"THE ONLY MORAL ABORTION IS MY ABORTION" (When the Anti-Choice Choose)

[kpete]

"THE ONLY MORAL ABORTION IS MY ABORTION"
When the Anti-Choice Choose
By Joyce Arthur (copyright © September 2000)

Abortion is a highly personal decision that many women are sure they'll never have to think about until they're suddenly faced with an unexpected pregnancy. But this can happen to anyone, including women who are strongly anti-choice. So what does an anti-choice woman do when she experiences an unwanted pregnancy herself? Often, she will grin and bear it, so to speak, but frequently, she opts for the solution she would deny to other women -- abortion.

In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers' own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy:

"I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers." (Physician, Australia)

..................

"Recently, we had a patient who had given a history of being a 'pro-life' activist, but who had decided to have an abortion. She was pleasant to me and our initial discussion was mutually respectful. Later, she told someone on my staff that she thought abortion is murder, that she is a murderer, and that she is murdering her baby. So before doing her procedure, I asked her if she thought abortion is murder -- the answer was yes. I asked her if she thought I am a murderer, and if she thought I would be murdering her baby, and she said yes. But murder is a crime, and murderers are executed. Is this a crime? Well, it should be, she said. At that point, she became angry and hostile, and the summary of the conversation was that she regarded me as an abortion-dispensing machine, and how dare I ask her what she thinks. After explaining to her that I do not perform abortions for people who think I am a murderer or people who are angry at me, I declined to provide her with medical care. I do not know whether she found someone else to do her abortion." (Physician, Colorado)

....

"The sister of a Dutch bishop in Limburg once visited the abortion clinic in Beek where I used to work in the seventies. After entering the full waiting room she said to me, 'My dear Lord, what are all those young girls doing here?' 'Same as you', I replied. 'Dirty little dames,' she said." (Physician, The Netherlands)

"I had a patient about ten years ago who traveled up to New York City from South Carolina for an abortion. I asked her why she went such a long way to get the procedure. Her answer was that she was a member of a church group that didn't believe in abortion and she didn't want anyone to know she was having one. She planned to return to the group when she went back to South Carolina." (Physician, New York)

"I once had a German client who greatly thanked me at the door, leaving after a difficult 22-week abortion. With a gleaming smile, she added: 'Und doch sind Sie ein Mörderer.' ('And you're still a murderer.')" (Physician, The Netherlands)

"My first encounter with this phenomenon came when I was doing a 2-week follow-up at a family planning clinic. The woman's anti-choice values spoke indirectly through her expression and body language. She told me that she had been offended by the other women in the abortion clinic waiting room because they were using abortion as a form of birth control, but her condom had broken so she had no choice! I had real difficulty not pointing out that she did have a choice, and she had made it! Just like the other women in the waiting room." (Physician, Ontario)

oldie but important, much more here:
http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/anti-tales.shtml

[Ratty]

1. Fascinating article. Thank you so much

Anti-choicers who have abortions for themselves or their families - and invariably try to keep it secret - are the worst of the worst. I normally have empathy for people who have to make hard choices but in this case I find I can't.

[kardonb]

53. gen.disc.

so many of these answers , declaring the medical provider a "murderer " seem to me classical guilt-transfers (I am not the "murderer " , YOU are the guilty one .

[BlueCaliDem]

2. As a Liberal, I'm against abortion - for MYSELF. That's *my* choice.

In this day and age of free and widely available contraceptives, I don't believe abortion should be necessary in a normal, healthy, sexually active life, but I strongly believe that NO woman should be excoriated for making that very difficult decision if she has to.

Live and let live, is my motto here.

In my personal life, I have never chosen to have an abortion (although there were at least three times when I was faced with that choice) before nor after my marriage, and as a mother, I have raised my daughter to see it from my perspective as well as encouraged her to balance what's she learned from me with information out there, and allowed her to do as she sees fit with it. But again, this is just my opinion, my choice, and she knows it. I would never judge her should she have to make that difficult decision. In fact, I would be right beside her, holding her hand, and comforting her because I respect her right to choose as she deems necessary for herself.

Therefore, I strongly believe I don't have any right to tell others what to choose. Every person must make their own decisions based on their own personal circumstances and needs, and be fair and truthful about it. If they choose that route, they shouldn't denigrate those who are faced with that difficult decision, either.

I strongly believe that access to safe, free, and and medically sound abortion procedures should always, always be available in every clinic, every hospital, and to every woman on this planet.

[RedSpartan]

12. A very good post.

[BlueCaliDem]

28. Thank you, RedSpartan. eom

[Luminous Animal]

76. Free and widely available contraceptives? What world do you live in? FREE????!!!!

And really. Each time you were pregnant, you made the choice not to have an abortion because, la de da, "should I have an abortion or a baby!"

And, "at least three time?" You mean there might have been more but you forgot?

"Well, I was pregnant at least 3 times but maybe more.. I don't know what happened to those other kids that I may have had. But at least I never had an abortion and I will gently hold on to my daughter's hands through whatever abortion or pregnancy that she decides to have whether she remembers them or not."

[BlueCaliDem]

94. My, my, my. Aren't you touchy and judgmental.

Or you just enjoy ridiculing people you don't agree with simply because it's great fun?

How sad.

Yes, free and widely available contraceptives - at least every place I have resided, both here and abroad. So my post pertains to MY situation, and thus reflects my opinion based on my experiences. Is that clear now?

FYI? I don't care for your patronizing tone. Good thing DU has options to prevent me from ever having to experience it again. Tah-tah.

[Bluenorthwest]

131. I agree with the others, and I recall a post of yours using a similar rhetorical tactic

"Gay marriage is for me unthinkable, but Civil Unions have my 100% vote. I believe that marriage is something done in churches, and the Bible does speak negatively about homosexuality.
However, allowed to be "married" by a Mayor, or a power-invested civil servant for gays, and lesbians, is right, and good.?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1352110

Gay marriage is unthinkable (even for others apparently) and you are against abortion, each followed by 'but' and a raft of modifying language.
Unthinkable!!!!!!

[ShazzieB]

146. Not free ANYPLACE where I have resided.

Please. check your facts, dear.

I don't know where all you've lived, but I have lived in the northeast, the southeast, and (mostly) the midwest. Nobody is giving out free contraceptives where I live now or anywhere I've ever been (at least not while I was there) unless you count Planned Parenthood volunteers giving out free condoms to publicize PP services on certain limited occasions.

[Gravitycollapse]

90. You're shaming abortion. Which isn't okay.

If there is nothing morally wrong with abortion, and there isn't, then your opinion of whether or not contraceptive is widely available is totally irrelevant. No one cares.

If women have access to contraception, choose not to use it and then decide to have an abortion, it's none of your business.

[BlueCaliDem]

93. Not shaming it at all. Again, I repeat: MY choice.

Whether abortion is morally right or wrong, is not something you or anyone else have a right to decide for others. Again, this is a personal choice and a person's morals and ethics are absoutely, unequivocally NONE of YOUR business.

If women have access to contraception, choose not to use it and then decide to have an abortion, it's none of your business.

