It is still too focused on the pregnant woman and not enough on the unborn child. What has she forgiven herself for? It is not at all clear, but I think it is “for letting it happen again”. Until she recognizes that another human being died so that she did not have to “forever be tied” to the wrong man, forgiveness of herself is unlikely to ever be enough.
I didn’t get that sense, Lauri, that this was about “letting it happen again.” Even if it was, the true issue is what she “allowed” to happen again. I understand that naming it is important, and I know the words we use matter. But the underlying sentiment in this article from beginning to end is that she feels sorry for killing her unborn children. I’m OK with her falling short of actually speaking those words, in this case.
I found this to be a very pro-choice article. No seeming awareness that there were two other lives at stake. And the second abortion was on a three month fetus – she could see the limbs. And adoption of course, doesn’t even exist. The protestors are the bad guys. No connecting of any dots.
She seems to forgive herself because, after all, relief triumphed over grief. Overall – ick.
I sort of agree with Lauri and MaryAnn: she is sorry for herself. Whether it’s to let it happen again or for feeling guilty about something she’s wasn’t supposed to feel guilty about.
Don’t get me wrong, I feel very sad for her. Especially in light of the fact that she now has a (living) child of her own. But I didn’t get the sense that there was much – or any — guilt about the unborn children either.
I didn’t read the article with an eye to classifying it as pro-life or pro-choice. I read it and felt there was a stream of sadness. I didn’t think it sounded like she’s actually coped with her past. The part where she says she is forgiving herself rings hollow and my guess is she’ll continue to have problems internally for some time to come. It’s not a triumphant article; it shows grief, pain, anxiety and anger. I put this in the “abortion is not empowering” category, is all.
My take home message from this story was this line:
“And after so many years I’ve finally figured out what it was that quelled the voice inside me that wanted to stop the procedure. It was another voice, a persistent one, that told me I’d be forever tied to a man I’d finally realized had no place in my life.”
And there you have it folks–the primary reason for the vast, VAST majority of abortions in this country. Women are simply sleeping with the wrong men.
Does anyone else get the impression that, if faced with the same circumstances again, she would still make the decision to abort?
Yes, Melissa, I do get that impression. So then I suppose the point might be that pro-life energy should at least in part be dedicated to teaching on the idea that if you can’t envision your boyfriend being the father of your child, you shouldn’t be sleeping with him. This then gets into the whole terrain of sex before marriage (or preferably not) and talking about that is, if you can believe it, harder than talking against abortion. I find, anyway.
Lauri Friesen says
It is still too focused on the pregnant woman and not enough on the unborn child. What has she forgiven herself for? It is not at all clear, but I think it is “for letting it happen again”. Until she recognizes that another human being died so that she did not have to “forever be tied” to the wrong man, forgiveness of herself is unlikely to ever be enough.
Andrea Mrozek says
I didn’t get that sense, Lauri, that this was about “letting it happen again.” Even if it was, the true issue is what she “allowed” to happen again. I understand that naming it is important, and I know the words we use matter. But the underlying sentiment in this article from beginning to end is that she feels sorry for killing her unborn children. I’m OK with her falling short of actually speaking those words, in this case.
Mary Ann says
I found this to be a very pro-choice article. No seeming awareness that there were two other lives at stake. And the second abortion was on a three month fetus – she could see the limbs. And adoption of course, doesn’t even exist. The protestors are the bad guys. No connecting of any dots.
She seems to forgive herself because, after all, relief triumphed over grief. Overall – ick.
Véronique Bergeron says
I sort of agree with Lauri and MaryAnn: she is sorry for herself. Whether it’s to let it happen again or for feeling guilty about something she’s wasn’t supposed to feel guilty about.
Don’t get me wrong, I feel very sad for her. Especially in light of the fact that she now has a (living) child of her own. But I didn’t get the sense that there was much – or any — guilt about the unborn children either.
Andrea Mrozek says
I didn’t read the article with an eye to classifying it as pro-life or pro-choice. I read it and felt there was a stream of sadness. I didn’t think it sounded like she’s actually coped with her past. The part where she says she is forgiving herself rings hollow and my guess is she’ll continue to have problems internally for some time to come. It’s not a triumphant article; it shows grief, pain, anxiety and anger. I put this in the “abortion is not empowering” category, is all.
Melissa says
My take home message from this story was this line:
“And after so many years I’ve finally figured out what it was that quelled the voice inside me that wanted to stop the procedure. It was another voice, a persistent one, that told me I’d be forever tied to a man I’d finally realized had no place in my life.”
And there you have it folks–the primary reason for the vast, VAST majority of abortions in this country. Women are simply sleeping with the wrong men.
Does anyone else get the impression that, if faced with the same circumstances again, she would still make the decision to abort?
Andrea Mrozek says
Yes, Melissa, I do get that impression. So then I suppose the point might be that pro-life energy should at least in part be dedicated to teaching on the idea that if you can’t envision your boyfriend being the father of your child, you shouldn’t be sleeping with him. This then gets into the whole terrain of sex before marriage (or preferably not) and talking about that is, if you can believe it, harder than talking against abortion. I find, anyway.