The recession is driving American demand for contraception and for abortions. The media have been riven this past week with stories about the rising number of couples and single mothers doing the math and deciding this is no time to bring a child into the world --- not when the economy is depressed, jobs are scarce and family incomes are dropping.
The media have also been rife with stories portraying this trend as something of a tragedy. Let me propose a counter view: it is not.
The Associated Press ran a story on March 25 that read as follows: 'The pregnant woman showed up at the medical centre in flip-flops and in tears, after walking there to save bus fare. Her boyfriend had lost his job, she told her doctor in Oakland, Calif., and now -- fearing harder times for her family -- she wanted to abort what would have been her fourth child. 'This was a desired pregnancy -- she'd been getting prenatal care -- but they re-evaluated expenses and decided not to continue,' said Dr. Pratima Gupta. 'When I was doing the options counseling, she interrupted me halfway through, crying, and said, 'Dr. Gupta, I just walked here for an hour. I'm sure of my decision.''
Yes, it's sad that this unwed, pregnant mother of three had no money for bus fare. It's terrible that her boyfriend lost his job. It is heart-wrenching that she fell to tears in the doctor's office. But in the long run, can we agree that this unwed couple's decision not to bring a fourth child into the world when they are having trouble feeding themselves and three children is no tragedy? It's actually a fact-based, rational decision that in the end benefits the three children they already have and society as well.
Feeding and raising children is expensive. Tuition may be free at public schools but there are still books, transportation, food, clothes, medical care and activities that add up -- way up. One may assume this family of five is struggling just to maintain its basics: housing and food. Add one more child and those costs rise as income drops. It's no tragedy: it's a good decision. The decision benefits society in two ways. It allows the couple to focus more time, energy and resources on their three children, giving each child a better life and a better chance of growing up to become a contributor to society. It also reduces the chance the family will have to rely on scarce public resources to raise their children.
Abortion was not viewed as a tragic event in the early days after the Supreme Court handed down its Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion on a national scale. A tough decision: you bet. An unpleasant process: that, too. But it was not something women whined about publicly on the scale many seem to now. Nor was it covered by the media or promoted by pro-choice politicians in "woe is me" terms.
All that started when Norma McCorvey, one of the two original plaintiffs in the Roe and Doe pair (the Roe decision was actually handed down as one opinion for two cases) turned against the pro-choice movement some 10 years or so after the decision became law. Norma McCorvey, who never actually had an abortion before she became the movement's poster child, changed from pro-choice to pro-life. She began speaking out about the evils of abortion. The pro-life movement seized upon her change of heart and promoted her as the symbol of abortion gone wrong.
Do some women have regrets about their decisions to terminate pregnancies? Of course. Are those decisions legitimate? Adamantly so. But is it wrong of the media to become a trumpet for the pro-life message that abortion is always a tragedy? Equally adamantly, yes. It is not always tragic and lots of times, it actually makes good sense.
(Bonnie Erbe is a TV host and writes this column for Scripps Howard News Service. E-mail bonnieerbe(at)CompuServe.com.)
COLUMN
Are you kidding?
I can't believe I wasted precious free time reading this column.
Abortion is always a tragedy, Bonnie - because an innocent life always dies as a result. The financial circumstances of the parents don't make it ok to end an innocent life.
There are alternatives to abortion - adoption being the best. But the abortion-on-demand crowd would rather make excuses for an abhorrent practice because they want to keep their pet issue alive.
"A tough decision: you
"A tough decision: you bet."
Why is it such a tough decision if it's no big deal? Definitely a tragedy, very sad that this woman chose to do this.
The decision not to bring a
The decision not to bring a fourth child into the world should have happened before they decided to have unprotected sex. The brutal murder of a baby after the fact is indeed a tragedy, no matter how you want to paint it. Was adoption not an option here? Or simply less convienent?
It's horrid to know people are so casual about human life.
Cold
Bonnie,
You do not realize that if the premise of those who oppose abortion, namely that abortion is the termination of a human life, then your whole argument of inconvenience is baseless and cruel.
For instance, if abortion is the ending of a human life, then your argument is the equivalent of saying, "You have the right to kill your child if he or she a.) causes economic hardship, b.) puts a "crimp in your style", c.) forces you to eat store-brand cereal, d.) takes away from quality family time, or e.) any combination of the above or whatever suits your little fancy.
And your grasp of history is astounding. There has been a stigma to abortion long before Norma McCorvey hit the scene. Maybe, you meant that YOU started paying attention to abortion at that moment... I'm trying to be generous.
