do know that there are PLENTY of good people out there that want to have a child to love, but can't. And yes, I even mean gay couples. Even though I don't get the whole sexual preference thing, at least a baby would have a couple of people who would love her/him rather than kill her/him.

Stop buying into the rhetoric of the abortion supporters. Their reasoning doesn't fly and if you really think about it, you'd see that.

Now, back to legal or illegal... I believe all the laws we ever needed to have were written in stone 5000 years ago. And what have we done with those? Why, we've made it illegal to display them in public places of course! If we all (me included) could just follow those 10 simple rules, there wouldn't be any of this madness. It's a crazy world people. It's a crazy world.

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 07:50:33 pm     #



There are two very civil (well, at least the last time I looked, they were civil) discussions taking place on this very subject over at BlogHer:

Why I'm Pro-Choice

Why I'm Pro-Life

posted by valbee on Feb 06, 2008 at 08:17:12 pm     #



Too much reality for some people I guess.

I didn't start this thread and I think I'm civil. It's sad to me that the hard truth and reality is too hard for people to handle so they want it to just "go somewhere else" and talk about it.

Thanks for stopping by Valbee with your helpful comment...your first in almost two months I might add.

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 06, 2008 at 08:22:33 pm     #



Oh, you're taking me to task for not commenting as much as you'd like? How amusing. Weren't you just commenting above that the subject changed multiple times? And now you've provided an opening for yet another change. Methinks you're a tad hypocritical.

I comment here when A) I have time to read the posts and B) I have something I feel might be worth contributing.

Did you find what I posted offensive? Why? Did I mention you by name? Did I mention ANYONE by name?

I did not.

I posted those links because when I was reading each of the posts the other day, I was extremely impressed with the way even those who disagreed with each other were trying to keep the dialog open, as opposed to the pointless arguing and judgmental attitude that typically pops up. Pardon me for thinking that it was relevant to show that discussion on this volatile topic might just be moving in the right direction.

Since you've managed to make some assumptions about my motives, I'll assume that you're one of the assholes around here that make this place such a "joy" to frequent.

No need to keep track of my posts... I won't bother coming back this time.

posted by valbee on Feb 06, 2008 at 10:37:30 pm     #



Fatbabe44, what you say about me is true to you. But what becomes of the children that are born. This link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overlaying, comes to mind because I remember in a book I read once. The author, a Frenchman, wrote of this practice in Medieval France. In the records of the local churches that were kept for hundreds of years could be found hundreds of deaths of newborns from "overlaying". The priests were aware that this was occurring, and yet women were encouraged to take the newborn into their beds to be with them. Since abortion was a sin, and families of peasants could scarcely feed themselves a "solution" was arrived at through folk wisdom. It is horrible to our modern sensibilities, but were these people any less "religious" because they did what needed to be done?

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 07, 2008 at 12:40:39 am     #



fatbabe - I don't believe that there is an all powerful God to answer to. And those laws written on stone 5,000 years ago? The fact that the earliest written language was discovered thousands of years prior to that,leaves me to think it throws a bit of a monkey wrench in the whole Biblical timeline (thus, my disbelief). But I won't get into an argument about religion - off track. I do understand what you're saying I think - and I do agree with some of it (perhaps much of it). But I'm a realist - there are children in need of homes as it is, that can't seem to find adoptive parents. And America seems to be on this trendy path to prefer to adopt foreign babies rather than American babies - perhaps that needs to be looked into, save our own, first. I am also a big animal rights believer - but I learned a long time ago, no matter how many gruesome, heartbreaking videos I watched, I can't save the entire animal kingdon. No more than we can save all these unwanted babies. I believe if abortion is done at all, the earlier the better - preferably in the first 2 months - 3 maximum. In a perfect world, those women would give their babies up for adoption. I honestly don't know what would be more painful to the mother - the abortion or knowing she gave her child away. I doubt abortion is the 'easy way out' - it's a painful decision to make, and the woman it has no effect on, is rare, I'm sure. But abortion has to be better than the way China deals with unwanted births.

posted by starling02 on Feb 07, 2008 at 12:57:11 am     #



Starling02: The 10 commandments didn't take place at The Beginning. You must get your biblical facts from the History Channel, or from Hollywood (Charlton Heston). Thus, your ignorance of "the biblical timeline". Who said written text started with Moses? ??? This is a whole other topic in and of itself.

Look, people keep making it about the mother and her needs. When that doesn't fly, it's about how horrible life will be for the child. Where do they get their facts? The Lifetime Movie Channel? Who will speak for the baby if not people like me?

Are there that many children in this country that are orphans? No. That's why the elitist Hollywood types go to foreign countries to buy their children. It's easy and only requires a checkbook.
In America, there are qualifications that have to be met in order to adopt a child because we don't put kids on shelves like little melons for sale.

Please people, stop buying into the crap logic that justifies the slaughter of tens of thousands of babies every year.

