In his book Life’s Dominion, Ronald Dworkin  writes, “…we care intensely what other people do about abortion and euthanasia, and with good reason, because those decisions express a view about the intrinsic value of all life and therefore bear on our own dignity as well(238).” He further states that, “We think that an unwarranted or frivolous abortion shows contempt for all human life, a diminished respect for everyone, and we want everyone to die, when they have a choice, in a way we think shows self respect, because that bell, too, tolls for us(239).”   

      In February of 1988, my wife and I were overjoyed to learn that we were, once again, to become parents. After an initial examination the doctor (at my wife's insistence) scheduled an ultra sound for the following month. I went with my wife, as I had for both of our other children, to a small community hospital where the procedure was performed. The technician gathered information, measuring body length, bone length and density, and the diameter of the head to determine the gestation of the pregnancy and the health of the baby. Imagine our shock, when we discovered that we were to be blessed with not just one but two babies. In the weeks that followed another ultra sound was scheduled, this time at the UConn Medical Center, in an effort to better monitor the pregnancy. Here the equipment would be more sophisticated, images would be larger and much clearer, more precise or succinct measurements could be taken, and even the sex of the babies might be determined. Our joy was to soon be coupled with apprehension and fear. When the Doctor reviewed the results of the test, he explained that there appeared to be a discrepancy in size between the two babies, and my wife, Dianne, would have to come back for another ultra sound in a month. Little did we know that this would be just the beginning, over the next thirty weeks, of many trips to the Hospital. There would be another fifteen or so ultra sounds, an amniocentesis, and a battery of other tests performed before the birth or our babies.(It was later determined that the discrepancy was due to a twin to twin transfusion.)

         While I always believed that abortion was morally wrong, I was indifferent. I felt that it was a woman’s body and she had a right to make her own decision. Now, I believe that the decision she makes is about much more than just her own body. It is one that involves the life of another human being. I used to think that abortion should be legal. I now feel that only when the mother’s life is truly threatened or when she will experience severe, permanent, physical injury is there justification for the killing of the most innocent of all human life.    

           A very common argument of the pro-choice movement is that it is a woman’s body and she should have the right to choose what she does with it. These can only be grounds for a valid argument if you believe that an abortion only ends a pregnancy; that the thing you are destroying in this process is not a person. I cannot understand how, given all the information available, someone could possible come to that conclusion. In the Lancet, author Thomas Rizzo writes, that by using ultrasonography it is known that the human fetus make movements from seven weeks of gestation onward, and between the eighth and fifteenth week they begin breathing, swallowing and sucking(328). The fact that a baby moves and breathes may not be enough to convince some that this is life, but Cathelijne F. van Heteren, of the University Medical Centre Nijmegen's Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology writes in an article for the Lancet, that scientists studying fetal learning and memory have done research that suggests that there are short-term and long-term memory functions before birth(356). In recent years, medical intervention for the treatment of babies in utero has steadily increased. This treatment now is much more than just prenatal care. Through the use of ultrasounds, defects can be diagnosed early on in a pregnancy. In an article for Feminist Studies, author Monica Casper reports that the use of fetal surgery is being used to treat a variety of structural defects such as, “congenital diaphragmatic hernia, sacrococcygeal teratoma, chylothorax, hydronephrosis, cystic adenomatoid malformation, and urinary tract obstructions(234).” Surgeons in these cases do not have just one patient but two. During an operation both the pregnant woman and her fetus are intensively monitored using an arsenal of imaging and recording technologies(235).(An amazing e-mail and photo) This makes the argument that life begins in utero much more compelling. I use to believe that "women’s choice" was a valid argument but now I see that it has many flaws. The decision a woman makes is not only about her body. She is making a decision that will affect the life and well being of another person.  