Cold
Bonnie,
You do not realize that if the premise of those who oppose abortion, namely that abortion is the termination of a human life, then your whole argument of inconvenience is baseless and cruel.
For instance, if abortion is the ending of a human life, then your argument is the equivalent of saying, "You have the right to kill your child if he or she a.) causes economic hardship, b.) puts a "crimp in your style", c.) forces you to eat store-brand cereal, d.) takes away from quality family time, or e.) any combination of the above or whatever suits your little fancy.
And your grasp of history is astounding. There has been a stigma to abortion long before Norma McCorvey hit the scene. Maybe, you meant that YOU started paying attention to abortion at that moment... I'm trying to be generous.
Another benefit
Another benefit of aborting her fourth child is that, once the other kids realize their mother offed their brother or sister, they'll be sure to behave. Abortion = a great way to keep the surviving kids in line.
I think this article is a
I think this article is a tragedy...
Another modest proposal
If you're going to be "fact-based and rational" why not also kill the youngest (already born child) for the benefit of the other two? Or the two youngest children for the sake of the first? Or all the children for the sake of the parents?
You said "Feeding and raising children is expensive. Tuition may be free at public schools but there are still books, transportation, food, clothes, medical care and activities that add up -- way up. One may assume this family of five is struggling just to maintain its basics: housing and food. Add one more child and those costs rise as income drops. It's no tragedy: it's a good decision. The decision benefits society in two ways. It allows the couple to focus more time, energy and resources on their three children, giving each child a better life and a better chance of growing up to become a contributor to society. It also reduces the chance the family will have to rely on scarce public resources to raise their children."
Why not apply that "fact-based" rationalism to the other children. After all if its of benefit to terminate one person, why not the others?
Abortion is not a tragedy?
"Abortion was not viewed as a tragic event in the early days after the Supreme Court handed down its Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion on a national scale."
Where did YOU live?? There may have been places in 1973 where abortion was not viewed as a tragic event, but for the remaining 99% of the country it was.
And where do you come off telling that pregnant woman "in flip flops and tears" that ending the life of her fourth child is not a tragedy? According to you it may not be but it was to her. The utilitarian argument that she would be financially better off without the child so an abortion is justified is frightening. Also, I would think that anyone who espouses moral relativism as your comments indicate would not be in the business of judging others and their situations.
Bonnie, I can hear you now
Bonnie, I can hear you now arguing for killing another member of the family: "Why not kill off grandma while we're at it? Taking care of her is a financial burden in these economic times. And the costs will probably only increase as her health declines. Besides, if I didn't have to care for her I could spend more time on my three children, and raise them to be productive members of society."
Of course, making a rational, good decision for your family doesn't usually require murdering one of it's members. I'm sure that those children will have great self esteem, since they were so important to their parents that they were willing to sacrifice their brother or sister for their sake. Then again, maybe they will feel what they should feel after this atrocity: remorse and guilt.
What is the difference between grandma and an unborn child? Size? Location? Visibility?
A life is a life is a life. All have inherent incalcuable value. Perhaps this mother and father could have taught their children that. And if you didn't want another child, don't choose to do the activity that by its nature creates one.
Why stop there?
She has 3 other children. Why not drop them off at a convent or monastery? I'm sure they can't afford them, either.
The Mom was crying because it was a trajedy
Should a baby's life hang in the balance because a Dad is temporarily unemployed?
Even in the worst economy the Dad won't be unemployed forever.
This is America--no one will starve--the mom was crying because she knew this wasn't right. What if the father gets a job next week? Will they just say, "Oh darn, we offed the kid too quickly!" I don't think they will see it as a rational choice then.
Are you serious??
Are you seriously trying to justify the taking of a human life? Why not jack a few rounds into a .45 caliber handgun and off one or two more of the existing children. What's the difference? These are the kinds of obtuse arguments that make no sense.
<shaking my head>
wow. just wow.
I was going to add something but Rosy beat me to it.
The ends don't justify the means. Where does the "convenience killing" end?
