on south dakota, on roe v. wade, and on partnership
I've been seeing this paragraph a lot on my flist lately:
The circumstances under which I would, might, have, or might have chosen to have an abortion are nobody's business but mine and those I choose to tell. They are not the business of any government. I do not accept the proposition that either the state or my sexual partner(s) should have any say over when and if I choose to bear a child. I do not accept any sovereignty over my body and my reproductive organs but my own. If faced with the situation, I will do everything feasible to help women and girls I know exercise their rights to safely terminate a pregnancy if they so choose. When a state treats women and girls as chattel, it is they who commit a crime.
This paragraph bothers me, but not for the reasons you might think. Let me start by saying that I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. I believe in the right of a woman to choose when and if she should have a child, and I believe in the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy should she deem it necessary. I am not sure I would ever be able to have an abortion, but I believe, very strongly, that it should be legal and accessible to women.
However.
The part of this paragraph that bothers me is the I do not accept the proposition that...my sexual partner(s) should have any say over when and if I choose to bear a child.
No. I disagree.
It takes two people to cause a pregnancy, and it should take two people to decide whether or not to continue that pregnancy. Should I become pregnant, it is my responsibility to speak to my husband, to discuss with him, and ultimately to decide whether or not we want to have a child. It is no more fair of me to decide to terminate my pregnancy without even informing him than it is for him to take away my right to do so.
If a woman decides to bear a child, she is responsible for its care and well-being. Is it fair of the state to demand that the child's father provide support for that child, even if the child's father wants nothing to do with the child and was, in fact, willing to pay to terminate the pregnancy? One could argue that because it takes two to conceive a child, it takes two to raise it. However, if the woman decided to terminate the pregnancy, the father would be absolved of financial responsibility. Is it fair to make him pay child support for eighteen years when he was willing to pay for the abortion?
Conversely, what happens when a woman becomes pregnant and does not want the child, but her partner does? With the sentiments expressed in the above paragraph, he or she would have no part of her decision. Is that fair?
I do not believe any woman should be forced to bear a child. And in cases of rape, of violence, this clearly does not apply. In situations such as those, it is entirely the woman's decision whether or not to go through with the pregnancy. I believe in the morning-after pill and that it should be available for situations like these. And I believe that a woman who has been raped, who is pregnant as a result, has every right to have a legal abortion.
I also do not think that the government should have any say in whether or not women can or should have children. When I went to the Million Woman March a few years back, one of my favorite signs was a woman wearing a placard that said "Hey Bush, stay out of mine!" As I said, I'm pro-choice.
I think the law in South Dakota is wrong. I think Roe v. Wade is incredibly important to women, and I'm afraid of living in a time when abortion is either criminalized or hedged in by so many restrictions, where doctors are simply afraid to perform them, that it might as well be criminal.
I'm not pro-abortion. And I think that if two people (or more; I think polyamory is a viable option for some) end up in a situation where one of them is pregnant, it's the responsibility of all those people to decide what's best.
Yes, ultimately it comes down to the pregnant woman. She is the one who will have to go through the pregnancy, through labor, through either raising the child or giving it up. But to say that she is the only one who can decide this--no. I disagree.
I don't necessarily believe in parental consent laws, and I don't necessarily believe in spousal/partner consent laws either. That's a slippery slope, and not one where I'm sure of my footing. Nor do I have a clear opinion on 24-hour waiting periods, on counseling sessions, although my inclination there is that if a woman wants an abortion, talking to someone first is not necessarily the worst idea in the world.
I think that my views are perhaps more representative of women out there than those I've seen on LJ, and that may be me generalizing. I don't know. I do know that this topic is a minefield full of bombs waiting to go off, with troops entrenched firmly on either side. But a lot of us are simply caught in the middle, leaning to one side but not willing to endorse the black-and-white views that side represents. I don't know who wrote the above paragraph, but I don't agree with it. Not entirely.
