NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

Abortion: “deferring responsibility based on preference”

by | Dec 11, 2012

By Dave Andrusko

As is often the case, the last post of the day is ruminating about the details of—and the rationalization for—an abortion. The headline is “Pregnant with an IUD: The Story of My Abortion,” and the woman identified only as “NW” spends a lot of time pondering the fallibility of what she believe to be the infallible IUD.

NW’s story is somewhat different in that she has a supportive boyfriend. After having the IUD removed, there is a week to go before the abortion. With time to think, she has second thoughts. NW writes

“Saturday morning I wake up before the alarm, thinking hard. We never talked about the other option, about trying to keep it. We never even talked through the logistics. I suddenly want to do that. I feel overwhelmingly selfish, to be making this choice based on what I want, not what I can handle—we could do this, we could take this on. It seems selfish to defer responsibility based on preference. We could keep it, practically speaking. It might even be good timing, since we do plan on doing this at some point anyway. Our gut reaction was so complete, so visceral – did that make it right?”

Ordinarily, here is where we read where the boyfriend insists she aborts. Instead, “He listens carefully, calmly. He agrees we could make it work. Do you want to reschedule the appointment? That stops me cold.”

She then quickly decides that while there may be a future for them, even one with kids, it isn’t now and not because “a faulty copper wire forc[ed] our hand.”

Much of the remainder of her story (found at www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/12/03/pregnant-with-an-iud) is an expression of how easy the abortion was (she is six weeks pregnant), which is part of a public service announcement on behalf of the wonderfulness of Planned Parenthood. Indeed she observes, “Why such an easy process needs to be done in a special clinic, politicized and alienated from the world, is beyond me.”

Well, there are lots of reasons. Most physicians see ending life as incompatible with their training which is to save life. Most physicians are extremely aware that to this day there are few more unpleasant reputations to acquire than to be known as an “abortionist.”

And abortion is “politicized” because while the “process” may seem “easy,” the decision to end an unborn child’s life is freighted with moral, ethical, and religious overtones.

NW ends with this all-back-to-normal conclusion:

“And then it’s Sunday and I’m not pregnant any more. We go out to brunch and meet up with a friend at a coffee shop. Sorry we haven’t been around. I’ve been sick, but I’m better now. My boyfriend works on a paper due that night. I chat about authors and law school. And life goes on.”

Except for the little one whose life did not go on because her/his mother chose to “defer responsibility based on preference.”

If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha. Please send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.

Categories: Abortion