Support, Not Abort
As the people of Trinidad experience anxiety over the zika virus and microcephaly, which is linked to birth defects, the question hanging over the head of the people, continues to be the morality of abortion under these recent circumstances. This question of abortion is not new, but zika has given activists another opportunity to attempt to guilt trip legislators into believing that people should have the right to end the lives of the unborn, a fight they have forever branded as ‘women’s rights’ and ‘pro-choice’.
Getting pregnant now, when zika is circling, does not mean opening the door to the first and only possibility of birth defects. At any time that women conceive, be it now, in the past or future, their baby is at risk. Perhaps we are forgetting that microcephaly, a disease that has not even been proven to affect EVERY pregnant woman who contracts zika, is only ONE of the many things that can affect a baby in the womb. There is downs syndrome, cleft palate, cleft lip, heart defect, spina bifida to name a few. So why then should abortion be legal now? The arguments normally sound something like this.
Having a differently-abled child is cruel because their life will be miserable, and even more so if parents cannot properly support the child financially and emotionally.
Firstly, this argument is quite unbelievable. I say unbelievable because in many cases, when differently-abled children are surrounded by loving families, they can in fact be much happier with their simple lives than regular people who are plagued by life’s complications. This should not be a very hard thought to swallow, since many a time we see differently-abled children not only full of their own joy, but also bringing so much love to people around them. There are many testimonies of families whose lives have been completely changed for the better because of these gems. No doubt, there is sacrifice involved, but sacrifice and suffering reap abundant happiness and rewards. This argument is also self-contradictory. It is conflicting that someone won’t bring a child into the world because they fear for this child’s well-being, yet the proposed solution is to kill the child—the child’s ‘well-being’ is no longer. Makes me question whose well-being and comfort this really concerns.
In cases where parents feel unequipped to raise a child perhaps if abortion advocates used their voices and efforts to create a support system for these mothers, outcomes would be better. What these women need is support, emotionally, mentally, financially; but what they do not need is a society that makes them feel as though if they do not fit into a certain mold or social class or family status, the only option is to end the life of their baby, a decision that no matter what the circumstance be, no expecting mother truly wants.
Another common argument is the feminist one that argues the following:
Women should have the right to choose, since this is their body etc.
However, the right to choose cannot be divorced from the objective of that choice. The pro choice movement is advocating for the ‘right’ for women to choose to prematurely and using artificial means, end the life that is growing inside them. How can this be a feasible choice in a civilized society?
One would think that feminism really is concerned with the well-being and happiness of women however, for the women choosing abortion, there are often serious physical and psychological consequences. Studies show that many women face health risks such as infertility and depression often for years after the abortion took place. It really raises the question of why a women’s advocate pressure group would ever want this for women. This Post Abortion Syndrome (PAS), a form of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) that women experience is not recognized by many well known psychology institutions such as the American Psychological Association and Planned Parenthood, however, according to Psychology Today “any traumatic experience can result in PTSD and abortion is no exception”. Post Abortion Syndrome (PAS) includes a wide array of symptoms including depression and thoughts of suicide, sudden and uncontrollable crying, deterioration of self esteem, re-experiencing of the abortion, intense longing to become pregnant again and more.
After a series of studies, which can be found through studentsforlife.org, researchers found only one ‘positive’ outcome of abortion: temporary relief. However, PAS symptoms can manifest soon after. Thankfully, there have been many support groups around the world formed to help women cope with the after effects of their now regretted decision to abort. These women have a very hard time living normal lives after the fact. Where is the concern for women here?
I will not give much attention to the third argument which says that legalizing abortion will put an end to ‘back alley,’ illegal and unsafe abortions, mainly because giving people a safer way to do something that is morally wrong, is not the way to go about solving a problem. It is just another example of modern day feminists and pro-choice activists throwing any possible argument at legislators no matter how hollow and unsubstantial it may be. It is actually making the problem worse. It’s like saying to someone “listen I know people will break the red lights sometimes, so let’s teach them the best or safest way to do it.”
In closing I will say this - abortion is a tragedy. From the one-day-old fetus to the hundred-year-old grandmother, each person from the moment of conception is a valuable life, entitled to rights; most importantly the right to life. No disease, disability or deficiency can change this. Pro lifers recognizes this and stand not only for the rights of all women who feel backed into all sorts of corners, but most importantly for the rights of the voiceless, helpless, and harmless unborn.
(Published in the Trinidad Guardian)