How irresponsible for you to
How irresponsible for you to write an article with the sly tone of abortion making sense. How cleverly you painted this picture of a down trodden woman who had to make this choice because of the economic situation. Why didn't you delve into more depth about the choice this woman made in getting pregnant in the first place. She obviously made the decision to be impregnated 3-4 times , yes? She would not have to make the decision at all to kill the baby growing inside her if she was the least bit responsible about her birth control. Instead she has made the decision to use abortion as her birth control. How dare you make this out to be some kind of good economic choice. Why not do a flip side story of a woman's regretful feelings after she's had an abortion. Which a lot of woman are completely regretful and it haunts them for life. But no. That would be shedding light on something you want no light on right? It sickens me that my local paper has run this article...and they will be contacted with major criticism for doing so. It is heart breaking to me that another human being would actually say that stopping the life of an unborn person is not always tragic and makes a lot of sense. Where does this kind of thought and movement stop. What about this Miss Erbe. Sally is having a hard time in this economy paying for the care of her ailing elderly mother. Would it make sense in this hard time economy to go ahead and put her to sleep? It is just as sick a statement as you have written about here. Or maybe you don't think it's sick at all. Shame on you Miss Erbe for trying to sell this hideous holocaust of our time to your viewers and readers. It is pretty simple. You are either pro-life or Pro-death and it is crystal clear where you stand. Shame on you and God forgive you.
Choose Life
Lisa
Of course it's a tragedy
Anytime innocent human life is taken, it's a tragedy. This woman should have given the child up for adoption if she couldn't afford it. Why does the child deserve death because the father lost a job?
"I Despise Birth Control": Chesterton on Babies
"I despise Birth-Control because it is a weak and wobbly and cowardly thing." With that emphatic statement, Gilbert Keith Chesterton takes us all to task on the basic premise of our own existence: why us and not someone else? Do you have the arrogance or do I to say I deserve to live over another? Every mother who faces that decision and acts on the philosophies espoused above has just shown arrogance disguised as rational behavior. She has shown cowardice disguised as financial prudence. And of the father involved? His is the worst cowardice. The arguments for abortion (which many now look upon as just another form of "birth-control") almost always seem to hinge on not being able to provide the necessities, when more often is the case, it is not being to provide the luxuries all around. Should we feel sorry when two people who claim to love one another suddenly are confronted with the effects of what most in postmodern world call simple biology? If that is so, how smart are we not to know after what some would also call thousands of years of "evolution" that two people mating would likely produce offspring? If these two are unable to control themselves in this moment of crucial decision on what essentially for them amounts to mere pleasure, what is here to convince us that they will control their spending for pleasure rather than need so as to support the argument of the fiscal prudence of abortion? No, this argument has no water; it is all sieve to promote acceptance of a pattern of reckless and irreverent behavior at the expense of a human life that cannot defend itself. As Chesterton brings out so well: this is an argument of cowardice. It takes a word that sanitizes an ugly action so as to confuse as many as possible as to the real and perverted action it is: murder. "I despise Birth-Control first because it is a weak and wobbly and cowardly word. It is also an entirely meaningless word; and is used so as to curry favour even with those who would at first recoil from its real meaning. The proceeding these quack doctors recommend does not control any birth. It only makes sure that there shall never be any birth to control. It cannot for instance, determine sex, or even make any selection in the style of the pseudo-science of Eugenics. Normal people can only act so as to produce birth; and these people can only act so as to prevent birth. But these people know perfectly well as I do that the very word Birth-Prevention would strike a chill into the public, the instant it was blazoned on headlines, or proclaimed on platforms, or scattered in advertisements like any other quack medicine. They dare not call it by its name, because its name is very bad advertising. Therefore they use a conventional and unmeaning word, which may make the quack medicine sound more innocuous." http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2008/chesterton_birthcontrol_oct08.asp
FLV to MP3 Converter just
FLV to MP3 Converter just free download it and enjoy it by yourself!
The really chilling prospect
The really chilling prospect about Ms Erbe's opinion is that I am on the other end of that age continuum. These other 3 children whose life was made better, more productive, more deserving of Mom & Dad's complete attention, etc., by ending the life of another human being will be of the generation that decides whether I (another human being) should get part of a decreasing amount of money for health care (Medicare/Medicaid) because I am old and/or sick (therefore useless, unproductive,etc.) That might be a point that "Mom and Dad" should ponder too. How old/sick will they be when these "other 3 children" reach the age of deciding that their life will be better all around by eliminating some other human beings.
Precisely. With the break
Precisely. With the break up of the family unit coupled with the myth of being able to "take care of yourself":"You don't need him", "You don't need her" philosophy of rampant divorce amongst covenant marriages, and the decreasing ability of government programs to take on that financial responsibility, what will these "other 3 children" who reach the age of decision do for those who have been abandoned by an irreverent society when they have been brought up with the idea that "inconvenient" human life is expendable?
