Jan 26, 2006

"Fight for these human lives" [LINK]

Second of two:

Kimberly Tsatsarones offers several situations a woman may face that would justify abortion. While there may well be such scenarios, the ones she offers are troubling at best.

She appears to be suggesting that a baby who is certain to be taken away from a drug-addicted mother by the state and suffer drug withdrawal may be better off dead than adopted. If the suggestion is that the mother would bring the baby to term only if she were certain to retain custody, that seems awfully selfish and irresponsible on her part.

It also seems odd to dwell on the case of a mentally ill woman who is manifestly unable to care for her children. It's worth noting that in exercising her right to "choose," the woman brought these children to term. But if anything, her compromised mental state may call for less choice on her part, and for greater vigilance by the state in ensuring her childrens' basic welfare. Why would her decision to abort be considered any more informed than her attempt to care for them?

Ms. Tsatsarones argues that abortion opponents often fail to consider such difficult situations. Perhaps so, but her letter exemplifies the converse: how abortion is routinely offered as the simple answer to so many difficult questions, much like the hammer that makes everything look like a nail.

As yet, no comments: