access to abortion
Thu, 2008-01-24 07:51
#1
access to abortion
Thu, 2008-01-24 07:51
#2
Nothing new here, but it's nice to see a pro-choice, pro-equal access to abortion piece in the MSM. Of course, there was a Margaret Somerville (blech!) article to counter this view.
From the article:
quote:
Yet our health system - from the politicians who oversee it to the policy makers and administrators through to the physicians and nurses who should provide non-judgmental care in public institutions - has largely failed women who seek abortions.The failings are many and varied, but revolve principally around lack of access to timely care.
In short, the arbitrary rules that have crept into the system in the past two decades make a mockery of the Supreme Court ruling.
[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080124.wpicard24/BN... to G&M article[/url]
Thu, 2008-01-24 07:55
#3
This is infuriating:
quote:
In Canada, fewer than one in five hospitals perform abortions. One province, Prince Edward Island, offers no abortion services at all. Another, New Brunswick, has created unjustified (and likely unconstitutional) barriers to access, requiring referrals from two doctors.In the nation's capital, Ottawa, the wait time for an abortion stretches to six weeks, a perversity. (If there is one area of care for which there should be a wait-time guarantee, it is abortion, obviously a time-sensitive procedure.)
But the greatest injustice is that faced by Canadian women living outside major metropolitan centres, particularly those in the North.
Virtually every hospital and clinic offering abortion services in Canada is located within 150 kilometres of the U.S. border, and there is not a single abortion provider north of the Trans-Canada Highway in Ontario.
A woman in northern Manitoba, for example, needs to travel about 20 hours to access the nearest in-province abortion provider. For women in the three territories, travel can be an insurmountable obstacle.
Abortion should be covered by medicare but, in reality, it is expensive. If a woman opts for an abortion in a private clinic - something that is often necessary given the lack of service offered in hospitals - she must pay out of pocket and be reimbursed.
Thu, 2008-01-24 08:30
#4
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]This is infuriating:[/b]
Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander!
Thu, 2008-01-24 08:36
#5
remind
quote:
Originally posted by EmmaG:
[b]Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander![/b]
And why is emmaG here?
Thu, 2008-01-24 08:42
#6
Maysie
EmmaG, I understand you aren't a supporter of choice regarding access to abortion, a legal medical procedure in Canada.
However, let's walk through the realities of women who can't access abortion in PEI, since you're so proud to be from there:
* Travel to another province to have an abortion, which costs time, money and privacy. This is not an option for women marginalized by poverty and abuse. Are you proud of this?
* Travel to another province to have a later-term abortion (because of time issues) than may be safe for the woman, risking health complications and longer recovery time. Still smiling?
* Not being able to have an abortion, and instead becoming a parent when this is not the choice of the woman. If financial stresses are not an issue, what kind of belief system wants enforced motherhood? What kind of children will be raised under this doctrine? What emotional damage does the mother and child incur because of this? If financial stresses are an issue, then we have that layered onto enforced motherhood. Yes, that's sure something to be proud of.
I actually understand the anti-choice position on an intellectual level. And I sincerely mean it when I say if you're against abortion, don't have one, but nobody has the right to prevent another from making that choice.
Thu, 2008-01-24 09:30
#7
remind
With all due respect BCG, I do not believe there is an intellectual perspective to anti-choice positions.
Thu, 2008-01-24 09:37
#8
quote:
Originally posted by bigcitygal:
[b]EmmaG, I understand you aren't a supporter of choice regarding access to abortion, a legal medical procedure in Canada.However, let's walk through the realities of women who can't access abortion in PEI, since you're so proud to be from there:
* Travel to another province to have an abortion, which costs time, money and privacy. This is not an option for women marginalized by poverty and abuse. Are you proud of this?
* Travel to another province to have a later-term abortion (because of time issues) than may be safe for the woman, risking health complications and longer recovery time. Still smiling?
* Not being able to have an abortion, and instead becoming a parent when this is not the choice of the woman. If financial stresses are not an issue, what kind of belief system wants enforced motherhood? What kind of children will be raised under this doctrine? What emotional damage does the mother and child incur because of this? If financial stresses are an issue, then we have that layered onto enforced motherhood. Yes, that's sure something to be proud of.