            Sadly, the general public has become very apathetic when it comes to the abortion issue. There seems to be two fairly small groups of people fighting on each side of this issue. Those in the middle could care less. As in so many other instances, the silent majority seems to say it does not affect my life; why should I become involved. The pro-choice movement on the other hand seems to have become successful in creating an image that abortion is the legal fundamental right of all women. Outspoken proponents for their cause have been able to work hard promoting their position, and political leaders, bend to their outspoken rhetoric for unlike the apathetic middle class (whose indifference is often times reflected at the polls) proponents of this cause do get out the vote. One can only question if common sense, right and wrong are at the crux of legislation legalizing abortion, or in a day and age when elected office is becoming a profession rather than an avocation is political survival at the core of the decisions being made. Unfortunately, to the other extreme, we have the unborn child, the victim, who has no voice. At this point in time, abortion is legal and not viewed as the killing of a baby, even though the law is not entirely consistent in the way it measures life when it concerns the unborn child. In 1995, Diana Brahams wrote that the Court of Appeal Criminal Division in the UK held that, “murder or manslaughter could be committed where unlawful injury was deliberately caused to a child in utero or to a pregnant woman whose child was born alive and existed independently before dying as a consequence of the injuries inflicted in utero(Lancet 1622).” In 1996, Norra Macready reported that a Wisconsin woman who was charged with attempted murder by drinking alcohol throughout her pregnancy, including the day she gave birth(Student BMJ 359). ). In Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes, the author sites a Tennessee judge who ruled that seven frozen embryos were already “children” and granted custody of them to their mother(Tribe 235). Court decisions made in California regarding drug use suggested that a woman’s conduct during pregnancy may result in her loss of custody after the baby is born(236).  Ronald Reagan, on a proposed bill that would make abortion available on demand, wrote of the inconsistency in California laws. To his staff attorneys, Reagan posed the following hypothetical question. In that by a vote that was virtually unanimous in the California legislature, a law was passed making it murder for anyone found guilty of abusing a pregnant woman to the extent that when doing so it caused the “death of her unborn child,” and that another law was passed permitting a man to will his estate to his wife, children and any children yet to be born of his marriage, (giving the unborn child property rights protected by law) would, under the proposed abortion bill, a woman who takes the life of her unborn child and inherits not half but all of her husbands estate be guilty of murder for financial gain?” The response given was that they were glad he wasn’t asking the questions on the bar exam(New York Times, Safire 38). It appears that the same laws which finds the life of an unborn child worth protecting will allow, this same life to be snuffed out easily and with so little effort, because it is thought to be an inconvenience, an unwanted occurrence, a kink in one’s life style. I can no longer support the view that an abortion can be legally obtained under the conditions that exist today. A law that would allow for the elimination of a life with so little consideration is an unjust law. It opens a Pandora’s box and invites such things as euthanasia. Will one day the same reasoning apply to the older population who may be looked upon as sapping our resources, requiring care which can kink our lifestyle, using up precious little space with “nothing to contribute,” and often times no voice to be heard or no one to speak in their defense. As we sow, so shall we reap?

      The laws that make an abortion so easily obtained are not etched in stone. Public opinion does seem to be changing, in a poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times in June of 2000 only forty three percent expressed specific support for Roe v. Wade. This compared to fifty six percent in 1991(Baird 14). In an article for the Social Science Journal, a mid-sized southeastern university study did not find that a majority of students approved abortion in most circumstances. This was contrary to other findings by Hollis and Morris in 1992 and Wright and Rogers in 1987(Carlton 622). As the moral values of our country improve and the value placed on life regains the importance that it deserves these laws can be change. The most recent decision on Roe v. Wade was by a 5-4 vote and with abortion being used as a litmus test during judicial confirmation hearings this vote is not secure(Katsh 131).      

      Every reasonable person must make the effort to, become involved, look beyond themselves, look at the evidence before them, and take a stand. Is an unborn child a person? If it is not, then abortion should be legal and the decision should be a private matter made between the mother, her family, and doctor. If an unborn child is a person, and I believe it is, then abortion should not be practiced the way it is today, used by some as a means of birth control and others a sheer convenience. There should be laws to protect the unborn just as there are laws to protect the rights of any person.

Dedication: