PRO ... WHOSE LIFE?
by sonya hammond
Hard on the heels of the male-dominated U.S. Senate's vote to ban late-term abortions [D&X ...dilation and extraction], a Portland, Oregon abortion clinic was heavily damaged by arson.
Possibly a coincidence in timing, but the incident should serve as a warning that so-called 'pro-life' fanatics will take the Senate vote not simply as an attempt to ban one controversial procedure, but, win or lose, as a victorious step forward in the battle to outlaw any and all of women's choices to determine their own fates.
The procedure in question is abhorrent, but not only is it rarely performed, all but 10 states already have laws banning abortions after the 6th month of pregnancy unless the health or life of the mother is at stake. Congress, by exempting only threats to a mother's life, apparently sees her health as a frivolous factor. The American Medical Association agreed with them.
Or at least the AMA's Board of Trustees did, once an amendment was added to shield doctors from prosecution in specific instances. The Board, which cited 'the timing of the Senate vote' as their rationale for not seeking endorsement of their support of the ban by the full AMA membership, also denied that current congressional negotiations over several physician-related issues played any part in their decision.
It would be interesting to know the specialties of AMA Board members, since the College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, composed of specialists who would be most affected by a ban, did not agree with them
Once the amended version of the bill is approved by the House [and it will be], the fate of a D&X ban lies in the hands of President Clinton who will almost certainly veto it, and the Senate vote of 64-36 is short the 2/3 needed to override it. But this is hardly the end of a battle, fought primarily by men, to legislate choices that primarily affect women.
As Sen. Dianne Feinstein noted, no member of congress will be in the delivery room 'when women are forced to deliver horrible deformed children'.
They were around, however, to be horrified by films of the D&X procedure, films so graphic that even some proponents of a woman's right to choose were moved to changed their votes.
Oregonians, who may feel somewhat removed from the argument since the procedure is rarely performed in the state [and so far never in Eugene], could buy into the [Eugene] Register-Guard's recent statement that the repercussions of the Senate vote 'may be more political than personal'.
Maybe, but while this latest 'political' attack on what should be a 'personal' issue probably will not result in a victory, the fight will continue to return women ultimately to a past when 'choice' was limited either to giving birth regardless of the consequences or facing an illegal procedure. While Congress has so far seen no films of that procedure, a scenario exists:
Opening scene is set in the good old days when ALL abortions were banned. Camera pans in on a woman six weeks pregnant, unmarried and desperately searching for a doctor who will perform an illegal abortion.
They are available for those who can pay hefty fees, but our heroine cannot pay more than the $200 she managed to borrow. She finally finds a pre-med student, also desperate for money to pay for his continuing education. His qualifications are limited to minimal knowledge of curettage, a process involving scraping out tissue of the uterus with a forklike instrument called a curette, but he is willing to break the law.
Fade out and back in to a kitchen of a grubby apartment. The pre-med student stands by a bare, hard white metal table. The analogy of a vintage meat market counter's white metal display trays does not escape the woman as she enters the room. She is naked.
She is told to climb up on the table which is barely deep enough to accommodate her body, even when she raises and bends her knees. She has been given a pill which the student says will dilate her uterus. He gives her nothing for pain, but hands her a wash cloth, tells her to put it in her mouth and bite on it, and to put her arms over her head and grab the back edge of the table. He warns her not to scream or faint.
The student pulls her forward so that the lower part of her body is on the edge of the table, inserts his curette, which may or may not be properly sterilized, and begins to scrape.
Camera pans in on the woman's face, distorted with pain and fear, but she does not cry out. She feels as though she is being reamed with an apple corer. She wonders if the pain will ever stop, or if she will die, almost a preferable option.
Her back begs for relief from the unyielding table. Her legs ache from the awkward position, her feet threaten to give up their grip on the edge of the table. Her arms feel as though they will break from strain. Her body is no longer hers; it belongs to some horrendous destiny she cannot control.
Finally, the student pulls out his instrument and takes a pan to a toilet to flush its contents. He tells the woman to get up, but she cannot. She feels as though she has been emptied of every organ in her body when she manages to unbend and edge herself off of the table. She can barely walk. Fade out.
Fade in to the woman at home, lying on her bed, the mattress covered in blood. She is terrified, hemorrhaging, she needs medical help but she has committed a 'crime'.
The will to survive finally overcomes fear and she calls a friend who comes to drive her to an emergency room. She cannot lie about what happened, but no one asks who did it; they know it would be useless to find him even if she told them. They take care of her. They tell her she is lucky to be alive.
For a long time she will not be sure how true that is. Fade out.
If such a film had been made, and Congress had seen it, would they have found it as repugnant as the D&X abortion film? Would they have been moved to instigate legislation permitting legal abortions, thus saving countless lives, terrible pain, humiliation and unspeakable trauma? Probably not, since a woman's life was, arguably, not at stake...only her future, her health and her right to more reasonable choices.
A veto of the late-term abortion ban will not stop those determined to again limit her choices. Any doubt of that should be buried in the ashes of burned-out clinics.
Note: If you think the 'scenario' above is fiction, you are dead wrong. It happened. Exactly as described. And it could happen again if the 'right to life' faction has their way.
© sonya hammond 1997