Where on god's green Earth did you read in my post that I even entertained the thought that it is? In fact, if you read my post with some comprehension, you'd know that I clearly stated that "I strongly believe I don't have any right to tell others what to choose. Every person must make their own decisions based on their own personal circumstances and needs."

Missed that, did you?

Don't put words into my posts, GC. I'm very capable of doing that on my own.

[Scout]

124. i think you are the one being judgemental...

"I don't believe abortion should be necessary in a normal, healthy, sexually active life"

really?? so my sex life is abnormal or unhealthy if i choose to have an abortion?

wow.

[Gravitycollapse]

142. Morality, ethics, are universal.

To say that your morality is personal is nonsensical. If you believe abortion is immoral for yourself, you're actually saying it is immoral for everyone else. That is the point of morality.

I say again, your rhetoric surrounding the idea that abortion can be made obsolete with contraception is an argument that abortion can and should be done away with. It's a moralization of abortion when abortion itself is an amoral issue.

At least you get the idea that a woman's right to choose is none of your business. Now all you have to do is recognise that your argument is making their choice your business.

[Lady Freedom Returns]

3. K and R.

[Solly Mack]

4. K&R

[progressoid]

5. Wow.

That is some grade A cognitive dissonance.

[BrotherIvan]

6. As long as people equate a fetus with a baby, they can claim it is murder

Unfortunately, too many, including so-called pro-choice people, allow this anti-choice framing to stand. Making it even harder on women, increasing the guilt and shame of making that choice. Since there is no 100% effective form of birth control--Not. Even. Close--then there should be no shame whatsoever in terminating a pregnancy (i.e. a potential child once it is carried to term nine months and successfully born). It is such stone age thinking and those who even unconsciously promote it have no idea the pain they continue to inflict upon women.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

24. seconded.

From the article: "dirty little dames". Wow.


So psychologically fractured, all of them.

[Hestia]

29. Great post - I scream at the tv every time I hear "unborn baby" arghhh!

It is a fetus until leaving the womb; after birth then it is a baby.

[BrotherIvan]

30. I was afraid I was gonna get slammed as I usually do

I have told the story on this board of so many friends who carried years of tremendous guilt for "killing their child." We haven't fought back hard enough against the anti-choice framing that a fetus=a baby or the photos doctored to look like actual babies in the womb. That's very powerful marketing for anti-choice rhetoric. A woman should never feel guilty for making the best choice for her life, health and reproduction. Never. I'm even getting weary of the term, "terrible choice" or "heart-breaking decision" because again, it is trying to slip in the RW shaming of women to decide for themselves.

And then you have to read this horseshit:

"It is horrific even to think that there are children, victims of abortion, who will never see the light of day.."
--Pope Francis

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/13/22288490-pope-francis-makes-toughest-remarks-yet-on-horrific-abortion?lite

Those are the kind of words used as a weapon against women and their rights. "Victims of abortion" "Children" "Unborn Child" Those are words that pro-choice people should actively reject because they are insidious and reject reality in favor of magical thinking. It's hard to do, as evidenced often on this very board, to understand that a child isn't a fertilized egg, a child is a living, breathing being that you raise and nurture. So please, don't feed the lies.

[ShazzieB]

147. Yes, yes, yes.

Especially the part about using terminology like "terrible choice" or "heart-breaking/agonizing decision." I don't even like it when people refer to abortion as a "difficult" choice/decision. I know it's difficult for some, and I sympathize with anyone who has been taught to regard abortion as a horrible thing and has to wrestle with that conditioning when faced with an unwanted pregnancy. But it is NOT a "heart-breaking" or even particularly difficult decision for everyone. It wasn't for me, when I was a pregnant college student. As soon as my period was late, I knew exactly what I wanted to do, and the only really hard part was figuring out how to scrounge enough money to fly to New York where it was legal.

Hard as it may be for some to comprehend, I was never taught to regard abortion as something "sinful," evil, or horrific. I wasn't raised Catholic, which as far as I know was the only branch of Christianity that heavily opposed abortion at that time. The evangelical and fundamentalist churches didn't jump on that bandwagon until long after I had left the denomination I was raised in, so I never received those kinds of messages, or any message equating abortion with "murder." I never even heard the word "abortion" until I read it in a magazine article at the age of 14 or 15. I asked my mom what it meant, and her reply was very matter of fact, because she had never received any of those messages, either.

That was in the mid-60s, when second wave feminism was getting underway. By the end of that decade, I had started reading about the movement, absorbing its principles, and adopting them as my own. One of those principles was the need to legalize abortion and give women control of their own bodies. My reaction to that idea was, simply, "Of course!"

So when I (a first generation, full time college student, attending school on financial aid plus the earnings from a part-time job) unexpectedly fell pregnant in 1972, it was clear to me what choice I was going to make. I didn't have the financial resources to raise a child without dropping out of school, which was unthinkable to me.. Roe hadn't happened yet, but the state of New York had legalized abortion in 1970 and become a popular destination for anyone in need of abortion who could finance the trip. I proceeded to make my plans accordingly.

At that point, I didn't even know it was supposed to be a "difficult" decision, much less a controversial one. As far as I was concerned, I was simply making the most sensible and practical choice that was available to me. My father, bless him, helped me with the money, and I made the trip and returned to school afterwards, confident that I had made the right choice for me and relieved to be able to continue with my studies as planned.

When people use "scare" words like terrible, agonizing, and even difficult, to describe the choice to terminate a pregnancy, it feels like a judgment against people like me who didn't see it as something requiring a struggle. It implies that the reason we shouldn't judge a woman for having an abortion is. because it's such a terrible, hard choice. I don't think any woman should be judged for having an abortion, period. Whether it was a difficult choice or not is completely beside the point.

[mountain grammy]

84. Yes, good post.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

7. In the same way that so many people with a history of drug use support harsh penalties for it. N.T.

[joeglow3]

8. Great read, but I don't like a doctor refusing service

Because he doesn't support the views of the patient. I am betting he doesn't support people who refuse to provide emergency contraception.

[quakerboy]

18. Based on reading the article

There seems to be a belief that the most strident anti choice patients will not carry through on the aftercare, and thus are more likely to end up with complications, meaning you could be harming their health, as well providing them grist for lawsuits. Under that kind of situation, You might be in a "do the least harm" scenario.

I think its also fair to make an argument that no one (Dr's or other) should be required/expected to provide service to people who are actively verbally abusing them (given the importance of medical practice, I would add "in the absence of a life threatening medical situation&quot .

[hughee99]

21. According to the article, the DOCTOR was the one asking the patient

about her beliefs. It didn't sound like it was an issue until the doctor decided to start a philosophical debate just before the procedure. If the doctor had decided to lecture a 16 year old girl about celibacy and Jesus before her ultrasound, and then the girl got angry about it, would you blame the girl or the doctor?

As far as the aftercare explanation goes, we both know that's a load of bullshit. A doctor refusing to provide service because in the doctor's opinion the patient won't follow up with the aftercare properly? That won't fly ANYWHERE, and even on the DU, the doctor would be widely ridiculed if they said they wouldn't perform a procedure for this reason (as long as the person isn't first painted as a rw nut-job).