I just don't get it. Thank God.

Go back and read my very first post in this thread. That's where I'm coming from.

Oldsendbrdy - What in the H are you talking about?! Even if that is true, does that make it right? There have been a lot of really bad things "the church" has approved and done throughout history. Condoning the intentional murder of a baby or the actual act of doing it doesn't make you any more or less religious. It just is a sin. We all sin and we all make mistakes. It's if we have repentant heart about it, or will we go ahead and do it again or encourage another to do it, or try to justify or condone it.

It's OK to be against abortion and at the same time not try to make it illegal. I just don't condone it and don't encourage anyone else to either. I don't want to force anyone to my will or what I think is God's will. No one has that right. I just won't sit back and say nothing. I can't. My heart won't allow me to be silent when I hear someone say it's OK.

PS:
Valbee, I'm sorry I got personal. This topic is very passionate to me (as it should be).

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 07, 2008 at 08:46:31 am     #



Right and wrong are, to me, historical. When things are going well we can be as liberal as we please. But 9/11 happened. Now water-boarding is not "torture". You believe in God, and the 10 Commandments. I believe in doing what is "convenient". Now I know of no one in my extended family who has had an abortion, but I've had a couple who have had out-of-wedlock children. They are hanging on by the end of their fingernails. Would I have encouraged them to have an abortion? Probably not. But I don't condemn any woman who has had one. It may be difficult for her. She may feel the loss of this "potential" human being. But she made a choice that was hers to make, not mine. It is easy to condemn another woman's choice, to say it is God's choice. But God doesn't pay the bills, or stand in court for abusing a child. We do. And when a woman looks around, and sees no help, she will probably choose the lesser of two evils.

But perhaps I am wrong on this. She should assume her "burden", and live with it. Even if she hates this thing that is crying, and screaming, and came into her life without asking, it is her burden. She chose to do what she did, and she should bear the consequences.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Feb 07, 2008 at 03:46:06 pm     #



fatbabe- I disagree with you on why celebrities adopt foreign babies. Foreign babies are trendy - asia, african, etc. trendier than adopting an American born black or white or Hispaic baby. Or perhaps they don't want a child that is a couple of years old. Kind of the mindset at animal shelters - people want puppies & kittens rather than grown animals. I am curious - while I do respect your passion about this (I do) - how many of these unwanted babies have you adopted & raised? (talk the talk, now walk the walk).

posted by starling02 on Feb 07, 2008 at 06:39:16 pm     #



Your ignorance and lack of compassion makes me sad.

I pity you that your heart and mind are OK with the reality that babies are being sacrificed for the mother's convenience and indiscretions.

Starling02 - I don't have a problem with you disagreeing on reasons why celebrities adopt foreign babies. That isn't the point of this whole discussion.

FYI - The husband & I adopted a full grown dog from plannedpethood.org. We both agreed before getting married that we didn't want children. We're more of a dog loving kind of people. ** Better to not have kids if you don't want them...and even better to prevent getting pregnant if you know you don't want kids or aren't ready. Now that's what I call WALKIN THE WALK.** DUH

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 08, 2008 at 12:33:32 pm     #



I fully respect people's right to not have kids - none of my kids, wants to have kids (for different reasons, all). I do not think motherhood is a be-all, end-all, and shouldn't define a woman. That said - I find it interesting that people who do not have kids (and do not want kids) presume to lay guilt trips on women to complete pregnancies. Kind of similar to the people who don't have kids presuming to know how better to raise other people's kids.

posted by starling02 on Feb 08, 2008 at 09:37:42 pm     #



Starling: Don't bother. Fatbabe hasn't read Roe v. Wade and wouldn't understand it she did. She hasn't adopted children nor tried to raise any, for which we may all be thankful. She and those like her should be disenfranchised and are not; more is the pity for that little crime against humanity.

And so, much like Valbee who must have the last word prior to an ostentatious exit, I shall depart this discussion with the final comment directed at the resident barn: If you're going to be fat, ignorant and stupid, the least you can do is become invulnerable.

posted by madjack on Feb 09, 2008 at 02:03:42 am     #



madjack, your personal attack is typical of ignorant people. Thanks for proving me right. Real mature thing to do when you can't offer anything constructive - throw a personal insult.

Am I Fat? Yes. Ignorant and stupid? I think you just proved you are both and as well an immature bully.

Starling02 - I'm laying guilt on women to complete a pregnancy? How awful of me to suggest that a woman should take responsibility for the consequences of not preventing pregnancy. I do not find it similar at all to presuming to know how better to raise other people's kids. After all, who better than a woman who chose not to have children to tell other women to not get pregnant to begin with. Abortion is not the "Easy Button".

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 09, 2008 at 10:30:20 am     #



FatBabe- Pot...Kettle...

Just let me excerpt two points from your last few statements...

""Your ignorance and lack of compassion makes me sad....I pity you...""

