New Page 1

	Sign In Sign-Up

Chose This!
Sylvia Cochran - Staff Writer
<home>

We live in a society where pro-choice is the battle cry of many (politicians included), whereas pro-life is the square turned boogeyman attitude of seeming oppressors who would (allegedly) like to see women barefoot and pregnant, no matter what. The most commonly cited reasons for being in the pro-choice camp are usually “life of the mother endangered“, “pregnancy by incest/rape” and “fetal defect”. Many a proponent of abortions on demand will fall back on these cases to justify her/his stand.

Yet, what is it about “fetal defects” that causes so many a woman to allow a physician to play god and take matters of life and death into her/his gloved hands? Why does calculation suddenly replace maternal feelings? Why does a baby suddenly become a fetus? Barbara Katz Rothman refers to this process as the "tentative pregnancy", brought on by the leaps and bounds by which medical advances have allowed prospective parents to become privy to the possibility of a birth defect early on in pregnancy. (1)

Some blame society. While many support, either financially or through volunteer work, the Special Olympics, and give to Jerry‘s Kids whenever the event arises, these same folks oftentimes consider it abjectly irresponsible to bring a child into the world that may suffer from a birth defect, or even a disability. Yet, is it not true that our laws protect individuals with disabilities? Is it not true, that discrimination is frowned upon, and parents teach their children early on not to tease the child who sits in a wheelchair? So why the double standard? Why is it ok to discriminate against a child prior to birth, yet not after? The truth is that no child should be denied birth simply because of her/his disability.

Further, it has been reported that many a woman who has chosen to abort a child that is thought to have a birth defect, does not experience the closure, peace, and subsiding of pain for she had hoped. Instead, many a woman finds herself riddled with unresolved grief, ever-present guilt and bouts of second-guessing. Granted, she could have saved herself (and her child) times of pain, suffering, possibly surgeries, heartache, etc. Yet, are these no natural parts of motherhood and also of childhood? Which mother and child are exempt from pain (physical or emotional), immune to the need for extensive surgery, heartache, etc.? Not one!

In the words of Nancy Valko, registered nurse and president of Missouri Nurses for Life, who grieved the loss of her five months old Downs-Syndrome daughter: "Karen taught me: That life isn't fair - to anyone. That self-pity can be an incapacitating disease. That God is better at directing my life than I am. That there are more caring people in the world than I knew. That Down Syndrome is an inadequate description of a person. That I am not "perfect" either, just human. That asking for help and support is not a sign of weakness. That every child is truly a gift from God. That joy and pain can be equally deep. That you can never lose when you love. That every crisis contains opportunity for growth. That sometimes the victory is in trying rather than succeeding. That every person has a special purpose in life. That I needed to worry less and celebrate more." (2)

For those who still need further proof that aborting a “defective” child is not a mercy killing, consider those souls, found in defective bodies, who were destined for greatness and who impacted the world as we know it in spite of or maybe even because of their disability:
Beethoven - deaf.
Helen Keller - deaf and blind
Ray Charles - blind
Louis Braille - severely impaired vision
John Milton - blind
Homer - blind
Stephen Hawking - paralyzed
Charles Dickens - epilepsy
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - epilepsy
Alexander Pope - stunted growth, disabled
George Gordon, Lord Byron - disabled

Those who, though not famous in the eyes of the world, impact lives daily by their various gifts, skills, and just “being there“

Both sides of this issue appear logical. The pro-choice side seeks to make intellectually sound points; yet, it fails in the long-term assessment of the situation. Who says that a mother cannot/should not raise a child with an abnormality? Who says that it would be better for the child to be killed than to live? Where did this glimpse into the child’s future originate? In the end, there is either the death of a child, of a future, of hope and of dreams left undreamed.... or her/his life, full of possibility, growth, heartache and triumph...choose wisely, choose this! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Barbara Katz Rothman , Tentative Pregnancy, 1993

(2) http://www.catholicexchange.com/vm/index...

Originally published at Suite101 at http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/9653/107876

You can reach Ms. Cochran at: sylviacochran@ucd.net