No choice?

I recently came across a distressing opinion column in the LA Times–in it, the author talks about the decision he and his wife made to abort two of their four babies 15 weeks into the pregnancy.

At first the column reminded me of another piece a few years ago in the NY Times about a “selective reduction”. At the time I marveled that someone would share her own experience in aborting two of her three babies–abortion is rarely something women are proud of, particularly when the decision is made for such seemingly selfish reasons (the author complained about how should would have to move to Manhattan and buy vats of mayonnaise).

The LA Times column strikes a different note though. The author asserts several times that he and his wife were forced into this decision, and if they did not abort the two, he risked loosing his wife and all the babies. He makes an emotional and anecdotal argument for abortion.

There are many elements of the column that bother me–the author seems capable of great forsight looking down the road to the horrors to come because of the recent S.C. ruling on partial-birth abortion, but does not see the danger that can come from his own reasoning about eliminating babies with fetal abnormalities or autism. He further mischaracterizes the partial-birth abortion debate and mentions that these are midterm abortions that take place between 12-28 weeks, when they typically take place between 20 and 24 weeks (20 weeks is just 3 weeks shy of viability).

But probably what bothered me the most was the author’s logic. He contends that it was necessary, and even warns pro-lifers that one day they may face infertility and find themselves in the same situation. He seems blissfully unaware that he opened this door when he and his wife initially told the doctor they were ok with selective reduction. He indicates that a pro-life individual would lose his/her convictions when faced with a difficult situation.

As a pro-life woman who is familiar with the infertility struggle, I can say that convictions are formed before the difficult situation arises. And again I am struck by the irony of someone from the pro-choice side feeling as if there is no choice. Why does he insist that he had no choice in asserting his “right to choose”? Because so often pro-choice isn’t really about choice, it is about abdicating and refusing to face responsibility. There is always a choice, sometimes it is made in advance, and sometimes it isn’t easy–but there is always a choice.