Stay Out of My Uterus.

Over the course of this blog, I've been asked from time to time about my feelings about abortion, Infertility treatments, knowingly going through with the pregnancy of a disabled child, etc. All heady stuff. I'm going to try to cover this without actually writing a seven chapter treatise, if that is possible. (ETA: Ha! Not possible!!) Because it all boils down to the same issue for me.

First of all, let me just say that I don't like the whole idea of abortion. This comes entirely from an emotional place, not an intellectual one, nor even a moral one. It is because I look at it from the perspective of infertility and adoption. I spent months, literally rolling the dice to see what a one in six chance of becoming pregnant each cycle actually looked like, scouring the internet for PCOS and IUI success stories, disability adoption stories, quadriplegia success stories, etc. I spent years wondering if I could ever become a parent or if it was just a pipe dream. At times it got so hard that even looking at the baby section of a store was painful. I spent hours in a waiting room at my RE's office with a bunch of other miserable, yearning people. We were surrounded by 3-ring binders of past patients successes. Photo albums and walls covered with pictures of IUI, IVF, and ICSI babies and their happy parents with that look of relief so evident in their eye as they held their infant. It was encouraging, but we in the waiting room were still miserable and yearning, wondering if we had enough ultrasound wands stuck up our hoo-has, enough time in the stirrups, enough weird speculum related x-rays, and D and C surgeries and injections and hormone altering pills, if we went through enough crap--would that ever be us up there on the walls with our baby? And although I didn't adopt, I have been around the IF community to see people who are trying to adopt and how they agonize over home studies, profile letters, dossiers to foreign bureaucracies, waiting to be chosen and then unchosen, spending tens of thousands of dollars on administrative and legal costs in hopes of becoming parents.

So, yes, it is emotionally hard for me to hear about women who can get pregnant so easily decide to abort. I'm not a big fan of it. But I understand that not really anyone is, even those who have chosen that route.

But politically, intellectually, logically, and yes, even spiritually I believe that abortion should be legal. I wondered, if and when I finally got pregnant, if my views would change. They did, in that they only got stronger. I became even more pro-choice. I've talked about this before, so I won't go on about it, but twice in my life I have thought of having an abortion and been grateful for the choice, even though I have never had one. The first time was when I was 20 and dumb. I got very accidentally pregnant, in that we did use birth control, but not really the best kind. Here is the thing about birth control, Nothing, absolutely no form of birth control is 100% foolproof. Most purport anywhere from 89-99%. When there are millions and millions of women using birth control, 1% is a huge number of accidental pregnancies. Hundreds of thousands, potentially. At 20, I was a college student, a sophomore by credits, living on $368 a month. I was unmarried and the father was in a more precarious situation than I was, and we were close to ending our relationship. In fact, I guess you could call the sex that resulted in the pregnancy "last call" sex, if you will. I never really got very far in the decision making process because I miscarried at 12 weeks. But during those weeks, even though the thought of abortion horrified me, it gave me another option, and the option of opting out sometimes is what you need to clarify how much you want to opt in. After the miscarriage, I wanted to double up on birth control and attempted to get on the pill. I had no insurance, no gynecologist, and wasn't even taking enough credits to qualify for student health services. It was Planned Parenthood who came through for me, providing me free medical services and reduced cost birth control pills. I also learned a lot of basics in family planning that I should have known but didn't from them. It was my only option and I was grateful for it.

