I have not yet in this blog addressed my opinions on abortion, though I think I've said enough to make it clear that I am pro-life. I have, in my life, become very personal about the topic, particularly late-term abortions, eugenic abortions--abortions performed because something is wrong with the baby.
Anyone who knows me knows that my second baby, Hope, was diagnosed with a fatal neural tube defect called anencephaly, that I carried her to full term, and had three bittersweet, intensly loving days to hold her for her lifetime. Everyday, another mom faces the same diagnosis, and last year I came across a news story about another such mom. Another Navy wife, actually, who went to court to force the Navy to pay for her abortion. I followed that case, which the superior court overturned, forcing the woman to reimburse Tricare the $3000 they had paid to Planned Parenthood to end her pregnancy. I am so sad for that poor woman, I can only sympathize with her heartbreak, whatever her choice was. But I was so very relieved that the superior court abided by federal law and did not allow the Navy to pay for it.
Why? Here is a very old post-- "Why Oh Why Are We Ruled By These Idiots" from Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal (a blog that deals mostly with economics and other topics that make my eyes glaze over) that clearly questions why the government would do this. It's a good question, because anyone with a heart must surely feel bad for this poor woman, and to demand $3000 of her hard-earned money, on top of what she's been through, seems cruel. (Well, everything about losing a baby is cruel.) I understand where his indignation is coming from, but I had to comment, because unfortunately, I know a thing or two about it.
I realize this post is over a year old, but I could not pass by without comment.
"I can't think of a reasonable basis for opposing an early and merciful end to this particular pregnancy."
I carried my second child, who was diagnosed with anencephaly, for the full term. She was born alive and wiggling, and I held her sweet body in my arms for three days, until she quietly passed away, having been loved by her mom every millisecond of her life in this world. There is nothing unreasonable about expecting a mom to love her baby, ANY baby, however heartbreaking that is. The constitution does not guarantee us freedom from heartbreak. Babies are born imperfect every day, and they still deserve every bit as much love, and protection under the law, as perfectly healthy babies.
"And in fact I very much doubt that more than a tiny proportion of "right-to-life" voters or leaders would want themselves or women they cared about to bring such a monster to term."
Shame on you for calling any tiny helpless being a monster. As for the people who carry these babies, and the people who care about us . . . you don't know what or who you are talking about. Women who choose not to carry such babies to term still go through the SAME medical trauma, just earlier, and they deny themselves the opportunity to love fully, and to grieve fully . . . and to move on, fully at peace.
I for one am glad that the NAVY hospital that diagnosed my baby did not offer "termination." Every single person there treated my baby as a baby, and treated her with as much value as any baby. I have met many, many moms, who went to civilian hosptials, who were encouraged to terminate, indeed wheeled to l&d within hours of diagnosis, when you are still in shock and denial. That is what a culture that tolerates abortion becomes. Abortion cheapens life, devalues it. Imperfect life becomes expendable. Replacable.
It is one thing for a woman to choose a safe and legal procedure, fully accepting the trauma and risks. But it is a much darker, colder thing to demand that we, the people, should subsidize it.