[Squinch]

41. I think, though, that if the doctor thought that the woman was fundamentally opposed in her beliefs

to the procedure and it would cause her psychological damage to go through with it, it would be legit.

The difference between that and the anti-abortion "counseling" is that the woman who is being "counseled" does not have religious or ethical objections to abortion. The "counselors" are trying to change her beliefs.

This doctor who refused to perform an abortion on a woman who thought it would make the doctor and herself murderers was just trying to avoid going against the woman's own beliefs.

[hughee99]

50. Then the doctor should have asked "Are you sure you want to do this" and given her a chance

to walk away, not gotten into a philosophical debate with the person. If the doctor felt that the woman was not mentally stable enough to make such a decision, that's fine too, but what this sounds like is a doctor decided NOT to perform the procedure because of a person's personal beliefs.

I was pretty sure it's "her body, her choice" unless we're now letting doctors, rather than patients, decide what the "right choice" is for each patient.

[Squinch]

52. My take was that he decided she was not mentally stable enough, and those questions were

to ascertain her state of mind. If he asked if she was sure she wanted to do it, and she had said yes, she was still voicing two diametrically opposed and contradictory wishes.

[hughee99]

69. So it's okay if a pharmacist refuses to give a catholic girl birth control pills,

not because of the pharmacist's beliefs but that of the girl? If a person whose religion opposes modern medicine seeks treatment for something, if the doctor asks if they think they're going to hell for getting treatment and the patient says yes, but wants the treatment anyway, the doctor is okay to refuse them?

I'll give you the "not mentally stable enough" defense, but IMHO, it has to be more than just saying, the patient's belief system is against this, but the patient wants to do it anyway.

I don't think a doctor should be able to deny treatment for a case of hypocrisy by considering them not mentally competent to make that decision.

[Squinch]

72. We don't know what went on in that office. We weren't there. How do you suppose

people ascertain if someone is not mentally stable enough? They ask them questions. If the person is clearly pursuing a path that is in direct conflict with their strongly stated wishes, there is a problem.

I could say, "Abortions are against my ethics but I have no choice other than to go ahead with it." That is a world of difference from saying to someone working in the clinic, "Abortion is murder and I am going to be murdering my baby, I am going to be a murderer," and then insisting to the doctor, "You're a murderer and I'm a murderer, and you will be murdering my baby, and I hate you, you abortion dispensing machine, I am a murderer, I am a murderer, and how dare you deny me this abortion?" From the doctor's description, the latter is what happened.

I don't think not going through with the procedure for that second person is hypocrisy.

[hughee99]

79. Exactly, we DON'T know what went on in that office, and the doctors side is the only one we heard.

Even her account doesn't make it sound like she handled it well. The doctor ASKED the patient what she thought of abortion. The doctor ASKED the patient what she thought of physicians that provide them. The doctor ASKED her what she thought of mothers who have them. The doctor wasn't probing her mental competence, she was probing her politics. Later on when she tells the patient "I do not perform abortions for people who think I am a murderer" it sounds an AWFUL lot like she's not basing that on the patients current state of mind or her willingness to do follow up care, at least ONE of her criteria for denying patients sounds like it's strictly about their beliefs.

[Squinch]

126. OK, fine. You know better than the doctor who was in the room with her.

[hughee99]

132. The doctor asked the women 3 questions she already knew the answers to

and formed her opinion of whether she was "deserving" of the treatment the patient was seeking. I read a statement from the doctor and formed an opinion on whether I think the doctor handled that situation well.

The doctor had a patient who was probably having a difficult enough time with the decision to have an abortion, and IMHO went out of her way to make the situation more difficult for her. It's okay, though, because the patient has the wrong politics.

[Squinch]

133. Yes, of course. You should call that doctor and teach him of your superior knowledge

about his experience. That you gleaned from reading 3 sentences about that experience.

[hughee99]

134. The anonymous doctor from Colorado?

I'll get right on that. Do you think the patient was having a difficult time with her decision to have an abortion? Do you think the doctor treated the patient differently than other patients because of her politics? Do you think the doctor would normally ask that question of ANY patient?

Yes, after reading three sentences about that experience, my opinion that the doctor was wrong to handle it that way is just as valid as your opinion (given the same 3 sentences about the situation) that the doctor handled the situation correctly.

[Squinch]

136. My opinion, as has clearly been stated, is that we don't know enough to judge.

And if you can judge the state of mind of his patient, surely you can divine his phone number. Now scoot, start dialing!

[hughee99]

137. We don't know enough to judge?

You spent a good bit of time arguing that the doctor handled the situation correctly, so apparently, you DID have enough information to judge the doctor. We're not on a jury, this is an internet posting site, there's enough information to for an opinion when having that opinion has NO real world consequences for anyone.

"This doctor who refused to perform an abortion on a woman who thought it would make the doctor and herself murderers was just trying to avoid going against the woman's own beliefs. "

"My take was that he decided she was not mentally stable enough, and those questions were to ascertain her state of mind. If he asked if she was sure she wanted to do it, and she had said yes, she was still voicing two diametrically opposed and contradictory wishes. "

[Squinch]

139. "We don't know what went on in that office." Are you dialing yet?

Neither of those quotes negates my statement that, "we don't know what went on in that office."

This is a REALLY stupid discussion, don't you think?

Have a nice night.

[hughee99]

140. It is when you're arguing that we don't know what went on in that office

so we don't have enough information AND the doctor acted properly. Saying we don't have enough information is fine, as long as you don't then go on to say that the doctor acted properly.

Apparently, I don't have enough information to judge the doctor wrong, but you have enough to judge them right.

I agree. This discussion is going nowhere. It has gone as far as it can with the information available.

[quakerboy]

59. According to the article, the PATIENT was the one who brought it up with his staff

"Later, she told someone on my staff that she thought abortion is murder, that she is a murderer, and that she is murdering her baby." What he then asked is at the very least arguably just doing due diligence in follow up on what she had brought to the table.

As to the aftercare issue, I completely disagree with your fiery assesment. Will a responsible doctor perform a gastric bypass if a patient is unlikely to do the proper followup? How about transplants? Are they likely to give you a new kidney if they strongly believe you will be binge drinking and decline to take the immunosuppressant drugs to prevent any rejection?

In the end, I think you are set in your thinking that the dr decided to decline service for political or personal animosity reasons. I would agree that that is a poor reason to decline medical service. But reading the whole article, I dont agree that that is the only way to read his or her response.

[hughee99]

66. Let me put it this way...

If a Doctor decided not to perform a surgery and gave the reason that they didn't feel that the patient would do the followup do you think that is enough reason? What if the doctor is white and the patient isn't? What if the patient doesn't have insurance and may not be able to afford the follow up? I think it has to be a VERY clear conclusion that the patient won't do the follow up, for example, the patient with a new liver says they're going to get drunk to celebrate, for the doctor to simply decide on their own that a patient who WANTS the surgery can't have it.