The second time I thought about abortion was when I was pregnant with the twins. I didn't seriously think about going through with it, I had worked so hard for these guys I wasn't planning on quiting now. But due to the fact that my already complicated pregnancy was now made super complicated by the fact of the twins, I had to face the possibility that my life could be threatened and I might be in a position to choose between my life and the babies. Horrible choices, but having the abortion option available made them easier to face. If it got so bad that my kidneys were failing, I did have the option of bailing out to save my health. At 32 weeks, too late for an abortion, I had a different dilemma, I had to weigh my babies health against my remaining eyesight. Each day, each step was a balancing act. This was not life and death, but it was scary. I could give birth at 32 weeks and my kids would end up in the NICU but I could go on to get the best surgeries and medications and outcomes for my vision. Or I wait till after the babies are full-term, and risk never seeing them. I ended up doing a compromise of sorts. A non-anesthetized simpler surgery than the best surgery, No medication until after their births, and then a follow up medication and surgery. I want to clarify something here. I was having contractions off and on throughout my third trimester, but not 'real' ones. I said somewhere that I was having contractions on the way to the hospital. I was, but I was not in labor. A decision was made between myself, my perinatologist, and my ophthalmologist to have a planned C-section at 35 weeks. It was a compromise decision. My blood pressure was rising, my non-medicated glaucoma was worsening, and the babies lungs were developed enough, so we decided it was time. How this all relates to abortion is this: I got to choose at what level to risk my own health and vision and my babies health and survival. It was not easy, but no one made the decision for me. I can't imagine someone saying to me at 32 weeks (or at 16 weeks, well within the abortion window), you have to abort to save your health! Or, you have to go into kidney failure and go completely blind to save your unborn fetuses! No one was in my situation, no one knew how balancing the babies needs and my own felt. No one had the right to make those decisions but me.

The other issue I thought of when I was pregnant and got such a backlash from D's family and a few strangers on the street was the whole eugenics thing. Disabled people historically were subjected to mass sterilization and sometime forced abortions. Also, those who gave birth often had their babies taken from them the second they were born. And by historically, I mean within the last century, the very recent past. Deaf and blind folks, as well as those with cognitive or emotional disorders and even physical disorders like CP were not allowed to make their own reproductive decisions. The fact that not so long ago, someone could FORCE me to have an abortion makes me even more committed to abortion rights. The flip-side of what happened to disabled women was happening to nondisabled women in the beginning of the last century and beyond. They were being forced to HAVE children. Information about available birth control methods like the rhythm method and how their cycles worked was being withheld. They also had no rights as far as consensual sex in marriage. They could not use abstinence  to avoid pregnancies either. Women were stuck in abusive marriages and forced to bear and raise children that cemented them in poverty and locked out of educational and work opportunities. This all goes back to the same issue. Women need control of their own bodies and their own reproduction. These rights need to be self-evident.

Does the fetus have rights? Is it a life? A human? Does it have a soul? If so, when? At conception? At 40 days? At birth? I don't know the answer to these questions. So, I assume that it is a human at conception and it does have rights. But here is my thinking on that: You have two humans involved here. An unborn child and a woman. If the woman wants to abort for whatever reason, you have two humans whose rights are in conflict. And you have to choose whose rights are paramount. The fetus needs the host, a woman, to survive. The woman's body is being compromised by the fetus. Even in the most healthy pregnancies, the fetus compromised the woman's body. Any ob/gyn will tell you that a fetus is a parasite, biologically speaking. My peri told me that when I worried that I couldn't eat enough due to eight months of morning (all day) sickness. "Ah, don't worry," he said casually, "They're parasites, they take what they need. You'll feel like crap and be malnourished but they'll be fine." I know it is a cruel way to look at pregnancy, but biologically, its true. Most of the time, women are willing and able hosts and put up with the sacrifices with no problem. But in no other situation do we require that a person compromise their bodily integrity for the health or life of another. No one is required to give up their life, an organ, or even blood for another person. Many do voluntarily, and that's great. But no one is required to. Even if a person is responsible for the other person's precarious demise are they required to provide biological and "hosting" services and products for another human being. A drunk driver who injures an innocent passenger who needs a blood transfusion or a liver transplant or whatever is not required to provide this. This is about the inalienable rights we have to control what happens to our own bodies. As crude as it may seem, a woman is hosting another human. She may even have gotten in this situation by her own stupidity or bad judgment, just like our drunk driver. Still, she needs to have the right to choose to do this voluntarily or not. They are both human, and they both have rights. This is why I don't totally object to mandatory rehabilitation for pregnant addicts. I think there is a potential chance for a balance between rights and some positives to happen there. But to carry the baby at all? I think the woman's rights trump the child in that instance. It is an unfortunate situation when a woman feels like she can't go on with a pregnancy. And my hope would be that she have all kinds of options available to her so she could make the best decision for herself and her pregnancy. Abortion, as much as I don't like it personally, needs to remain one of those options.

