More News

Most of my blogging is going to come from the New York Times online, because they're kind enough to give me full access for free, just because I am a student.

Abortion Foes See Validation for New Tactic

The article in the NYT today that caught my eye was this one about the grand old abortion debate, the favorite stomping grounds of the Falwells and Dobsons, and the famed litmus test for all GOP candidates. It concerns the evangelical infatuation with their new strategy of claiming that abortion isn't just bad for fetuses/babies/martyred saints, it's bad for women, too.

I have a few immediate problems with this argument:

1) On the issue of psychological harm, well, duh. Of course it's a difficult decision to terminate a pregnancy, only made worse by the vitriolic disapproval from the anti-abortion types. The people who say they only want to look out for the health of both baby and mother are the same people who camp outside the clinics and call the women seeking abortions whores and murderers. Anti-abortion groups assert that there is a psychological disorder called Post Abortion Syndrome which is related to PTSD, but unfortunately this isn't recognized by the psychological or psychiatric communities and isn't to be found anywhere in the DSM-IV (the bible of mental disorders). So, PAS exists in the same murky ground as claims that homosexuality is a mental defect.

2) As for the claims that abortion is a severe danger medically, well, the evidence doesn't obtain. When you're making a medical argument this total lack of reputable, peer-reviewed research is a serious problem. In reality an abortion performed by a doctor in a clinic (e.g., a legal abortion as opposed to the back-alley jobs that would be necessitated by a renewed ban) is safer than childbirth.

3) Finally, the entire argument is flawed. Even if abortion were as dangerous for a woman as claimed, where is the justification for state intervention? Divorce can be an emotionally damaging, difficult experience. Should the state force married couples to undergo counseling before they're allowed to file for divorce?

Then there's the matter of the actual content of these state-mandated "informed consent" sessions and counseling procedures. As reported by the Times, the South Dakota informed consent law (under legal challenge) states that abortion kills a

'“whole, separate, unique, living human being,” and that it carries a variety of psychological and physical risks to the woman.'

It becomes rather clear what the "informed consent" law really is. Abortion foes can assemble across the street from an abortion clinic and yell abuse at women who enter. But, sadly, they can't follow the woman into the clinic and continue to verbally assault her. This where the God-fearing South Dakota state legislature comes in, because now you are directed by law to stop and listen to a state-mandated official tell you that abortion is murder before you're allowed to go into the operating room. How splendid, and might I add, it is wonderful to hear that in the state of South Dakota the government mandates officials inside a medical clinic to make false statements about the medical safety of a procedure.

(South Carolina also wants to force women to look at the fetus via sonogram before having the abortion. I don't think this will work because it is illegal to force people to undergo medical procedures without their consent, but it is a nice touch. Maybe they can also make a law saying that the doctor has to slap the woman across the face and yell "It's a child, not a choice!" before starting the procedure.)

Something else I enjoyed:

"But Allan E. Parker Jr., president of the Justice Foundation, a conservative group based in Texas, compares the campaign intended for women to the long struggle to inform Americans about the risks of smoking. “We’re kind of in the early stages of tobacco litigation,” Mr. Parker said."

Now, see, the difference here would be that tobacco has been established by decades of unanimous scientific evidence to be dangerous, and that there isn't any strong evidence that abortion is particularly dangerous medically or psychologically.