Steve Chapman gave us some of the pertinent details in the travails of Jane Doe, the pregnant Central American young woman too often referred to as a “girl” (“Forced childbirth or voluntary abortion?” Tribune, Thursday, October 26th, 2017) and compared her case to the practice in China of forced abortions and coerced sterilizations. He is correct to compare the US unfavorably with China, for all three practices are a matter of someone imagining he (it’s almost never a woman claiming she should decide) knows what’s best for a female, or all females, of childbearing age.
A veteran Chicago Police Officer, I have worked as a clinic guard and seen firsthand the anger of the zealots who cannot dissuade a woman trying to control her own reproductive destiny. They turned their rage on me too, sending me ostensibly caring cards, but some with vague threats. Such Christian compassion did one man display that he stepped on my foot and punched me! Perhaps he imagined he was Jesus at the money-changers’ table? He fled before the on-duty officers arrived, so he got away with it, thirty-some years back, and perhaps he’s already had to sit in judgment for it: I can hope.
Yet why did Chapman not mention who, or what entity, was ready to step up for the potential baby should the Trump juggernaut have been successful in forcing the young female human to go to term? He noted none because there is no such animal.
Did they demand to know the father and sue him as the at-fault party for the legal and medical expenses the United States would have ponied up? Some man had a part in this, but because they can’t see him they willfully drop the matter and focus their laser-like attention on the pregnancy.
What about the assumed pregnancy caused by then-Rep. Tim Murphy (resigned Republican from Pennsylvania), who insisted his mistress get an abortion? It’s pretty convenient, isn’t it, to be a man and demand women do what you say. This cretin blamed the texts on his staff, but at least he resigned, though another anti-choice man’splainer must surely be waiting in the wings.
Sometimes the fervent few provide diapers and baby clothes for the expectant one’s offspring. But they don’t they put themselves in the picture for the long haul, they don’t provide medical care if the infant is born damaged or addicted, they don’t help the mother get clean and stay sober, nor do they help her get an education and a worthwhile job. Do they provide the child with a good education, vaccinations, or nutritious meals? Warm coats and hats in wintry regions? Books? All for the child’s entire life? They don’t. Why not, because God will provide? Does He always, now? Most assuredly he does not.
What they did in Jane Doe’s case was send the top Health & Human Services official (purportedly picked to lead the Office of Refugee Resettlement, though his anti-choice political leanings were said to be the deciding factor), E. Scott Lloyd, a zealot, to Jane Doe, where they led her to believe they were taking her for the procedure; then, once at the “clinic” (read: trap) merely prayed over her. Because whatever the prayers that young Latina woman had, they weren’t good enough for her jailers – only their words would make a difference!
Also relevant: Lloyd writes for anti-female journals that claim contraceptives cause abortions, nevermind the solid science that proves the proper and consistent use of contraceptives reduces the need for abortions to nearly nil, and that tax dollars are being used to trick people into abortions. That is highly doubtful, and tax dollars sure are not going to help give those children women keep to have full lives, and when they bring to justice the men who tricked them into believing they were happy for a pregnancy, the garnished wages are never enough for that idyllic happy life. Lloyd claimed contraception often fails, without any citations; references are for nerds, I guess, not the fervent faithful.
Obviously Lloyd and Murphy and their ilk were and would be okay with Jane Doe’s lack of choices, to have her returned with the unwanted child to her country of origin (maybe while boasting, “She changed her mind! We got her to have the baby! We saved a life!”), where she might hope for the best, perhaps, but where she said that she would assuredly suffer more abuse, from her parents and the system as well. How much does one have to hate immigrants, to drive an involuntary almost-mother back to the country where she was impregnated, where her own parents don’t support her? Maybe she was raped along the way to the Land of the Free – that doesn’t weigh on their consciences?
It costs a lot of money to raise a child. Those who are anti-abortion and who don’t put their money where we find these hungry mouths and minds, who don’t let any woman avert a pregnancy before it implants, they should be laughed at and dismissed, not given ever more power to control us. They are wrong and they must be stopped.
These pro-life-on-MY-say-so types, they sure want to make sure America has fewer anchor babies, don’t they.