One of the reasons I don't like abortions is this whole issue of pre-screening and abortion of disabled fetuses. I am saddened that so many people (about 90%) choose to abort fetuses Down Syndrome, Spina Bifida, Cystic Fibrosis, etc. It saddens me because this is such a social construct. But our society is not set up to help the poor woman who has no reference to disability and has just learned her kid has Down Syndrome. Nor is it set up to accept and assist her and her child after it is born. What happens is, when women do the triple screen (or quad screen or whatever) at about 18 weeks, and they are told that their unborn child has a disability, they just have a matter of days to a)go through the grieving process of losing the ideal of a "normal" child; b)process all the information they can about their child's disability; c) process what this will mean for their own lifestyle, financial situation, the way they will be perceived by their peers; d) process their own prejudices and misconceptions about disabled people and learn how to become an advocate (they need to become an instant advocate because their doctor for sure along with everyone else will expect them to abort); and e) figure out that there is a whole community of support out there and most importantly, many happy parents and happy children that are disabled. You will laugh at this reference to show what I'm saying, but their was a season on the TV show, Dallas, many years ago where Donna and Ray found out that her unborn baby had Downs. Then they went through weeks and weeks of agonizing decision making. They went out and got to know adults with Downs and parents of children with Downs. They met with doctors and self advocates. They started volunteering at a sports team for kids with Downs, they became close to a child with Downs and invited him into their home and practiced taking care of his needs. By the end of the season, they had chosen to go ahead with the pregnancy. They figured out that parenting a Down's kid would be a real challenge, but not a tragedy for them or the kid and though not what they expected, it was what they wanted.

And wouldn't you know it? That was the season that was all Pam's dream. So after they decided all that, Pam woke up and it all never happened. (I always wondered why she dreamt about them so much, didn't you?) But in reality, 18 weeker pg women do not have weeks and months to explore these issues and make these decisions, they have a matter of days. And with the oppression and prejudice in our society about people with disabilities, you can't expect them to really come to a different understanding about life long thought patterns that are ingrained in their psyche. Outlawing abortion is not the answer here, changing what it means to be disabled in this world is. Making it respectable. And that is not something a mom can do in 3 days. It isn't even something 54 million disabled people can do in 50 years. I really feel that it is unfortunate when mothers abort disabled babies. I think they are missing out, as are the children, of course. But I am realistic enough to know that pointing a finger at a particular mother in this situation will do no good. This is the hidden problem with oppression and discrimination. Everyone turns out to be a victim of it, even if you are not the target minority. The able bodied mother is oppressed herself by society's discrimination and lack of respect and value for disabled people. I've often wondered what will happen if they find a "gay gene." The Gay rights movement is leaps and bounds ahead of the disability rights movement. Will society be ready to accept a gay baby pregnancy? Or will there also be a 90% abortion rate? And we can carry that to eugenics of eye color, sex, hair color etc. If we can determine all this pre-birth what will happen as far as abortions? Again, here the answer doesn't seem to be to disallow all abortions. The answer is about changing what society values. Going deeper and seeing the worth of all people instead of giving in to shallow and misinformed prejudices or even vanity. Group think is incredibly persuasive when it comes to these types of decisions. Right now, it is the common logic think to do to abort a downs baby because downs adults are not valued and respected. What if they were? It would change those scary days after amniocentesis dramatically.