While there may be cases of pro-life women not doing the follow up, it's NOT automatic to believe that they won't, and I think it's not a doctors place to deny someone treatment they want because it's against their beliefs. If the doctor had denied medicine to a person who had mentioned that their religion strictly forbids "modern medicine", but showed up at the hospital asking for treatment anyway, would you be okay with the doctor telling them to go elsewhere?

Due diligence is making sure a patient understands what the procedure is, that she wants the procedure, and she's competent enough to make that decision, not having a philosophical debate with her.

[quakerboy]

83. Its my understanding that thats exactly what they do

They deny and approve transplants based on their best guess of what the aftercare behavior will be

I think that your example of the person who's beliefs forbid modern medicine is a perfect demonstration of my view, not yours. If they came in for a liver transplant, but were clear that as soon as the new organ was implanted, they would be going back to their community and eschewing additional treatment, such as the anti-rejection regimen, I would have no problem at all with the Dr saying no. Saying yes would look irresponsible to me, as a rejecting organ is going to be at least as bad as the issue with the original organ.

I dont have any personal experience in this field, so I cant say what the numbers look like for after care among anti-choice women who have abortions. Literally, all I have to go on is whats in the article. And whats in the article, on its face, in that one anecdote, is literally a woman demanding that another human being murder someone. She was saying that committing an abortion is committing murder, and then demanding that the Dr do exactly that.

Does a person who is insisting that a medical procedure is murder really understanding what the procedure is? Is someone who is utterly against a particular act really wanting that act? Is someone demanding that someone else help them commit murder competent to make that choice? I dont think that's an easy call to make, and I am comfortable with the one the Dr made.

Being anti choice is not a reason to deny service, and more than being black, being female, or being disabled. Actively calling your abortion Dr a murderer is a valid reason for denying service, in my opinion, just as would be shouting white power slogans in your dentists waiting room, or groping your waitress in a restaurant.

[hughee99]

86. What if the new person's "aftercare" wasn't anti-rejection regimen for a new organ

but "no alcohol for 6 weeks" (for a religion that also shuns alcohol). It could really go either way. The doctor could be SURE the aftercare would be followed but use one of the OTHER excuses provided. The patient isn't capable of making this decision for themselves because the believe that this treatment will result in them going to hell, and they don't want to go to hell, but they want the treatment anyway. The person isn't being logical or acting consistently with their own beliefs, but they've consented to the treatment and OTHERWISE seem reasonable.

All of this aside, you're guessing that the doctor determined the doctor determined the woman MAY have not been mentally competent to make the decision or that the patent wouldn't follow up on the aftercare because of her beliefs (and they'd HAVE to be a lot more science on that to convince me that it's a reasonable assumption). Why not just take the doctor at her word?

"After explaining to her that I do not perform abortions for people who think I am a murderer or people who are angry at me, I declined to provide her with medical care."

It sounds like the doctor didn't go with either of the two suggestions you had, but rather told the patient it was about the doctor's personal opinion of the patient's attitude or beliefs.

Calling someone a murderer is a reason to kick someone out of your restaurant. Groping a waitress is assault, and illegal. We don't hold doctors to that same standard though. The doctor isn't claiming the patient assaulted her and from her account was even "mutually respectful" to the doctor. Then the doctor asked a series of questions that she would have never asked to just any patient, and when the patient told her what her beliefs were, she refused service. The doctor even said that the patient admitted that she, herself, was a murderer. Personally, I'm not all that comfortable with a doctor who probes someone's personal political/religious beliefs before they decide if they'll do surgery or not. I suspect the doctor had already decided not to do the procedure, based on what her staff told her, and only asked those questions to provide a justification, but that's just my opinion.

[quakerboy]

87. "Later, she told someone on my staff that... she is murdering her baby."

Taking the Dr at his or her word, the Dr responded to the unsolicited comments of the patient. The patient brought this up, not the Dr. I would hope any Dr would follow up on comments like that, regardless of what the patient presumed beliefs were.

Putting it in perspective, lets imagine the Dr was a podiatrist, and the procedure in question was a corn removal. And the patient was making comments to the staff regarding the Dr being a murderer, and then became quite hostile toward the DR when the question was brought up.

Its not a normal thing, and I dont think that any person, Dr or not, should be expected to serve someone verbally abusing them. Aside from life saving measures, I just dont think its necessary. If you're a dick to your neighbor, your waitress, or your Dr, I think they should be considered well within their rights to turn their backs and walk away.

My guess is that the Dr considered a number of facets to the incident and made a decision that it wasn't prudent to offer this service to this person. Was the Dr concerned about the health of the woman? Most Drs care about their patients, even the difficult ones, in my experience. Was the Dr concerned about legal ramifications? In the age of litigation, it seems quite likely. Did the Dr take some level of unprofessional pleasure in turning her away? Possibly so. I doubt that was the only reason behind the decision though, and I feel extremely confidant that a paragraph of anecdote was not intended to portray the complete and unabridged decision making process that lead to the final choice.

[hughee99]

89. You're stretching to read a lot more into this is known.

"After explaining to her that I do not perform abortions for people who think I am a murderer or people who are angry at me, I declined to provide her with medical care."

The patient didn't think the doctor was a murderer because of who she was, the patient thought it because of what the doctor did. Yes, it's an extreme political view, but it's still a POLITICAL view. I didn't see anything in there about fear of legal ramifications. Even the patient admitted it's not illegal ("but it should be" is what the patient actually said according to the doctor's account). Did the doctor care about her health? I can't tell. Apparently she seemed to at least until finding out about the patients political views. I don't know what the availability of abortions is in this unknown area of Colorado, so finding another doctor may have amounted to something the girl wasn't able to do. In either case, the patient was SUPPOSED to have a choice and the doctor may have taken that choice away from her. If you're a dick to your neighbor or neighbor or waitress, I absolutely agree, but a doctor isn't a person who brings you food or lives next door, it's a greater responsibility and most doctors would probably tell you, when someone comes to see them, they're not always in their best mood. Are you suggesting that "being a dick" should be enough to have a doctor say, "I won't treat you"?

I'm sure her statement isn't the whole story, but the part she seems most prominent in her mind wasn't any of those other things, the thing she mentions is that the patient thinks abortion is murder, admitted that the she, herself, is a murderer and the doctor is too, and the doctor denied her service. Nothing about fear of lawsuits, aftercare, mental instability, just her political beliefs and the fact that the patient was angry. I wonder how much of that anger came out before and how much after the doctor told her to go away.

You see stories like this all the time on the DU (and I'm sure the freeptards tell them too). Someone encounters someone of opposing political beliefs (who usually fits a stereotype perfectly) that needs their help, gets into a discussion of politics or religion, and then tells the person off because that person isn't acting consistently with their beliefs. Flip the script and people are often disgusted by that behavior, but as long as the person on the losing end is "the enemy" people will go to considerable lengths to justify it.

