Abortion Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

I CAN TELL YOU WHAT TOMORROW WILL LOOK LIKE

Photo by Manny Becerra on Unsplash

Sepsis. Maybe you’ve heard of it, maybe not.

An email from a nurse friend recently sent me back down the rabbit hole of abortion memories. She wrote of another nurse who, after minor surgery in her own hospital, got sepsis that took, first, both of her hands, then her feet, then her life. Sepsis is not for the faint-hearted.

Yet it’s how millions of women died in this country alone before Roe v Wade made sterile abortion care widely available.

I am a survivor of one of those pre-Roe abortions. Performed on a kitchen table in 1956 by a sleazy guy who probably hand’t bothered to wash his hands. Did I care? Well, yes — but the issue was to end an unwanted pregnancy resulting from a workplace rape and this was the only option.

The most common method of back-alley abortions involved insertion of a straw (or worse) into the vagina, which would precipitate bleeding and eventual discharge of fetal tissue. It seems barbaric today, but few people today understand the desperation of a woman who needs to end a pregnancy — often compounded by rape, incest, abuse, you name it. You cannot name it, though, unless you are that woman.

Photo by Myriam Zilles on Unsplash

Unsanitary conditions lead to sepsis. The advent of medication abortion (along with general improvements in reproductive care overall) virtually eliminated the risk of sepsis when a woman needs to end an unwanted pregnancy. The last half century saw a world of progress.

But today? The crazies who would dictate what a woman may or may not do with her own body are also dictating to physicians who, in many states, now have to consider losing their license or going to jail while they’re considering how best to treat a patient.

Not even pharmacists are exempt. The super-safe and simple dispensation of pills for medication abortion it also in the crosshairs of the crazies.

Images of all those women who died of sepsis — because desperation abortions cause sepsis — might seem dim to you. Not to me.

I am a survivor. An incredibly lucky survivor who lived to marry and have healthy, much-wanted children. But I have not forgotten the unlucky ones. If we do not fight hard, daily, everywhere for restoration of reproductive freedom, I know what the future will look like.

Photo by Jez Timms on Unsplash

Solving the Abortion Rights Problem

A SIMPLE, EFFECTIVE PLAN ACCEPTABLE TO PRO-CHOICE AND ANTI-ABORTION SIDES ALIKE

Photo by James Wainscoat on Unsplash

I don’t know why nobody’s thought of this before.

Recent news of the Florida Solution (isn’t Florida coming up with great policies right and left?) to its peacock problem suggests the perfect answer to the testy abortion debates. Universal Vasectomy!

(We will set aside the peahen here. Peahens have never had access to reproductive choice so what do they know? We could ask growing numbers of women in choice-less states. But it’s mostly the peacocky guys making laws anyway, and they pay little or no attention to the reality of us peahenny women.)

Clearly, if Universal Vasectomy were put into place the whole abortion problem would go away, and women could set about accessing the reproductive care that they — and presumably peahens — deserve. 

This policy, as described in a New York Times article, “would allow peacocks to continue acting like dominant males, displaying their dazzling feathers and assembling their harems, though they could no longer fertilize eggs.” Does this make sense, or what?

The same issue of The Times carried another article which sums up the need for UV: An 89 year old man voting against Ohio’s sneaky attempt to restrict abortion was quoted thusly: “If men was having babies there wouldn’t be none of this nonsense.”

OK, how is this going to work, you ask. Easy peasey.

All we have to do is set up a national trap-and-release program for all males of the species. Each will then be given the choice — imagine! individual choice! — of either assuming full responsibility, in perpetuity, for any fertilized egg that may result from any future sexual adventure for the rest of his natural life — or, Snip! 

There will admittedly be costs involved, for things like reimbursement to physicians administering the simple procedure (I suggest that thousands of women MDs who have endured harassment or worse will eagerly sign up for the program.) Solution: take it out of the defense budget. Who’s going to notice a few billion there? Especially after the need for dazzling- feathers displays concurrenty diminishes, a peripheral benefit. 

Once this innovative program goes into effect in the U.S., countries around the globe will recognize it as widely satisfying and at the least cost-effective, and quickly follow.

Voila! World peace.

I rest my case.

Should the pope open a WordPress blog?

Photo by Ashwin Vaswani on Unsplash

I seldom agree with the good Pope Francis, although we do share a name. (It’s spelled with an ‘i’ for the Franks of the world; Frances is for the Frans & Frannies. This is an educational essay.)

Our disagreements include:

The pontiff would have just about every pregnant woman in the world carry that fetus to term, without a nod toward what else is going on with that woman, her life, her health or her concern for a fetus that’s not viable — all things that seem worth considering before we just ban abortion, period. He and I do read the same Bible, which, by the way, does not mention abortion.

The other cause with which I am deeply involved, the right to control one’s final days when one is near death, is opposed at every turn by Pope Francis and his otherwise perfectly respectable church. Happy side note: In California we have the End of Life Option Act, which was signed into law in 2015 by deeply religious Catholic Gov. Jerry Brown. Gov. Brown opined that he didn’t know if he’d want to make such a choice — using legal Medical Aid in Dying — himself, but didn’t think he had the right to deny others such a choice. And bless his Jesuit heart.

So I follow the goings-on of the aging pontiff with a degree of fellow-Christian skepticism. But here he is, in a recent New York Times, urging compassion for the aged. I would definitely be in agreement with the Vatican on this one; surely we can all get on board for compassion.

As the story evolved, though, the pontiff kept throwing in phrases like “spending time with the old forces people to slow down, turn off their phones and follow a deeper clock;” or “there is a gift in being elderly, understood as abandoning oneself to the care of others.” Full disclosure: I am older than the pope. This is admittedly VERY old, but such is life. Seeing photos of Francis in a wheelchair when I’ve just finished a three-mile walk around the hills of San Francisco evokes a degree of compassion from yours truly.

I just resist giving The Old a blanket bad rap of total decrepitude. Some of us (not me) are still running corporations or making scientific discoveries. Some of us (not me) are still running marathons. Some of us are agitating for reproductive justice, end-of-life choice and world peace — all of which are compassionate endeavors.

Maybe the pope should start a WordPress blog?