Also, Down's and Spina Bifida are just the tip of the iceberg as far as amniocentesis decision making goes. Many times, parents are told that their child has a terminal condition. I once knew two women who were pregnant at about the same time and both were told their kid has trisomy 18. Trisomy 18 is usually fatal within a few minutes to a few months after birth. One woman decided to abort. Her reasoning was that her baby was all nice and comfortable and warm in her womb. It was the only home he had ever known. The child would be aborted via anesthesia overdose, and thus would simply fall asleep in her uterus and die inside of her. This, to her, seemed more natural and comforting than to give birth to a child who might have nothing but pain in a cold, sterile incubator. To her, it was the only thing she could do for this child as his mother, that he die within her. The other woman decided to give birth. She decided that for whatever short time her baby had, she was going to make it the best possible. That her baby deserved every second of its short life that she could give her. She had her baby and she lived for about six weeks. During that six weeks, that baby was constantly held, loved, nursed, sung to, comforted, played with, all by a round the clock vigil of family members and friends. She died at night with relative ease in bed between her mother and father. This was how she chose to best mother her child. Who took the right path? They both did. Who am I, or anyone else, to say differently? It is about your personal relationship with your child as a mother. No one can make these decisions for you.

Moving on, I'm not going to say a whole lot about ART (Assisted reproduction) except to say, again, these are very individual decisions having to do with your own body and your own decisions on how to balance risks. It is the same issue as abortion. One thing I absolutely CAN'T STAND is when people make comments like, "Well, if you are infertile, maybe God is trying to tell you not to have children! You shouldn't mess with GOD!" So by that line of thinking, if you get cancer, you shouldn't get medical treatment to fight it because God must be trying to tell you not to live. Don't mess with God now! If you seriously break your legs and you will never walk again unless you have a very complicated high tech surgery, God must be telling you that you belong in a wheelchair, right? Infertility is just a medical issue like anything else. You have rights as far as what medical treatment you want to pursue or refuse. Infertility treatments are no different. Medical technology is advancing in this area like in every other medical field. It gives us more options. How you go about dealing with IF is such a personal thing that I can't imagine judging someone for it. Yes, sometimes I see people on their 20th IVF and wonder why they don't give it up and adopt? But never have I known all the reasons or been in all the situations that bring people to ART. Yes, people who go nutty doing pre-implantation genetic testing to get a perfect baby are a bit disillusioned that this will guarantee them a perfect Mensa child. But here again, it is society's attitudes that need to change, not so much the available technology.

One last thing along these lines. This:

If you don't recognize them already, let me introduce you to the Duggar Family. Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar and their SIXTEEN children (with number 17 on the way.) These are all biological children, folks. This family is evangelical Christian and they have decided to let God decide how many children they have. They homeschool, they have no debt, and live very frugally, yet surely buy out the Costco every other day. They have Christian hair. You get the idea.

I do not agree with the choices the Duggars have made. Mostly on the grounds of overpopulation and our responsibility to not go crazy making the problem worse. And personally, if I spent the past 20 years of my life pregnant and breastfeeding without a break, I'd want to hurl myself off the nearest skyscraper. However, I agree to the principle that they have the right to make these decisions. Recently, on a pro-choice, feminist website, the Duggars came up and everything from the condition of her vagina to the assumption that the girls are being abused came up. I don't think there is any evidence to support a problem with either the mom's vagina or the girls safety that I am aware of. I mention them because it goes both (all) ways, folks. If women have the right to decide whether to take a fetus out of their uterus, they also have the right to decide how many to support in their uterus. If they can't have 17 children, then can they have 10? How about 8? Is 4 OK? Or should we be really logical and say only 2, to replace ourselves? Or we could take China's approach and only allow one baby per mother... and have thousands of impoverished or otherwise oppressed mothers have to abandon their (mostly) girls because boys are valued more. Thousands of children who were probably wanted and loved end up institutionalized until they are able to find adoptive homes. Often leaving them with emotional and developmental delays. Again, I see nothing wrong with societies educating people on birth control, and overpopulation, and encouraging smaller families. But, still, I think if we defend the right to control our uterus then we have to go all the way. Families like the Duggars are very rare, which is why they get so much attention. And their hair still annoys the hell out of me. But I will not be making fun of anyone's vagina or advocating that women shouldn't be allowed to have that many children while also advocating that woman should have control of their bodies should they decide to abort. Reproductive rights are reproductive rights.