I actually understand the anti-choice position on an intellectual level. And I sincerely mean it when I say if you're against abortion, don't have one, but nobody has the right to prevent another from making that choice.[/b]
Sorry, I shouldn't have even made the original comment. As per my understanding of this forum, I will be banned if I speak on this issue any further.
The only thing I'll say is that there is currently a 7 yr waiting list for adopting newborns on PEI. Why worry about potential emotional issues to children if you don't care if they are even born?
Thu, 2008-01-24 09:39
#9
quote:
Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander!
Don't want one don't have one but mind your own business.
Thu, 2008-01-24 09:42
#10
quote:
The only thing I'll say is that there is currently a 7 yr waiting list for adopting newborns on PEI.
Why don't you be clear - the waiting list is for perfect white babies. There are lots of unwanted children and babies in Canada looking for homes.
You should be banned for cheering for second class citizenship of women in this country. It's not progressive and it's trolling. And please, we all know you aren't sorry, you have been warned before and yet you keep posting crap.
Thu, 2008-01-24 09:50
#11
I think Emma's comments do constitute trolling. She should know better than to post something like that on this kind of board.
Scout, is there a place where I can recieve information about adoption, waiting lists, and the like?
Thu, 2008-01-24 10:00
#12
I don't know the link anymore but I'm sure you can google it that shows you profiles of children looking for families, one in particualr was from out West. It's disturbing, I don't know that I agree with posting kids profiles like that but I get the motivation is good hearted.
I don't understand how there can be a waiting list unless people only want perfect white children, there are lots of special needs kids, siblings, and non-white children looking for something better than groups homes or foster care.
Certainly there are issue with whites adopting children of colour but is foster care better? Do we have a solution that's better right now? Cause kids need loving homes right now, not when we figure a better way in a couple years.
Thu, 2008-01-24 10:18
#13
Does anyone have figures on waiting times and access for abortion compared to waiting times and access for other types of elective procedures?
Thu, 2008-01-24 10:22
#14
quote:
I don't understand how there can be a waiting list unless people only want perfect white children, there are lots of special needs kids, siblings, and non-white children looking for something better than groups homes or foster care.
My understanding of this, from friends who have adopted children with FASD, is that the more relevant line is the child's age. You have to wait a long time for an infant, but there are plenty of 5-year-olds in government care.
This is all second-hand, so take it as you will. I have never seen formal stats on the subject.
Thu, 2008-01-24 10:31
#15
remind
Words from Joyce regarding this article:
quote:
This is indeed a good article, but whenever I read something so negative, I cringe a little. Yes we have many access problems in Canada, but things really are not that bad! We have it GREAT compared to almost any other country in the world. And there's actually a number of inaccuracies in Picard's article.Hospital access may have decreased over the years, but clinics have picked up the slack and more. Access has improved substantially since 1988, with 45% of abortions now done in clinics compared to 7% in 1988. All provinces with clinics pay in full for abortions at clinics, except for New Brunswick, Quebec being the latest victory. This means very, very few women actually have to pay for their abortions. Further, there is now a fund run by National Abortion Federation to help women with travel expenses or those not covered by Medicare. Women in the territories have their travel expenses covered by the government. The wait time problem in Ottawa has been fixed - the gov't increased the clinic's funding. In some provinces (eg., BC, Quebec) women ARE reimbursed if they must travel to the U.S. for an abortion. This is a tiny minority of abortions anyway. We do bady need mifepristone in Canada, but this is NOT a domestic political problem at all, it's due to the reluctance of foreign manufacturers to make an application to Health Canada.
[url=http://www.breadnroses.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21733&start=40]http://w...
Thu, 2008-01-24 11:13
#16
quote:
Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander!
Hey EmnaG. I support whatever you decide to do with your body because I believe that it is the individual's right to choose what gets done to their bodies. If you choose to carrry through with a pregnancy, I support you. If you choose to abort, I support you.
Thu, 2008-01-24 11:24
#17
quote:
Originally posted by EmmaG:
Sorry, I shouldn't have even made the original comment. As per my understanding of this forum, I will be banned if I speak on this issue any further.
