Archives for 2011

Pro-choice groups want “safe and legal”, right? Well, maybe not that safe. From The New York Times,

The Virginia Board of Health on Thursday approved a set of regulations for abortion clinics that abortion rights advocates say could result in the closing of a number of the state’s more than 20 clinics. Supporters of the measures say they will make the clinics safer.

[…]

In a statement, the Family Foundation, an anti-abortion group that promoted the measures, called the approval, “a significant pro-life victory,” and said that “Virginia’s abortion centers now face the choice of either spending their profits on meeting standards or no longer doing abortions at their facilities.”

Just take a moment to ponder that last line.

____________________

Andrea adds: As I’ve said before, “safe, legal and rare” comes down to “legal” for many an extreme abortion advocate these days. When you scratch just the tiniest bit below the surface, this becomes clear. And yet they still get off with the stranglehold on “women’s rights” rhetoric. Boggles the mind.

When “Yes We Can” took hold of Americans (and Canadians) and Obama became President, I was one of the few who wasn’t a fan. Nowadays, we’re a dime a dozen, including some Democrats. It’s nice to be vindicated after such a short period of time.

Can’t take credit for the post title, as I believe it was Jon Stewart who mused that Obama’s slogan for 2012 might be: “We thought we could, but…” 

Anyway, I don’t like President Obama because he is America’s most pro-abortion president in history. (For me, there were many other reasons, too, but I won’t get into those here.) I’m glad to see opinions on him are shifting, if they haven’t turned already.

I suppose we can add a little question mark to the slogan below.

Wait no more to find out! China’s Ministry of Education is apparently making a course on love and sex compulsory for university students. Because nothing says love like the Chinese authorities forcing a course on the topic.

I have been following, at least a little, the story of the Alberta woman who killed her newborn son, throwing his body over a fence into a neighbour’s yard.

The woman, Katrina Effert, received no jail time, merely a suspended sentence. The judge had this to say:

Judge Veit ruled, according to multiple media reports, that because Canada allows abortions it reflects how “while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support.”

Naturally, this is all very disturbing stuff. But the light sentence, although explained today in light of our abortion-friendly culture, would have likely been given prior to abortion being available on demand, precisely because a mother murdering her baby was viewed as so contrary to a woman’s nature. Lower sentences associated with infanticide, in short, recognize that a woman bonds with her baby over nine months gestation, and that subsequently killing that baby represents a break with normal maternal instinct.

It is in the same way that having an abortion breaks with normal maternal instinct–the desire to protect your baby.

In today’s day and age, we undoubtedly have to get rid of the lower sentences for infanticide, precisely because women have grown more and more distant from their own bodies, how they work, and what pregnancy is and what abortion does.

But if we lived in an abortion-free culture, I’d be in favour of lower sentences for women who kill their newborn infants. Some may well do so in cold-blood. I feel, however, that killing your own baby is such a strange thing that mental disorder may, in fact, be to blame.

I’m still thinking this one through. I thought to myself, hey, I should discuss this with someone. But then I realized I have a blog for such questions as this.

Thoughts?

I suppose this is one of the reasons why countries with massive gender imbalance (largely due to sex selection abortion) have cause for concern.

…that’s when I tend to think we are in deep trouble.

We shouldn’t be able to walk over homeless people sleeping in the streets and not find it troubling. We shouldn’t be able to just walk by “all-night massage parlours–open late!” featuring seductive photos of Asian women and not feel a twang of conscience. And we shouldn’t be able to walk by an abortion clinic and not know what is going on there. So that’s why you should definitely read this post.

Calling all university pro-lifers! The National Campus Life Network is having their annual conference in Toronto September 30 to October 2. They do a great job of equipping campus clubs to engage in the debate throughout the year. Not easy, being a pro-lifer on campus these days, I think we can all agree. Great speakers, great city, what more could you ask for. For more information, check out their web site.

