Marysia's blog

Elise Hilton is the mother of an intellectually and psychiatrically disabled young woman who was recently raped. As Meghan discussed in a recent post, women with disabilities are at pronounced risk for sexual abuse and assault.

It fell upon Hilton to decide whether or not her daughter should take Plan B emergency contraception. As LifeSiteNews.com reports, Hilton decided against Plan B for her daughter on the grounds that the drug may "take the life of an innocent child."

But up to date, correct scientific information about Plan B probably could have saved Hilton a lot of her agony over this decision and alleviated her fears of endangering a very young grandchild. Levonorgestrel type emergency contraceptives work entirely before conception. In fact, they have no possible mechanism for hindering implantation or otherwise working after sperm meets egg.

How often do rape victims and their loved ones suffer unnecessarily because of the myths out there-spread by prolifers and prochoicers alike-about emergency contraception and how it does and doesn't work? How many unintended pregnancies and abortions happen?

We wish Hilton and her daughter healing. We call for people to rise up against the rape and abuse of human beings with disabilities and bring an end to it. And we will work all the more to replace misinformation about Plan B with the facts that rape survivors and their loved ones need and deserve to know in the midst of a crisis.

The editor and publisher of On the Issues Magazine, Merle Hoffman, has been involved in providing abortions for over 40 years. In Where the Reality of Abortion Resides: Intimate Wars, she bears witness to

...so much vulnerability: legs spread wide apart; the physician crouched between white, black, thin, heavy, but always trembling, thighs; the tube sucking the fetal life from their bodies.

A poignant thread runs through so many of her clients' stories.

"I would want to keep this pregnancy, if only…" I learned that it is in the "if only" that the reality of abortion resides...

If only I wasn't fourteen.

If only I was married.

If only my husband had another job.

If only I didn't give birth to a baby six months ago.

If only I didn't just get accepted to college.

If only I didn't have such difficult pregnancies.

If only I wasn't in this lousy marriage.

If only I wasn't forty-two.

If only my boyfriend wasn't on drugs.

If only I wasn't on drugs.

If only . . .

Yet Hoffman concludes:

The act of abortion positions women at their most powerful, and that is why it is so strongly opposed by many in society...the assumption -- the myth -- that women should not be trusted with this ultimate power.

But Hoffman's perspective does not leave any room for the very real motives for the stance that All Our Lives-takes against abortion. We trust women to exercise power-with, nonviolent power. Power-over, for people of any gender, is another matter. However, we don't agree to begin with that abortion "positions women at their most powerful."

I do not question Hoffman's intent to help women in difficult situations. But I hear in this claim a strange reminder of certain antiabortionists who also believe that abortion is women's "ultimate power."

Unlike Hoffman, they take this as the ultimate reason to oppose abortion. They harbor a virulent suspicion and hatred of women who dare to exercise any kind of power. Let alone any power over life and death of the sort that men have traditionally and territorially staked out for themselves. This is precisely why they can behave as if life begins at conception and ends at birth without becoming so ashamed of themselves, they crawl under a rock.

Even conceding (however briefly, for the sake of argument) that women are at their most powerful in the decision to have an abortion: what does this say about the severity and gravity of the constraints that still bind women's lives? If abortion is an exercise of women's "ultimate power"-isn't that a cause for weeping? And isn't that a cause for ensuring that no woman and child/as few women and children as possible ever end up in that position?

All Our Lives opposes abortion-and tries to build substantive alternatives-because we believe it is so often a sign and symptom of women's powerlessness.

Powerlessness to prevent unintended pregnancies, powerlessness to get through and beyond difficult pregnancies.

It is not fear or mistrust of women's power that moves us. It is sorrow and distress and outrage that women are so robbed of power, on such a massive scale, in such an intimate, painful, lifetaking way.

Michelle Duggar has miscarried her 20th child with her husband Jim, according to People.com

I cannot help but wonder how many women with pregnancy-related medical risks end up conceiving and losing babies because they feel, or someone else feels, G*d doesn't want them to use family planning.

At the same time: condolences to this family, as to any other, who loses a child.

All Our Lives has repeatedly-and civilly, respectfully- attempted to dialogue with both prolife and prochoice groups so that we can actively cooperate with them on abortion-reducing measures. With prolifers, we have mostly tried to address widespread myths about contraception that deter support for it. With prochoicers, we have mostly expressed our solidarity on matters like voluntary family planning and our willingness to bring the message to constituencies they have not reached.

Not that we haven't gotten any positive responses-but the negative, dismissive ones have outnumbered them. We won't mention any names, but here are but two examples.

• We try to share the news of our "Family Planning Freedom Is Prolife" presentation on the social media page of a prolife group that professes neturality on "artificial" contraception, even though we known many members who support it. Our post is swiftly removed, but the administrator gives no reason for its removal-nor are we violating any policy known or accessible to us. To test whether this was some flukish glitch, we post our announcement again. Once again, it is swiftly deleted.
• We join an initiative devoted to action on a measure indispensible to alleviating the root cause of abortion, but does not itself involve abortion. We are the only prolife group involved, but we have found nothing in this initiative's policies that suggests we are not permitted to join. Some members welcome us warmly, but others feel so strongly that this is a prochoice-only cause and a prochoice-only space, we are summarily ejected from the campaign.