Yes, you shouldn't have. And since it was trolling, after you've been warned quite a few times in the past, you'll be banned now. And if that hadn't been enough to make it clear, this rotten little quip seals it:
quote:
The only thing I'll say is that there is currently a 7 yr waiting list for adopting newborns on PEI. Why worry about potential emotional issues to children if you don't care if they are even born?
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:10
#18
quote:
Originally posted by Scout:
[b]
I don't understand how there can be a waiting list unless people only want perfect white children, there are lots of special needs kids, siblings, and non-white children looking for something better than groups homes or foster care.
[/b]
Most of the people looking to adopt kids are white, middle class couples who are unable to have kids on their own. And, yes, for msot of them, they are looking for newborn babies who look like them, are in good health and where the details of the father are known.
The nice university couple who accidentally get pregnant and decide to put the baby up for adoption: there will be a line a mile long of people who want to adopt that baby.
The drug addicted woman who gets prgnant and isn't sure who the father is: that's going to be a much tougher child to find a home for.
The child (not baby) in foster care with a learning disability and a history of behavioural problems: very, very difficult to find a home for them.
of course, the supply for babies in that first category is not nearly large enough to meet the demand. Lots of couples in such instances are now looking to China to adopt.
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:15
#19
Uh no kidding eh? [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:22
#20
remind
Think you are talking from some place other than your mouth, IJ. Your premise in the first paragraph is completely negated by your last statement.
.
quote:
Originally posted by Indiana Jones:
[b]Most of the people looking to adopt kids are white, middle class couples who are unable to have kids on their own. [i]And, yes, for msot of them, they are looking for newborn babies who look like them, are in good health and where the details of the father are known.[/i]...of course, the supply for babies [i]in that first category is not nearly large enough to meet the demand. Lots of couples in such instances are now looking to China to adopt.[/i][/b]
If they are looking to China to adopt, then the baby looking like them, the health of the baby and knnowing who the father, or indeed who the mother is, the criteria you suggested has NOT been met!
And I am beginning to see a pattern in your messaging in this thread and in your other ugly thread on Lakehead University.
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:30
#21
What I meant is taht people are going to China and elsewhere because there are so few babies in that first category, which would be the preference for most. But there aren't enough and many people don't want to wait years and years when they can get a healthy baby from China that much sooner.
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:32
#22
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b]
And I am beginning to see a pattern in your messaging in this thread and in your other ugly thread on Lakehead University.[/b]
Um, no. I posted what I did regarding adoption in response to teh psoter who said that abortion wasn't necessary in PEI because there were such long waiting lists to adopt. I was pointing out that while there ARE huge waiting lists to adopt certain children, there are still huge numbers of unwanted children in PEI and across Canada.
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:32
#23
I wonder if those in PEI who make the rules, are less concerned with perceived ethical issues around womens' choice, than increasing PEI's population at any cost.
I thought the conclusion of the G&M article summed up the situation well:
quote:
Between the legalization of abortion in 1969 and its complete decriminalization in 1988, women fought many tough battles.Yes, it is time to celebrate.
But there are many more battles to be fought to ensure choice is not only theoretical but real.
Too bad the [b]public[/b] is so complacent about this important issue. Thankfully, there is a new generation of women who are redefining the struggle.
(my bold)
Since post history is not accessible, one must take the word of others that "crap" has been posted - and if one wishes to cherry pick, perhaps a cache could be assembled and held for use against many of us.
I mention this only because, particularly after just introducing others to Babble, I felt that EmmaG could have been treated with less boorishness. It's one thing to told not to post in a thread, quite another to be gagged on all topics.
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:46
#24
quote:
Since post history is not accessible, one must take the word of others that "crap" has been posted - and if one wishes to cherry pick, perhaps a cache could be assembled and held for use against many of us.
Actually it’s easily available. 2 clicks away in fact. Just take a boo at anyone’s profile and voila! You can also search under their member number. Best to have the facts first eh? Then you don't look like a silly finger waving prat.
quote:
I mention this only because, particularly after just introducing others to Babble, I felt that EmmaG could have been treated with less boorishness. It's one thing to told not to post in a thread, quite another to be gagged on all topics.
Here we ago again with you bliter! Boorish is to not abide by the rules of the forum. Boorish is to suggest that we must submit to yet another anti-choicer in a progressive space in spite of the clear mandate of the forum.