Life isn't black-and-white. And neither is abortion.
The circumstances under which I would, might, have, or might have chosen to have an abortion are nobody's business but mine and those I choose to tell. They are not the business of any government. I do not accept the proposition that either the state or my sexual partner(s) should have any say over when and if I choose to bear a child. I do not accept any sovereignty over my body and my reproductive organs but my own. If faced with the situation, I will do everything feasible to help women and girls I know exercise their rights to safely terminate a pregnancy if they so choose. When a state treats women and girls as chattel, it is they who commit a crime.
This paragraph bothers me, but not for the reasons you might think. Let me start by saying that I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice. I believe in the right of a woman to choose when and if she should have a child, and I believe in the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy should she deem it necessary. I am not sure I would ever be able to have an abortion, but I believe, very strongly, that it should be legal and accessible to women.
However.
The part of this paragraph that bothers me is the I do not accept the proposition that...my sexual partner(s) should have any say over when and if I choose to bear a child.
No. I disagree.
It takes two people to cause a pregnancy, and it should take two people to decide whether or not to continue that pregnancy. Should I become pregnant, it is my responsibility to speak to my husband, to discuss with him, and ultimately to decide whether or not we want to have a child. It is no more fair of me to decide to terminate my pregnancy without even informing him than it is for him to take away my right to do so.
If a woman decides to bear a child, she is responsible for its care and well-being. Is it fair of the state to demand that the child's father provide support for that child, even if the child's father wants nothing to do with the child and was, in fact, willing to pay to terminate the pregnancy? One could argue that because it takes two to conceive a child, it takes two to raise it. However, if the woman decided to terminate the pregnancy, the father would be absolved of financial responsibility. Is it fair to make him pay child support for eighteen years when he was willing to pay for the abortion?
Conversely, what happens when a woman becomes pregnant and does not want the child, but her partner does? With the sentiments expressed in the above paragraph, he or she would have no part of her decision. Is that fair?
I do not believe any woman should be forced to bear a child. And in cases of rape, of violence, this clearly does not apply. In situations such as those, it is entirely the woman's decision whether or not to go through with the pregnancy. I believe in the morning-after pill and that it should be available for situations like these. And I believe that a woman who has been raped, who is pregnant as a result, has every right to have a legal abortion.
I also do not think that the government should have any say in whether or not women can or should have children. When I went to the Million Woman March a few years back, one of my favorite signs was a woman wearing a placard that said "Hey Bush, stay out of mine!" As I said, I'm pro-choice.
I think the law in South Dakota is wrong. I think Roe v. Wade is incredibly important to women, and I'm afraid of living in a time when abortion is either criminalized or hedged in by so many restrictions, where doctors are simply afraid to perform them, that it might as well be criminal.
I'm not pro-abortion. And I think that if two people (or more; I think polyamory is a viable option for some) end up in a situation where one of them is pregnant, it's the responsibility of all those people to decide what's best.
Yes, ultimately it comes down to the pregnant woman. She is the one who will have to go through the pregnancy, through labor, through either raising the child or giving it up. But to say that she is the only one who can decide this--no. I disagree.
I don't necessarily believe in parental consent laws, and I don't necessarily believe in spousal/partner consent laws either. That's a slippery slope, and not one where I'm sure of my footing. Nor do I have a clear opinion on 24-hour waiting periods, on counseling sessions, although my inclination there is that if a woman wants an abortion, talking to someone first is not necessarily the worst idea in the world.
I think that my views are perhaps more representative of women out there than those I've seen on LJ, and that may be me generalizing. I don't know. I do know that this topic is a minefield full of bombs waiting to go off, with troops entrenched firmly on either side. But a lot of us are simply caught in the middle, leaning to one side but not willing to endorse the black-and-white views that side represents. I don't know who wrote the above paragraph, but I don't agree with it. Not entirely.
Life isn't black-and-white. And neither is abortion.