Friday, April 04, 2003

 
SEIZING THE MIDDLE GROUND IN THE ABORTION DEBATE.
External link:

Everybody always talks about how even many people who consider themselves to be pro-life will make exceptions in the case of rape, incest, or threat to the health of the mother. But I really think, on account of modern technology, we ought to add to that list an exception that most pro-lifers would be willing to make: an exception for advanced knowledge of a serious birth defect to the fetus. I think the vast majority of people who consider themselves to be pro-life would make an exception for at least some serious birth defects. But the thing is, once they concede that, they've given up the whole game, because (as they love to ask) where do you draw the line? Is it okay to terminate a fetus with an IQ of 20? How about 50? How about 75? Is it okay to terminate a fetus who will be born deaf and blind? How about just blind? How about just deaf? How about significantly hearing impaired, but not completely deaf? Surely, we can all agree that it's okay to terminate a fetus who has Tay-Sachs disease (which causes severe pain and paralysis by age 2 and death by age 6). But what about a fetus that we are only 90% sure has Tay-Sachs? How about 50%? How about 25%? How about one fetus that is significantly hearing impaired, with an IQ of 75, and a 25% chance of Tay-Sachs disease? I ask these questions not because I'm trying to suggest what the right answer is. The point is that these are all difficult questions. Some are obviously more difficult than others, and some are more difficult to some people and others are more difficult to other people. So, who should get to decide what to do in each case? The legislature? A judge? You, the individual abortion rights opponent reading this? It seems difficult to argue for anything other than that it should be the decision of the prospective parents. But once the pro-life advocate concedes this, he or she has given up everything. What of the parents who want to terminate because their child will have an IQ of 95? What of the parents who want to terminate because there is 2% chance their child will walk with a limp? Leaving that decision to the parents is tantamount to simply legalizing abortion in all cases.

Describing my own views, if I had to pick as between pro-choice or pro-life, I'd definitely label myself pro-choice. But it would be more accurate to describe me as both. That is to say, I am deeply opposed to outlawing abortion, but in ordinary cases, I'm also deeply opposed to abortion. I wish that both sides could get together and try to reduce the number of abortions in the United States, which is, I think, what we all want, right? Whether we're pro-choice or pro-life, can't we all agree that we'd like there to be fewer people choosing to get abortions? To achieve this, there should be better options for making birth and childcare more affordable, especially for single mothers. There should be more done to make fathers responsible for their out-of-wedlock children. And (though some pro-lifers would object to this) there should be more education about and access to birth control. The ironic thing is that all of those things tend to be more associated with the liberal agenda, which, of course, is more associated with abortion rights advocacy.

It seems to me that the pro-life side, with its claim to cherish fetal life, ought to be taking this approach, at least in addition to its efforts to outlaw abortion and terrorize doctors who perform abortions. And this is precisely why I think that it's the pro-choice side that has the most to gain by seizing this middle position, that whatever the legal status of abortion is, we should do everything else possible to make childbirth an attractive option over abortion. Let us live up to that the name "pro-choice" and be able to say that pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion, but it really does mean giving women a genuine choice. I am convinced that whichever side takes this middle position will ultimately win the abortion debate, because that will be the side that most Americans will want to identify themselves with. And yet neither side has to give up any ideological ground to reach this middle position, except that some pro-lifers would have to give up their opposition to birth control.

This is The Official Record. 2:44 PM
link to this item: http://www.creamy.com/blog/2003/04/seizing-middle-ground-in-abortion.html


Check for older comments: Archived comments on item #200098487