[quakerboy]

143. "Are you suggesting that"

"Are you suggesting that "being a dick" should be enough to have a doctor say, "I won't treat you"? "

Im not suggesting it, I outright stated it. In situations where there is no life threatening emergency, I very much believe that verbally abusing your Dr (or their staff) is justification in plenty for that to refuse to work with you, to send you on your way to seek treatment from a different clinic. Regardless of the nature of the medical service in question, whether you were seeking treatment for a wart, reproductive services, or an eye exam.

As for the legal ramifications... read the article. It tells me what I needed to know. I am willing to trust the judgement of the medical professional in the room. You are not. So be it.

"I have long felt that anti-abortionism is a psychological contraindication to the abortion procedure. And that we don't have to give everyone who asks an abortion. An anti-abortion woman is likely to be uncooperative and will probably not follow post-op instructions or instructions on how to deal with complications. There is actually a case where an anti-abortion patient failed to go as directed to Emergency for an unrelated complication. She ended up dying, and her family sued the physician and badgered him publicly. Additionally, if you have a complication that day, it will be the anti-abortionist. I'm not talking about the patient who says, 'I was against abortion until it happened to me', or 'I'm really against abortion, but I have to do this'. I'm talking about the picketer, the activist, the totally anti-creature who will come back to haunt us."

"We saw a woman recently who after four attempts and many hours of counseling both at the hospital and our clinic, finally, calmly and uneventfully, had her abortion. Four months later, she called me on Christmas Eve to tell me that she was not and never was pro-choice and that we failed to recognize that she was clinically depressed at the time of her abortion. The purpose of her call was to chastise me for not sending her off to the psych unit instead of the procedure room."

[hughee99]

20. The first thing that I noticed here. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who noticed

something that would have OTHERWISE been a hot-button issue if roles were reversed.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

61. Give a scenario in which the roles would be truly reversed.

[hughee99]

67. A patient comes in with a broken bone and wants to get checked out by a doctor.

The issue is one that is not life threatening, but one that SHOULD be handled by a medical professional. The patient tells the doctor that he's a member of "X" religion that doesn't believe in modern medicine, but has decided to come in and seek treatment anyway. The doctor asks the patient if the patient believes he'll go to hell for getting medical treatment and the patient says yes, but doesn't change his mind to get up and leave. The doctor refuses to treat the patient, because they feel it's in conflict with the patients own beliefs, and sends him elsewhere.

In the previous case, some say the doctor was right to refuse the patient for their beliefs or they MAY not follow up on the aftercare. Would you argue that in THIS case?

A parent comes to a doctors office to get their newborn a circumcision. The parent tells the doctor and staff how cruel and barbaric the procedure is, and that it should be outlawed, but is determined to have their child circumcised anyway. The doctor refuses them because it's against the PARENT'S beliefs or because they don't think the parent would do the necessary follow up.

[TNNurse]

25. An abortion can be an elective procedure.

It does not state that her life was in jeopardy or that the fetus was not viable.
Performing an elective procedure on someone who is clearly not mentally ready on it would be wrong. I agree with him. It is a tough decision and having that attitude could easily lead to serious emotional and psychological repercussions.

She exhibits a serious emotional if not psychological nightmare for the future. Unless of course she can cope with extreme denial, which is a possibility. I hope she had an abortion, she was certainly not stable enough to be a mother, but I understand his not taking part.

[joeglow3]

32. Bullshit. The idea it is an elective procedure is a RW talking point

This woman needed a procedure that she has the right to decide under our constitution is necessary and he refused service because he didn't like her political views. If roles were reversed, he would be getting eviscerated.

[Squinch]

42. But if she is insisting forcefully that she, herself, will be a murderer if she goes through with

it, that seems to legitimately be someone who is not reconciled to her own actions. Depending on her demeanor, it could have been a responsible decision not to go through with it.

[joeglow3]

43. Not his decision to make

People do things they are conflicted with every day, as it is the lesser two evils. He tried to play legislature and restrict her access to a legal procedure she wanted.

[Squinch]

45. Glad you are all knowing about what is right for the patient that was sitting in the room with

this doctor, a patient who was expressing strongly contradictory wishes about a medical procedure.

To bad you weren't there to guide him with your certainty.

And if she did herself some damage to herself after having the procedure, because of her stated beliefs about how wrong it was, I am sure your certainty would carry you through that. But apparently not this doctor.

[joeglow3]

121. So, you agree that Doctors can force birth on women and remove their choice?

And, if he felt that way, did he refer her to a mental health professional? Finally, if it was a mental health issue, why would he share that story with a reporter?

No matter how you cut it, he behaved unethically.

[Squinch]

128. So you agree that we don't know what went on in that room.

No matter how you judge it, you don't know that he behaved unethically.

And quit with the, "you don't agree with me so therefore you are anti-choice" nonsense. It's silly and obnoxious.

[LanternWaste]

118. I'd think that reading specifics into any of the cases presented

I'd think that reading specifics into any of the cases presented would be at best, little more than an exercise in futility as the story in the OP stated directly that all the conversations were edited for brevity-- the removal of one sentence, or even one phrase contextually irrelevant to the writer's POV may be contextually relevant to any conjectures and prophecies you yourself are alleging.

[Squinch]

127. Of course you are right, but there are those here who WILL insist

that by saying that you are anti-choice.

Honestly! These people are experts on patients' states of mind after reading three sentences about them.

[A Simple Game]

51. The whole argument on abortion is not for or against abortion.

Most people I know, including myself are anti-abortion. many like me are also pro-choice. If you are for abortion, fine, that is your choice.

But don't start arguing that abortions are a matter of need, most are not, and you know it. The argument is for the ability to choose and whose choice it should be. You don't have a choice when something is a necessity.

If I'm a doctor and somebody belittles me and calls me a murderer, they will get nothing from me except an escort to the exit. They would seem like a prime candidate to claim malpractice.

[mercymechap]

82. I have to agree with you

if the person is so convinced that it is murder and that the doctor will be committing a murder, and that she considers herself a murderer for allowing it to be done, then she needs to find someone as crazy as her to do the procedure she believes is murderous. Who's to say that she wouldn't come back later and accuse him of performing an abortion on her that she didn't want?

[TNNurse]

92. You are correct

Politics does not belong in medical decisions. Psychological evaluation is essential. She exhibited serious emotional issues which needed to be addressed before any medical procedure that was not an emergency. I hope she got an abortion, but accusing the person who is about to perform that procedure of murder shows a much bigger problem. What is he had done it, and then she went out and got a gun, came back and shot him and herself? She exhibits mental instability by her words.

[joeglow3]

100. Or, she saw it as the lesser of two evils

Many of us are forced to make undesirable decisions that we would otherwise consider wrong, because the alternative is worse. She was clearly faced with that situation and felt that while she viewed abortion as wrong, it was the lesser of two evils. But, because her original views don't align with the Doctor's, he gets to call her crazy and refuse her a constitutionally protected procedure.

[A Little Weird]

27. I understand your point

But I think the motivation has to be taken into consideration.

Someone refusing emergency contraception is almost always doing it because they feel it is 'morally wrong'. Their focus is on themselves and not their patients.