Narrow Minded people like you
Have you ever sat at talked with a woman who has had an abortion? If you did, most would tell you that it was the biggest and hardest decision of their life. Most would tell you they regret it, even if they felt it was necessary. It hurts a woman's heart to feel the need to give up life, either out of "rational necessity" or the inability to be a mother or provider. Sometimes, when I read your column i wonder if you are a woman(because you certainly don't seem to identify with us). Yes you may be female, but you have a sympathetic gene missing. I am very much pro life, but I know people who have made the choice to give up life and it changes you forever. There is not a day that goes by that you dont think about that child. Let me ask you a question, if a woman miscarries at say 14 weeks, was that a viable life, does the mother have a right to grieve over that life, or is it "no tragedy" as you put it? The end to a life, no matter how short is a Tragedy.
Closed minded - in a different way
I think most of you are missing the point of this article. The article is saying that this woman made a sound choice. But it is also saying that this choice was not a tragedy. These two things are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps her choice was the only way her family could survive in light of her changed circumstances. At the end of the day, however, she had to make the choice. BUT SHE HAD WANTED A FOURTH BABY - and that's what makes this a tragedy. She had every intention of bringing a baby into this world, and things broke down for her and that became an impossibility. Is it a tragedy? Hell, yes. For that woman, it is definitely a tragedy. Now, I am pro-choice, although I feel alot of people use that to a point of using abortion as a form of birth control instead of being responsible. That is a crappy attitude and lack of respect for life. What the woman in the story did was know that she couldn't possibly bring up this child in a good way, given her situation, which she DID NOT know would be the way it was when she got pregnant. She made a choice to save the rest of her children. Is it a happy decision, no. Is it the right decision, that depends on your morals. But it is most certainly a tragedy - for her, for us, for the baby. And if it isn't a tragedy for you, Erbe, you need a sensitivity check, STAT.
has this lady ever heard of
has this lady ever heard of adoption? if they're having problems feeding thier kids why not terminate the rest of them? at what point does a human being deserve human rights?
a baby is dead. it's not a choice it's a life that is now gone.
Choosing to have your child
Choosing to have your child murdered is always a tragedy. In fact it's insanity to have your child murdered and even more insane for a grown woman like Erbe would try to dismiss this as an inconvenience.
Murder is murder is murder and taking the life of the most innocent and precious gift is sick and insane.
Certainly, that interruption
Certainly, that interruption of a human life occurs at its earliest stage, psychologically facilitates a situation, but it does not change the nature of abortion which murder inherently is and as that is very serious sin as murder is angrily... Hundred thousand the lawful abortions made in hospitals of the State of New York, represent massacre.
abortion is tragedy!
It will be always tragedy, we must fight with it!
this is so crazy to even
this is so crazy to even think about. People do not need to bring kids into this world when cannot afford it. Abortion is not an option at this point.
Orlando Personal Injury Lawyers
abortion vs. economy
I am new to your articles and after reading the second one, I am amazed. The insensitivity to your articles is at par with Rush limbough. If you knew your economics, you would note that the elder population will strain the tax base of this country and that at some point, if we all followed your advice, we will need to "import" workers to pay for the elderly via taxes to help pay for our parents. From your articles, I do not expect that you would want such "inhuman imports' to burden our system either.....Historically, economics has a natural impact on human nature to breed or not breed. i.e post war baby booms, economic strife and retraction in baby births. This has been so prior to birth control or abortion rights which I believe should be a woman's choice not the governments choice. Stay out of the bedroom or perhaps you have been sleeping alone too long to know human kindness and bonding. Perhaps you yourself have never faced your own frailty that other women have encountered. I see you are very angry at women and see your conveniently forget it takes two to tango.
If you want to provide your opinion, I am all for freedom of speech, but your commentary is harsh, uncompromizing and not human enough for me personally. I am pro-abortion unlike many critics here above but I must say your stance sounds very harsh and angry. Cuddle up and warm up and stay out of everyone's personal choices. It is of no concern of yours how others choose to live. Abortion is a tragedy to all involved and not a choice taken lightly by the woman who has to choose it and to think that it is superficial and naive ask anyone who has to live through it. its not oh gee I got pregnant and I have no money so let me get rid of the problem so I can continue to be economically at par or improve my economic situation. Its far more complex than that my dear.
Post new comment