AND-

""your personal attack is typical of ignorant people. ""

posted by wombat2 on Feb 09, 2008 at 02:14:55 pm     #



wombat2 - since no one wants to have a civil discussion on the horror of abortions and would rather take potshots, I'll respond.

I think once the first potshot was fired at me on a personal level, I have to assume someone is ignorant. That's what ignorant people do when they can't articulate in a debate - they go on a personal attack. Therefor, my response is based on the evidence.

I'm sorry that so many people here would rather talk about me than the reality of millions of murdered babies. But, no one wants to hear the truth when it's ugly.

I may be a hypocrite, an asshole, or a fat ass (all names I've been called here), but I'm proud of the fact that I am trying to change peoples' minds about abortion.

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 09, 2008 at 03:49:02 pm     #



You'll never change a person's views on abortion. A person's pro-choice or anti-choice beliefs are rooted in his or her guts, and based upon his or her most basic and deeply held values regarding what is fair, what is just, what is right, what is ethical and what is private, and in some cases, what is Christian and/or what is economical. These are values most people don't yield on.

If you would like to be proud of your pro-life beliefs -- which is fine with me -- your energy would be better spent not ranting on Toledo Talk but by taking actions to support and make better the lives of children who are aleady born -- including those living in poverty, those languishing in the foster care system, those suffering life-threatening diseases and birth defects in an unaffordable health care system, those lagging in their educational development in poorly funded public schools, and those born to mothers who cannot afford child care.

For starters.

posted by jmleong on Feb 09, 2008 at 07:47:14 pm     #



Preach it brother!

posted by FatBabe44 on Feb 10, 2008 at 07:24:47 am     #



fatbabe - By 1983, I knew of half dozen women who got pregnant while using different birth controls - fo I imagine there's a lot more since then - just of people I may have been acquainted with at some time (small world). There is no 100 percent effective birth control - and sometimes, the best preventatives, fail. I would love to see all sexually active women under the age of 30 use birth control. But sadly, teenagers often don't - they tend to subscribe to the 'it won't happen to me' theory of denial. I have known married women have birth control fail when they already had 3 or 4 kids they could barely afford as it was - and a couple of those, another unexpected pregnancy may well have put those marriages over the edge. Married people argue most about finances & kids - those are the two things that doom many marriages. It's one thing to have 1 or 2 kids & have to live on very tight purse strings. It's quite another to add another child to that mix when that new child pushes them over the edge, financially. Medical bills alone for the mother & child in just the first year can be staggering. Child care can eat a weeks paycheck very fast. I think your heart is in the right place and I do agree with you, that too many women opt for abortion just because it's inconvenient as per their careers, school, dating, etc. - BUT, this is the real world, and maybe it's not the worst thing to have a 14 yr old girl get an abortion & be able to finish school. Maybe it's not the worst thing for the single, struggling mom working 2 jobs to support the 2 kids she already has - to have an abortion. I haven't even touched on rape or incest - or just the idiocy that defines young teens thinking. I do kind of resent that you make the assumption that we are all ignorant on this board about the horrors of abortion - that only you have seen the videos, etc. We HAVE. You aren't telling us anything we don't know. Some of us have had up close & personal experiences with this - so do not preach to us. You do not know what goes on in other people's lives, or what the determining factors were.

posted by starling02 on Feb 10, 2008 at 08:28:34 pm     #



This group continues to demonstrate it's various and substantial weaknesses. Here are some of the morally relative and completely weak reasons that have been presented in this this thread to kill your unborn children:

Children are too inconvenient.

Children are too expensive.

Children need too much time.

Children are needy...

Waa...

Waa...

Waa...

(no offense intended to the white african american fellow that used to post here.)

***************************************

Whatever it is...

...YOUR CHILD
...YOUR WORK
...YOUR HEALTH NEEDS
...YOUR RETIREMENT
...YOUR HOME
...YOUR TOWN...

...whatever the nature or subject or your constant and irresponsible bitching...IT IS NEVER YOUR RESPONSIBILITY!!!

How it that possible?

Are you all just bystanders on the sidewalk of your LIFE?!?

***************************************
I wrote the following in August of 2006:

Don't think for a minute that being a believer in Christ is consistent with KEEPING SILENT.

If you don't want to be Christian, that's your problem.

But if you choose to be an ANTI-CHRISTIAN (i.e., a sodomist), AND you choose to AGGRESSIVELY DRIVE YOUR BELIEFS INTO MY LIFE, there will be CONFLICT.

***************************************

Starling, you are a moron. Last year, you were trying to make sodomy sound like the latest trend sweeping America.

Now, you want FatBabe44 to just stop preaching to you. If anyone needs more preaching in her ears, Starling, it is you.

Every single one of you morons trying to sidle up next to the idea of killing your next child needs to consider the superficial and murderous nature of your thoughts.

With disdain,

AirTrainer

posted by AirTrainer on Feb 12, 2008 at 12:30:22 am     #