The physicians in the article were concerned about a) patients not following up on their care, b) causing emotional trauma to the patients, c) being sued. With the exception of that last reason, their reason was concern for their patient, not themselves. I'm not sure how I feel about their concern for being sued - it seems like that is a potential issue for any doctor. But there are apparently organizations dedicated solely to suing abortion providers so I can understand the concern.

[Jerry442]

35. Doctors should not perform any elective procedure when they think...

...doing the procedure will potentially do more harm to the patient or others than not doing it. A woman who is deeply conflicted about getting an abortion may in fact do harm to herself or others if she gets one.

If she's stridently anti-abortion, getting an abortion, and not conflicted, then she's a psychopath and too scary to deal with.

[joeglow3]

38. I would argue for her to do this, she NEEDS to get one

It is HER decision to get one. That said, you are making crap up. The doctor flat out said he refused it because of his personal belief. If the roles were reversed, everyone here would be up in arms.

[Jerry442]

39. "I asked her if she thought I am a murderer,...

"..... and if she thought I would be murdering her baby, and she said yes. But murder is a crime, and murderers are executed. Is this a crime? Well, it should be, she said."

I'm not a doctor, but that certainly meets my standard of likely to harm herself or others.

[joeglow3]

40. So you support restricting access to abortion?

Interesting

[Squinch]

44. That's a ridiculous conclusion.

[joeglow3]

46. That is EXACTLY what the dr. He is supporting did

He is trying to justify the doctor's decision.

[Jerry442]

47. If the woman who wants an abortion couldn't STFU about abortion-is-murder for even a moment...

...that screams "diminished capacity."

[joeglow3]

49. Who decides that

I know people who liberal views are mental disorders. Can they deny services to liberal patients/clients?

Seriously, is it hard to have zero consistency in your views? Do you feel at all conflicted using completely opposite logic to oppose something you supported earlier?

[jeff47]

57. If the only evidence of mental disorder was liberal political positions, then that would be wrong.

That's not the case here. The woman is sobbing and calling herself a murderer, but still wants to proceed.

Doctors are required to not do elective procedures if they think the patient does not want it or will harm themselves after. Sobbing and calling yourself a murderer is pretty strong evidence that she doesn't really want the procedure.

[joeglow3]

62. Then you agree it was disgusting of the author to include this?

She is taking advantage of a poor woman's mental disorder to further a political point.

[jeff47]

71. Nope. The author included it as the only example of consistency.

Every other example is a massive hypocrite.

[joeglow3]

98. What does someone having a mental disorder prove?

[jeff47]

102. It's about whether or not she wanted it.

The woman indicated she was not sure she wanted the procedure - she said she wanted it, and then said it would make her a murderer, indicating she did not want it.

You don't give any elective procedure, from abortion to ear piercing, unless you're sure the patient wants it.

In addition, saying it would make her a murderer kinda indicates future self-harm if the doctor went through with the procedure.

[joeglow3]

105. Do you acknowledge people sometimes have to choose between two evils?

Is it possible she saw it as wrong, but felt it was the lesser of two evils? Or, can only a crazy person feel that way?

[jeff47]

107. You don't sob and call yourself a murderer in that situation.

Instead, you act like all the other examples in the OP.

[joeglow3]

108. We will just have to agree to disagree

Like I said, I pray she was not forced into some back alley coat hanger abortion because the Doctor made the determination that she didn't really want an abortion after she showed up for MULTIPLE visits and state clearly she wanted one. We were supposed to have left that behind in the early 1970's......unless we can justify why it okay

[jeff47]

112. You're busy getting hung up on it being an abortion

What I'm talking about is any elective procedure. Abortion is one, but not the only elective procedure.

If you show up at the doctor and claim that getting liposuction will make you a murderer (of billions of cells), then your doctor isn't going to do it. Even with multiple visits and saying that you want it. Your actions do not match you saying that you want it.

The fact that this is an abortion does not change that. If she said "it's wrong, but I just can't have a child right now" then the doctor would have done it. But that's not anywhere close to what happened. And we are not talking about a single sentence - the doctor talked to the woman for quite a while trying to tease out if she really wanted it.

Btw, how do you know she actually wanted it? Sure, she said she did, but you don't know if someone else is forcing her to get it. Husband could have told her to get an abortion or he'll beat her, for example.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

63. The two are not remotely related. If a doctor thinks a patient is mentally disordered simply because

the person holds liberal views, that's an unsupported judgment. In the case here, the patient demonstrated a clearly questionable mental state. She expressed the fact that she would consider herself a murderer if she went through with the abortion. This is not someone thinking, "Well, I don't believe humans should eat animals, but I think I'll have the hamburger anyway."

And she believes the doctor to be a murderer. Certainly he had just cause to fear dangerous consequences for the patient and/or himself. I wouldn't be surprised if she were setting the doctor up for a lawsuit or some other sort of retribution if he performed the procedure, or even if it appeared he was about to go through with it.

[ReasonableToo]

85. Doctors ALWAYS ask a patient seeking a vasectomy if they are sure that they don't want children.

If the patient is wishy washy the doc doesn't perform the operation. Same for tubes tied.

If a patient associates the procedure with murder then the patient needs to resolve issues before the procedure.

doc did the right thing.

[Jerry442]

97. My GP tried to (calmly and professionally) talk me out of getting a vasectomy.

It was a long time ago and now we know the possible future he envisioned where I'd regret the decision didn't happen, but I did at the time (and still do) appreciate his taking the time to counsel me.

[joeglow3]

99. So, you believe there are situations where a woman should be forced to give birth

No matter how many times she says "I want an abortion," the Doctor gets to say, "No, I don't think you do" and force her to give birth.

One chip at a time....

[ReasonableToo]

103. Not really

The doctor is recognizing that she has internal conflict about it and is most likely a lawsuit in the making.

[joeglow3]

106. Regardless of what his reason is, he gets to force birth on her

Like I said, one chip at a time.

[ReasonableToo]

115. I'm 100% pro-choice

Doctor may very well be 100% pro-choice. He was in the room. There was probably a MEDICAL reason to not do the procedure. A patient doesn't get to demand procedures.

[joeglow3]

119. Then it is wrong for him to share MEDICAL stories with a reporter

Either way, unethical on his part.

[ReasonableToo]

122. really? I think we're done here. Have a nice day. [end]

[joeglow3]

123. How would you feel if your Doctor was discussing your mental health with a reporter

We BOTH know the answer to that and why you refuse to address it.

[TNNurse]

129. Did that story identify the woman????

[joeglow3]

130. Was there a medical purpose to discussing this with a reporter?

[TNNurse]

141. I am going to try to make one last comment.

I have been an RN for 35 years. Any invasive medical procedure requires informed consent. It is unethical to allow someone to sign for a procedure if there are real concerns about the patient's capacity and understanding of all of the possible outcomes. If I was faced with someone who said "this procedure is murder and the people taking part are murderers", I could not legally allow her to sign consent.

There is nothing wrong on sharing such a story with a reporter if there was no way to identify the mentioned patient. How do you think they write textbooks and medical articles without telling a story and giving examples?