All of these issues boil down to one thing. Control over what happens to our bodies is an inalienable right and should be fought for.

Comments

[Cathy]

Well said

I've always thought that genetic counselors needed more access to the disability community. 90% is a huge number - what a loss for us all.
Christian hair? I always thought the beeehives and streaking = fundy hair.

[shannon]

Well I came over here to yell at you for not posting in such a long time and now all I can say is that it was worth the wait!

I once dated an OB/GYN who performed abortions at PP and she used to say "it's taking human life, but sometimes it has to be done." I think that's a profoundly thoughtful way to see it. She was always sad after a day at PP, the way she was happy after a delivery. But she wore a bullet-proof vest to the clinic, under FBI escort because she believed so strongly that sometimes it had to be done.

As for the Duggers, I agree with you in theory that a family like that is the logical extension of reproductive choice, but in actual reality, re: that actual family, I have to wonder to what extent Mrs. D. is making uncomplicated "choices" about her body and her family. The god-given rights of the patriarch to make reproductive decisions for his wife and daughters is a major piece of the ideology that the Duggers subscribe to. Women's choices are not valued within it. I mean, you could say she chose to live within that ideology, but I just think it gets sticky there.

But I'd never make fun of her vagina. I hardly see the point in that.

And yes--I hope they NEVER find a gay gene. I have no doubt more people would abort than not if they did. I am saddened by the loss of Downs babies as it is. I have worked with a lot of kids with Downs and they were great people with happy, loving, proud parents. If we're going to talk about indicators of God's will, why not consider that part of God's plan for Creation is that some folks have Downs Syndrome? They add something to human family life that is unique and special to them, and enrich the world in a way that only they can.

And I just use Downs as one example.

[Lisa]

Shannon,

Yes, regarding the Duggars, particularly Mrs. Duggar, I also have real concerns about how the patriarchy and her place in it affects her ability to make real consented decisions. I also worry about the girls (and the boys for that matter) and how they are probably being enfolded into the patriarchical Christian mindset and what that might do to their options when they grow up. It is very sticky.

But for the purposes of this post, so that it didn't run longer than it is already, I had to narrow down my concern to just the mere fact that people criticize their right to have X number of children at all. Again, that right should be self-evident...the whole Mrs. Duggar is being oppressed under the patriarchy is a much larger societal issue. And that goes along with all the myriad of issues as to why pregnant mothers are in situations of poverty where they feel the need to abort or put their child up for adoption. Although y'all know I could go on and on, I tried to narrow this post to specifically talking about the rights women have/should have in regards to their bodies in reproductive decisions.

[M-j]

Such a hairy topic.
Yet, even this Catholic girl is (SHHH! Don't tell!) Pro choice. Reason? No one has the right to tell me how many children I am allowed to have. That decision is mine, and mine alone (although, I must admit, the husband is in here somewhere!). As the mother of two children with Autism (and several nephews, they think it may be genetic) it horrifies me that someday people could choose to abort because they cannot stand the thought of raising a child like mine. But no politician, religious person or rights group has the right to take that away. Stay out of my uterus is right!

[jess]

I am very pro choice for the reasons that you gave, that no matter what choices we make personally, it is important to have options. A hobson's choice isn't really a choice at all. It comes at no suprise that the countries where sex education is close to nonexistent birth control is difficult to come by or even illegal are the countries that have very high abortion rates (even when abortion is illegal) vs countries where there is comphrensive sex education and easy acess to birth control, abortions are far more rare.

(and I agree with you on the Duggar's hair. As for Mrs. Duggar she can make the reproductive choices she wants to make but I feel a lot of symphathy for her kids who are doing the lion's share of running the house and rasing each other based on dugar family's description of their family life.)

[Heels]

Very nicely put.

On the Duggars: I'd never choose it, but I guess they're a good representation of what life could be like, ideally (?!?), when you live like they do.

I will say that I don't think that the kids get enough one-on-one time with their parents when you have dozens of kids, or enough of an actual carefree childhood, but there you go.