Five ordinary women
I’m thinking of five Auckland women, three in one family and two of their friends, one in her eighties, one seventy, the others in their fifties. Three have more than one tertiary degree, four have husbands. One was raped under the age of sixteen. Between them they have had twelve healthy children, four miscarriages and seven abortions.
The miscarriages of wanted pregnancies were devastating; the abortions were not. The abortions were a clear choice, and once they’d been performed the emotion was relief, although the woman in her eighties was forced to have a backstreet abortion that nearly killed her. The abortions were not an “agonising” decision, and there were no regrets.
These are five ordinary New Zealand women, and this is a perfectly normal reproductive history over a lifetime. The idea that anyone would interfere in their choice of healthcare is abhorrent to a majority of New Zealanders, and our current laws reflect that.
But can we be sure the position won’t change? The decision of the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v Wade has rocked America, almost immediately denying abortions to women in half of that country. The only option is to travel out of state, which effectively makes the decision a war on America’s poor. Many women who need to travel don’t have cars, credit cards, adequate ID or money. Some could have been raped by family members, and many will be young girls.
When National MP Simon O’Connor broadcast his pleasure at the decision, his post decorated with triumphant love hearts, he caused a problem for his party, and National MPs rushed to reassure women. That storm may have passed, but we were left contemplating the disturbingly large number of MPs, on both sides, who voted against the decriminalisation of abortion. In particular, there was a worrying past statement by National’s health spokesperson Dr. Shane Reti, whose anti-abortion voting record seems more radical given he’s a medical doctor. Dr. Reti didn’t rule out changes, took no position and added, “but we are mindful in watching what happens with Roe v Wade.” This seemed to suggest the decision would have an influence.
Republican and Democrat senators are now complaining that Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch lied in their confirmation hearings about their intentions for Roe v Wade. Perhaps if you believe you’ve got God on your side, you might be as willing as those US Justices were to lie to achieve what you want.
The problem for our pro-life MPs is that we are about to witness the barbarity, injury and death associated with the state enforcement of their “morals.” If they’d been American politicians, this is the mass human rights violation they would have voted for.
I wonder how pro-lifers like Simon O’Connor deal with the question of the twelve-year-old rape victim. After the sexual abuse of a child, are they perfectly okay with authorities prolonging the physical and psychological torture of a little girl by forcing her to carry the pregnancy to term? This isn’t going to be a theoretical issue in parts of America. To what extent does their stance perpetuate the original crime? They should think about that.
Maternal mortality and injury will rise in the United States, because that’s what happens in primitive theocratic societies where religion trumps health policy. Women will be impoverished; educational opportunities will be lost, and children and all of society will suffer.
In El Salvador in May, a woman was sentenced to thirty years in prison after having a miscarriage. This is sick and brutal, and a completely logical outcome of criminalising abortion. Mr. O’Connor’s “love hearts” demonstrate that old adage: sentimentality and cruelty go hand in hand.