[ReasonableToo]

116. Also,

Declining to do a procedure for what sounds like a medical (mental health) reason is not the same as "force her to give birth"

Yes, in some areas there are limited providers. I would blame that on state regs. rather than this one provider.

[joeglow3]

120. They why would he share someone's mental health issues with this reporter

If that were the case, it does not fit the narrative of the article. Unless he likes rubbing people's faces in their mental health issues.

Unethical either way.

[Aristus]

60. When a patient starts calling me names, I get up and leave the exam room.

I don't care what they're there for.

I don't perform abortions. (Not my specialty.) But as a primary care provider with prescriptive authority, occasionally I get patients who view me as Dr. Feelgood, and present to the clinic for whatever they're currently jonesing for. Usually one of the three 'V's - Vicodin, Valium or Viagra.

If in my clinical assessment, the medication is not indicated, I refuse to prescribe it. And if the patient gets nasty and abusive, I terminate the visit.

I don't blame that doctor for refusing to do the bidding of a verbally abusive patient.

[joeglow3]

64. He asked her questions. The onus is on him

[Aristus]

68. She was an anti-abortion nut seeking an abortion and trying to

convince herself that she is 'different' from all the others getting abortions. The onus is on her.

[joeglow3]

70. So, he made the decision based on her personal views

But this is different, right? It clearly is wrong when others do it regarding issues we support?

Her views don't matter. She wanted an abortion a doctor impeded her constitutional right to get one.

[Aristus]

73. Not if she was able to get one somewhere else.

If a news-stand refuses to sell me a magazine for any reason or no reason, I'll just go get one somewhere else. My 1st Amendment rights have not been impeded. Same thing.

[joeglow3]

74. Have missed the thousands of articles about the shortage of abortion clinics

Many people travel hours just to get to the closest doctor.

[Aristus]

75. Due to legislation supported by people like this woman.

I sympathize with the women who have to go out of their way to get an abortion through no fault of their own.

But this woman? Well, poetic justice can suck sometimes...

[joeglow3]

77. Oh. So THAT is when it is okay to restrict a woman's right?

Who else do we get to exclude from Constitutional protections?

[Aristus]

78. I didn't say it was okay.

I said it was poetic justice.

Go back and read it again.

[Schema Thing]

95. The Doctor did the right thing

Otherwise he would have been helping this woman murder her baby - in her mind. Obviously, you can't do that and be "doing no harm".


As well, doctors refuse to perform surgery on Jehovah's Witness patients quite often, sending them on to find a doctor willing to do the surgery "bloodless".

[joeglow3]

101. Is that when the patient is asking the Doctor to do something they don't normally do?

That was NOT the case here. She stated that she felt she was making a decision that, while wrong in her mind, was the lesser of two evils. He response was "well, if you think it wrong, then you are crazy and I won't provide your constitutionally protected procedure." Hope you can afford to fly 400 miles to the next closest provider or you WILL deliver that baby.

Lets pray this lady didn't resort to a back alley coat hanger abortion because some Doctor thought he could play God and ignore the Constitution.

[Schema Thing]

109. He doesn't normally assist people in committing what they believe to be murder.

[joeglow3]

110. He doesn't believe it is murder, so he is fine. Or, is he so weak-minded

that he believes what the person nearest to him believes? That said, answer me this:

Do you believe there are situations where a woman should be forced to choose between giving birth or using a coat hanger?

[Schema Thing]

114. honestly, just go away with your ridiculousness.

[joeglow3]

117. It was a simple yes/no answer and you couldn't give it.

[Scout]

135. when my sister was a counselor at an abortion clinic...

if the counselors knew (because the woman told them), or felt pretty sure (after the counseling conversation) that she was being coerced into the abortion, she was not accepted as a patient there. Her political views were not part of the discussion.

By the same token, if she were being coerced to carry to term rather than get an abortion she wanted, once they were sure she had made the decision herself, she could be accepted as a patient.

I don't see anything wrong with that.

Women should not be coerced into an abortion or into carrying to term. If she has an abortion after being coerced into it, these are the exact women that then join the anti-choice movement and complain how abortion ruined their lives. And as far as being coerced to give birth, well, that's just not good for anyone--woman or child.

[lunasun]

9. Thats right -they are hypocritical beyond anyone's dreams -Surprised?????

Thank you for this article

[Ilsa]

10. I'm glad this topic resurfaces occasionally.

We need to be reminded of the hypocrisy of the anti-choice crowd.

[nolabear]

11. I have some compassion for these women.

I am not excusing anything, but their actions and words, mostly splitting their psyches and disavowing their own actions, are the result of terrible conflicts, pressures and fears. The only thing they are capable of is compartmentalizing in order to remain what they believe is okay. If they hadn't been taught that the price of facing reality is being shunned by those you love and need, they might have been able to be more compassionate toward themselves and others.

[lark]

15. Sorry, I don't feel sorry for them.

They chose to embrace those values. I was raised in redneck northern FL. by extremely religious right wing Southern Baptists, who were card carrying members of Moral Majority. When I was 16 I had a good teacher who opened my mind to other realities than the one I heard at home and church and got started in the process of becoming a liberal. When I got pregnant by my boyfriend who had just quit doing a lot of drugs, I had an abortion and didn't tell my parents. I made up my own mind, and they could too but choose not to. They are just typical hypocritical Repugs.

[nolabear]

37. What do you mean? They did make up their own minds.

And you have no idea what their lives are like, what their capacities are, what they are afraid of, what their own dreams are attached to. Each one chose, and they chose the same thing you did. They just had to twist themselves into psychological pretzels in order to be able to do so. And they are hardly typical; they aren't anything alike except for being female and needing abortions. They aren't even "Repugs," as you call them. Not one was identified as such.

As I said, I make no excuse for the harm they might have done by their choices but they had reasons. If you can't accept that idea and want to make nothing more than "typical hypocritical Repugs" out of them then you have your reasons for that.

[lark]

113. Experience is my teacher and is theirs as well

Yes, there are a few exceptional circumstances - limited intelligence, birth defects, abuse, but those are not the majority. The majority of people who have abortions but think abortions are something no one else but them can have are Republicans, not Democrats. Democrats, by and large, think abortions are a sometimes necessary evil. Republicans, by and large, think abortion is a never right and is murder (except when it's them). That's what the article is about and thus my comment.

[nolabear]

125. But those stories are from all over the world. They're not Republicans.

They're women who are facing choices that they're terrified of and have such conflicted feelings about that they can say and do the things they said. "Experience" includes so much, and we fear so much. Lots of people with those fears and conflicts BECOME Republicans, because the Republican viewpoint is simplistic and makes promises it can't possibly keep vis-a-vis right and wrong and whether you're a good person. That sixteen year old girl who had the abortion and then went back to the protest group just rips my heart out.