Someone just sent me this study. It’s from 2008, so not new, but I was not aware of it. The executive summary (beware the clinical language, talking about this poor little guy):

 A 28-year-old woman, with only moderate asthma treated occasionally by albuterol, became pregnant 3 years after a miscarriage and 1 year after a full-term pregnancy resulting in a healthy, normal child. No use of illicit drugs was reported. She decided to terminate this pregnancy and started the French protocol for chemical abortion at the beginning of the seventh week of gestation (day 43). She received oral mifepristone 600 mg and, 2 days later, misoprostol 400 μg. One month later, despite significant metrorrhagia, an ultrasound examination showed ongoing pregnancy, with no anomalies observed in the fetus. The patient requested genetic consultation during the fifteenth week of pregnancy; thus, pharmacovigilance advice was solicited to counsel the woman on teratogenic risks. A follow-up by a sonographer was started because the woman decided to continue her pregnancy. The woman delivered a boy at 33 weeks and 3 days of pregnancy; his measurements were within normal parameters for his age of gestation: weight 2.28 kg, length 46 cm, and cranial perimeter 31 cm. The boy presented with transient respiratory distress, which was corrected rapidly. Diagnosis was immediate for left facial palsy, microretrognathia, and axial hypotonia related to Möbius syndrome (Figure 1). Eight weeks after birth, the left facial palsy and microretrognathia were still present. At month 4, the infant was able to suck without help, but he was still hypotonic and unable to lift his head completely or grasp objects.

 A couple of things. Mostly, my point is that there is no “undo” button, not for sex resulting in pregnancy and not for abortion–these are final things. But here we see a mother who was able to change her mind on extinguishing the life within her. I applaud this, but I also feel terribly bad for her son, who will live with some challenges thanks to her earlier decision.

These sorts of cases also highlight that life is a continuum: we start out very small and funny-looking (take a look at photos of very early gestation pregnancy); we grow into… what you see walking all around you every day. Mothers don’t drink or smoke to protect that development, knowing very well that the person growing inside them is the person they will always be. It just all highlights that a person’s a person, no matter how small.

And lest there be any confusion on the matter, this abortion survivor is a person too, fully human and fully loved, even with some disabilities. I’m sadly quite sure that the report offers this advice in order that some women should choose to get the job done right, once and for all:  

Ineffective use of mifepristone and misoprostol in the first trimester of pregnancy may be associated with a risk of Möbius syndrome, primarily due to misoprostol activity. Women with ongoing pregnancy after failed abortion with misoprostol administration should be informed of this risk.

Nearly 73% of Canadian mothers work outside the home, and many of them struggle to find a work/life/parenting balance. But one company has been successfully giving women more flexibility for 125 years. I’ve never purchased Avon, but I might just get myself a bottle of Skin-So-Soft to mark the occasion (I could use it anyway, the mosquitoes are murder this year).

‘I was a stay-at-home mum,’ says Rebekah. ‘I was really shy at first. I didn’t think I would be able to knock on a stranger’s door, but my confidence grew and I began to think, “If I become a sales leader and recruit my own team, I could earn a full-time wage from this.” And it just grew and grew. Avon has taken me beyond my dreams.’

Few companies are able to inspire such loyalty in their workers, but then this isn’t the usual kind of employment: reps are ‘independent’, earning commission on sales (20 per cent on orders over £78 and 25 per cent on orders over £148) and working the hours they want. (The ‘start-up’ fee to become a rep is £15.) Some of the women in the arena work only a few hours a week – not just to earn a little extra money, but because of what they perceive to be the social side of being a rep (many talk about how their customers have become their ‘friends’). One or two say that their ‘dream come true’ with the company has been the ability it has given them to ‘come off benefits’.

____________________

Andrea adds: I’ve been surprised by the number of Avon-style events I’ve been invited to lately, for skin products, kitchen stuff, clothing. These are always events led by women for women and to me it speaks to the reality that most moms do not want to work full time, 9 to 5, when they have kids. (Which is why I’m against provincial daycare schemes of any and all kinds: they force women into one mould and solidify a lifestyle most parents do not want, that of the two-parent, full-time working household.) 

Someone sent me this article and I thought it was refreshing. I think many young mothers might be relieved to know that small children under the age of five constitute “the darkest part of motherhood:”

She turned to me and cheerfully asked, “So, what are the ages of your children?” I answered a bit sheepishly, “4 ½, 2 ½, and 1 ½,” unsure of where the conversation was heading. “Oh,” she exclaimed, “you’re in the darkest part of motherhood! It’s going to get better!” Say what? I was totally surprised, and frankly, relieved.

The article goes on to highlight how decisions to sterilize are often made on emotional grounds, without enough information. I’m quite sure decisions to abort are made on emotional grounds, without enough information. So I certainly saw a parallel there. The moment of finding out that you are pregnant if you didn’t want to be is a very dark day indeed. Too bad there aren’t more older, experienced women to step out alongside and say something simple like “this too shall pass,” or “this is as bad as it’s going to get” before we go on and take drastic measures to “alleviate” the pain.