We won't stop trying to network. The human cost of *not* striving for cooperative action is just too high.

But if you're someone who has censored and blown us off already: kindly please reconsider. And if you're someone who is inclined to censor and blow us off in the future: kindly please stop it already.

Let's talk. What do we all have to lose if we *don't*? More than that, what do we all have to gain?

As a national debate rages in the US over whether contraception-something accepted as a human right in much of the world- should be defined as essential preventive care and thus made more affordable....I am heartsick about the news that Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar of reality TV fame are expecting their 20th child-even though, during her previous pregnancy, she developed preeclampsia, a dangerous rise in blood pressure and the baby was premature.

No, I'm not heartsick because I think I have the right to tell people not to have large families. It's because this couple uses their family life to tout the pernicious ideology of Quiverfull, which calls for the abandonment of all efforts to forego or even space pregnancies, even natural family planning. Birth control is conflated and equated with abortion.

While touting itself as the very height of us-against-the-world G*dliness and virtue, Quiverfull denies women much of anything but submission to endless pregnancies. Anything else is selfishness, wickedness, and defiance of G*d, hatred of children and life itself.

Even for the countless women like me, for whom pregnancy is or would be a matter of serious health risks to ourselves and/or our babies. No, we cannot try to protect with family planning our very lives and those of any children we might otherwise conceive, or the loved ones we would leave behind if we died.

Granted that the Duggars' TV show is somewhat in the dubious entertainment tradition of the freak show, and only a tiny minority of the population actually practices Quiverfull. But Quiverfull expresses and perpetuates much more broadly held attitudes that, for example, are deployed to sabotage expanded contraceptive coverage: "Oh, you're saying that pregnancy is a DISEASE," or "What next, manicures and pedicures?" or "But contraception is abortion!"

Vyckie Garrison is a refugee from Quiverfull who warns of its wider cultural influence. She talks about about the ideology's breathtaking trivialization and denial regarding pregnancy-related medical risks and her own submission to more than one life-threatening pregnancy.

And if a woman or baby dies? So what. It's G*d's will. It's a martyrdom any woman should be happy to undergo. If she balks at it, why, she is a monster of narcissism.

For me, this is one heavy instance of the personal-is-political.

Yeah, monstrous narcissism fully explains why, some two decades ago, I made the most prayerful decision to have a tubal ligation, with my husband's full support. While I do not regret giving life to our daughter in the least, I had already undergone one unplanned pregnancy due to failure of a conscientiously chosen and correctly used reversible family planning method.

I did not go through that pregnancy out of obedience to some ovarian-destiny duty decreed and inflicted by some nasty Sky Daddy G*d. I resisted abortion-which a doctor tried to pressure on me- because I did not want to take my daughter's life. Going through with the pregnancy was the only way to accomplish that end. if there had been some other way, I would have sought it out.

I had known since developing severe endocrine problems in childhood that reproduction would be tricky for me, but I had a lot of "wombs-on" learning during those nine months about just profoundly incompatible my body and life were with pregnancy.

I developed hyperemesis gravidarum-severe and unremitting vomiting, much better known and treated today than it was back then-which greatly complicated the management of my endocrine problems, dehydrated me and unbalanced my blood electrolytes, and threatened my daughter as well. I developed preeclampsia. I went through 52 hours of complicated labor. My baby and I were in and out of the hospital for much of the pregnancy. The whole time I lived in dread and panic for myself and the baby, and for my husband and other loved ones should they lose either or both of us.

And then I lived in dread and panic that such an ordeal might happen again, no matter how much my spouse and I tried to guard against it. As much as I loved being our daughter's mother, as much as I loved and felt a responsibility for all children I also knew that I did not ever want to conceive again, in part because of my beliefs regarding abortion. I did not want to end up in a situation where I might desperately think of it, or where it might become necessary to save my life.

The answer that arrived was tubal ligation. I made very sure beforehand that this is what I really wanted to do. As a disability rights advocate with disabilities, I was all too aware of the shameful history of sterilization abuse against "my kind." But voluntary sterilization is something else altogether. For some women with disabilities, it is quite literally a lifesaver.

Unfortunately, though we had a health plan, it specifically excluded this surgery, even in cases of medical necessity. We were already struggling financially, but the alternative to the surgery was much worse. The month I had it, we skipped paying our rent and got behind. It took us six years of even further financial struggle to pay off the hospital bill.

Our health plan was able to exclude tubal ligation because of a cultural climate that, like Quiverfull, even if not so blatantly, dismisses the right of all women to seek or not seek out conception as they see fit, and that minimizes the very real medical danger of pregnancy for so many women and babies.

Though I am not a prostelytizer or very sectarian, I believe in G*d and try to live out G*d's Love in and through my life. But I can't believe for one moment that such indifference and hostility to sacred human beings-whether on the part of Quiverfull or something less intense but still problematic-is G*d's will or "respect for life." And I hurt and fear for those who do mistake those things for G*d's will and respect for life. Including Michelle Duggar. I worry about her unborn baby, too.

Most of all, I worry about what will happen, so unnecessarily and preventably, if the opponents of expanded contraceptive access get their way with this country. How much death and suffering will be on their hands?