Friday, August 18, 2006

An Open Letter to Patty Murray

Reproduced below is a letter recently sent to Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) in respose to Senator Murray's defense of her vote against the Child Custody Protection Act:

Senator Murray,

Sadly, I believe you are misinformed and your approach, not the Child Custody Protection Act, is what endangers the health of women.

If your statistic is correct, then two-thirds of women who do not involve their parents are not victims of abuse (from their parents.) They are, however, victims of abuse by a system that readily channels them into the choice of abortion as the preferred option to a challenging pregnancy. This two-thirds of women then face life long serious physical and emotional consequences including depression, suicidality, drug and alcohol abuse and spiraling self-esteem and self-confidence which negatively impacts their future life success.

I don't need statistics to tell me that this is true because I have worked with these women for the last twelve years. These women tell me about the so-called "counseling" provided by "family planning clinics" which was nothing more than disinformation regarding potential health consequences for themselves as well as development of their child, along with no real help toward making any other choice but the choice of abortion.

Many young women express fear of disclosing pregnancy to their parents and even say such things as "My parents would kill me." This can reflect a typical adolescent fear with no actual basis in reality. What teens need at that point is specific help in telling parents and enlisting their support. After the initial shock, most parents step in with support for their daughter. This bonds the family and results in growth for the teen as well as family relationships.

There are safeguards of judicial bypass already provided by law for those teens in truly dangerous abuse situations. What we do not need is intrusion into the parent / teen relationship by teachers, counselors, other school officials and clinic personnel by providing transportation across state lines so minor teens can obtain abortions without parent knowledge or consent. This is clearly wrong-headed thinking.

Senator Murray, we do agree on the need for education which will significantly reduce teen pregnancies. Unfortunately, current public funding supports education by the very people who profit by teen sexual activity and abortion, most notably Planned Parenthood. This is a clear conflict of interest. I would urge you instead to read the attached study (The Current National Picture on Teen Pregnancy by Stan E. Weed, Ph.D., 1999, 4 pp, available through the US Conference of Catholic Bishops) regarding teen pregnancy statistics and sex education.

Democrats pride themselves on being open-minded. I would therefore respectfully request you read this article with an open mind. Any democrat who votes a consistent ethic of life is first in line to get my vote.

In the meantime, I will continue to pick up the pieces of those women who have been victimized by a so-called pro-choice culture.

Valerie J.


Jersey McJones said...

Abortion and the Civilized State
In Canada, where they have single-payor, universal healthcare, a woman can get an abortion just as she can get any other medical treatment ala the state. There are adjusted deductibles, of course, depending on the procedure, but there is also an understanding that abortion is not just an elective procedure. For many a woman abortion is an absolute necessity, depending on the circumstances.

Now, an anti-choicer may say, "no, the woman chose to get pregnant by default because she chose to have unprotected sex." But would they then say, "no, the skier chose to break his leg by skiing," or, "no, the driver chose to get in an accident by driving?" Of course not. When the skier or driver needs medical care because they skied or drove, and hurt themselves doing so, the care they receive is not elective, it is necessary. Unprotected sex is no more dangerous than driving a car or skiing a slope. And so, if a pregnancy results from said sex, and an abortion is needed thereafter, that abortion is no more elective than treatment for a broken leg from skiing or getting into a car accident.

Yesterday, a Quebec court ordered reimbursement for 45,000 Quebecois women who were billed out of pocket for their abortions over the past six years, as if the abortions were elective. They were not elective. Having an unwanted child is no different than hobbling around with an unwanted broken leg.

"The Association for Access to Abortion argued in court, among other things, that the extra-billing was unconstitutional, and the Quebec government was acting in bad faith because abortions are covered by the Quebec Health Insurance Act."

That's how a truly civilized society deals with abortion.


Mary E. said...

JMJ -- I understand you are trying to get some traffic to your site but your article has nothing to do with the topic of this post. Please don't post whole articles to the comments section again, especially if they have no relevance to the original post.