[lark]

144. Context is everything

This is NOT talking about women all over the world not was I. Both are referencing American women, in our culture and country. In our culture and country most women who "hate" abortion but thinks it's OK for them but no one else are most certainly Repugs. Yes, I know some Democratic women who are anti-abortion (generally with exceptions for health and rape) but they don't demonize it like the Repugs do

[nolabear]

145. I feel like I'm in an alternate universe.

To wit:

"In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers' own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy:"

We've totally lost the thread of conversation. And going from feeling compassion to making it again into a b/w attitude on the part of either side and being invested in name-calling is just not where I'm coming from at all.

[lark]

13. Rick Santorum is the perfect example of this.

He opposes abortions for rape or health of the woman - except when it was his wife! She had an abortion because carrying the baby to term could, I repeat could, have been dangerous for her. So his wife gets an exception for health and it's fine because it shows how much he loves her, but other men aren't allowed to protect their wives? Even MUCH more germane, other women can't protect themselves - at least of course unless they are married to a Repug - then it's OK.

[3catwoman3]

22. Do you remember the obfuscatory...

...terminology - "The pregnancy was 'allowed to lapse.' "

What a crock!

[BrotherIvan]

31. And they never used the word abortion

They called it a D&C because as I recall it was somewhat late.

Burn, hypocrites.

[cinnabonbon]

14. "She told me that she had been offended by the other women in the abortion clinic waiting room"

These people both fill me with rage and pity. They just don't get it. Even when they need one themselves, they don't get it. I don't understand how they can have so little empathy for the other women that needs to have an abortion.

[sufrommich]

16. These stories do not surprise e at all. nt

[laundry_queen]

80. Me either

it's typical right wing entitlement. "*I* deserve these services because *I* am special. However, for the rest of you, because *I* am so special, *I* get to tell you how *I* think you should live your life. But remember, none of what *I* tell you about how you should live your life applies to *ME* because, again, *I* am special and better than you."

[Kablooie]

17. Just about every right wing issue is like this.

No unemployment insurance unless *I* am unemployed.
No food stamps unless *I* need them.
No health insurance unless *I* need it.

They want to deny services to everyone except themselves.

Just typical family values.

Like a libertarian I know said, "All I care about is making sure *my* family is cared for."

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. Right. Laws & rules do not apply to Rs, Ts, & 1%; or so they think. Corpus Christie finding out now

[MsPithy]

19. Somebody famous said the real anti choice position on abortion exceptions is,

exceptions only for rape, incest, life of the mother and me.

Sorry for not finding the source.

[dangin]

26. Abortion after hubby's vasectomy

I know a doctor who related to me the tale of the anti abortion activist in his town who needed an abortion and the doc referred her because he didn't do that procedure. But he had done her husband's vasectomy 5 years earlier.

[PeaceNikki]

33. Joyce is one of my heroes. See also: The case for repealing ALL abortion laws

http://www.democraticunderground.com/115253

[Inkfreak]

34. As a man, I realize my opinion is meaningless.

But my support is critical. I must stand with a woman's right to choose. Hypocrites suck.

And let's get 'em some fucking health services for fuck's sake.

[cinnabonbon]

111. ...

[Jerry442]

36. It's not just abortion.

If hypocrisy was a condition that caused you to drop dead without warning, the streets would be littered with bodies.

[Fumesucker]

55. And Washington would be a ghost town n/t

[Squinch]

48. I am a former catholic. I went to a catholic college. I have never been in a cohort at

any other time in my life in which a higher percentage of women had abortions than in that college.

[Ilsa]

54. "I Had Two Abortions and I Wish I Hadn't"

I heard an older anti-choice woman say this on tv today. "It was awful." She told the reporter.

Apparently it wasn't so bad that she stopped at one. How disengenuous can a person get?

[stuarttman63]

56. Back in the early 90's

Back in the early 90's, I read an article in either the St Petersburg Times or the Tampa Tribune that profiled a woman(wish I could remember her name) who had two abortions, one before she became an anti-choice activist and one after she'd become very high up in the Operation Rescue hierarchy. The reason she gave is that it was her personal choice and nobody else's business that she got an abortion. Oddly enough, this is precisely why the Supreme Court in 1973 approved the right to have an abortion, because of the privacy that one is guaranteed in the Constitution.

[valerief]

58. Conservatives: Do as I say, not as I do. So typical. nt

[Lex]

65. Yep. My conservative abortion-hating aunt's 16 year old grand-daughter got pregnant

and the first thing she want the girl to do was get an abortion so it "wouldn't ruin her high school and college plans."

True story.

[gerogie2]

81. 30 years ago

I had a 15 yr old girl friend that I dated for a while and her Catholic mother was anti-choice. A few months later the girl became pregnant by another boy and her mother couldn't get her to planned parenthood fast enough. The girl didn't want the abortion, but the parents made it clear if she had the baby she would be kicked out of the house.

It worked out for the best. That girl obtained a masters degree and is upper middle class married with three children. Had she kept that baby I'm sure she would not have been able to provide for her child very well and lived in poverty.

[Lunacee_2013]

88. There's a small, evil, dark part of me that

wishes all these "my abortion is a-ok, but yours is murder" types were either turned away and told exactly why, or were forced to admit that they had an abortion. How dare they judge the other girls/women for getting abortions WHILE THEY TOO WERE GETTING ABORTIONS. Damn, that's fucked up!

[TxDemChem]

91. It's the hypocrisy of "For me, but not for thee"

Fuckin hypocrits

[marble falls]

96. Thanks for posting on the "Pro-Life" dirty little secret.

[Bennyboy]

104. My story and a Catholic friend's story...

I got a girl pregnant when I was 19. (thanks for the puritanical approach to sex, folks). Everyone wanted her to have an abortion. Her parents, my parents, friends, the family, Everyone. We went to Planned parenthood in Sacramento and had counseling etc.... and after a lot of soul searching we decided to have that baby. A personal moral decision.

Of course we could not handle being parents and and she killed herself when the baby was 10 months old.(She was a "suicide girl" and tried many times in her short life) and left me to be a single parent which led to a lifetime of near poverty for myself and the child.

Ten years later I slipped another one past the goalie with another woman. Again, the pressure to abort from family, mine anyways, (hers was Mexican Catholic), but we both considered abortion and again met with counselors at Planned Parenthood in Sacramento. AGAIN, the counseled us away from an abortion and they suggested that I have a vasectomy which they provided not long afterwards..

I love my kids very deeply but will always wonder how things for me might have turned out had I not had to start providing at such a young age. Had I not had to shoulder the load by myself at 19.

Now I have a very catholic friend, A former Colonel in the AF, in fact. A guy they call the Professor. He got a girl pregnant at 19. Both his and her very very very Catholic parents demanded an abortion. He tells me there was NO option, just the one.

He went on the Air Force Academy and got a PHD and is a partner in a company that makes systems for Gov't (Whatever that means)....... And has a big house, a great wife, couple kids, one in Stanford and the other at UCSB......


He is so anti abortion he is hard to be around when the subject comes around. He wonders about the kid he "lost". He strongly supports the churches stance on abortion, but he had one. I wonder if realizes that had he not had an abortion and I had one, our places might be switched?

[Blue_Tires]

138. Almost NINE years to the day:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=217x1052

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3115111