She was warned repeatedly and chose to keep trolling the feminists about abortion in the FF. Boorish is to be new and continually taking other posters and the mods to task because you think we all just ain’t polite and tolerant enough in the face of non-progressive behaviour. You’re free to leave if this place ain’t to your liking.
Indiana Jones your not trying to lecture feminists in the feminists forum about an aspect of adoption are you?
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:49
#25
quote:
Originally posted by Scout:
[b]
Indiana Jones your not trying to lecture feminists in the feminists forum about an aspect of adoption are you?[/b]
Lecture? Um, the only person you might be able to suggest I was "lecturing" was the person who was kicked out for violating the forum's policies. And since I was clearly disagreeing with that person, I don't know where you get the impression that I was "lecturing" "feminists".
Thu, 2008-01-24 12:52
#26
What is it about the FF that attracts a certain kind of man.
Thu, 2008-01-24 13:17
#27
Scout:
quote:
Actually it’s easily available. 2 clicks away in fact. Just take a boo at anyone’s profile and voila! You can also search under their member number. Best to have the facts first eh? Then you don't look like a silly finger waving prat.
Thanks for the info. Could have done without the insult. My point on boorishness still stands.
Perhaps I couldn't help contrasting the two or three responses, following EmmaG's first post.
Thu, 2008-01-24 13:26
#28
quote:
...they are looking for newborn babies who look like them...
That is generally the rationale for the racist policy of keeping "others" out of Our Space. Whatever happened to the children's best interest criterion?
Thu, 2008-01-24 13:26
#29
remind
quote:
Originally posted by bliter:
[b]Scout: Thanks for the info. Could have done without the insult. My point on boorishness still stands. [/b]
No, actually your point does not stand, but hers certainly does.
quote:
[b]Perhaps I couldn't help contrasting the two or three responses, following EmmaG's first post.[/b]
It is not up to you to contrast anything, particularily not in this forum, and definitely not on this topic.
Now, I am asking you nicely, to step away from this thread and from the feminist forum. You have absolutely no right to come in here an lecture us on our behaviour, and tell us what you think we should do, or should not do, nor upon how we should behave.
Thank you in advance for your compliance.
[ 24 January 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Thu, 2008-01-24 13:35
#30
quote:
Originally posted by martin dufresne:
[b] That is generally the rationale for the racist policy of keeping "others" out of Our Space. Whatever happened to the children's best interest criterion?[/b]
Hm....and yet on babble there have been numerous threads about the perils of transracial adoption.
Thu, 2008-01-24 15:00
#31
quote:
Thanks for the info. Could have done without the insult. My point on boorishness still stands.
Don't scold grown women. You got less than you deserved when you strolled in here to scold; considering you hadn't a clue what you were talking about. That's being a boor. It's also your MO to scold - you aren't a mod or the politeness police either. It's deja vu actually.
Thu, 2008-01-24 16:14
#32
Mindful of remind's admonition and REQUEST I will not comment on this topic.
Since, AFTER THAT POST, Scout has addressed and quoted me, I feel entitled to answer here.
You speak to others about lecturing but, clearly, are not averse to engaging in it.
You pounced on an error and chose to be unnecessarily snotty. If I was unfamiliar with the
profile icon, it was because I had been used to a board where "profile" was not only spelled out with the poster's message but in the menu.
One wonders if some enjoy combativeness more than communication.
Thu, 2008-01-24 16:22
#33
Okay, maybe EVERYONE could stop shadow-moderating now, including bliter, who started it.
Once again, bliter, if you don't like the moderating, you can feel free to bring it up in rabble reactions instead of derailing yet another thread.
Everyone else - this pile on is completely unnecessary. You're just giving him what he wants.
Thu, 2008-01-24 16:30
#34
quote:
You're just giving him what he wants.
Well then why is he still here?
Thu, 2008-01-24 16:34
#35
Because moderators don't ban people for criticizing moderating decisions. I think this place would become pretty empty if we did.
Jebus, now I'm doing it. Can we continue this discussion in rabble reactions if it's that important?
[ 24 January 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]
Thu, 2008-01-24 16:38
#36
No but we ban them for baiting. How is strolling here to tell us to be less boorish to anti-choicers not baiting?
Thu, 2008-01-24 16:54
#37
remind
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]You're just giving him what he wants.[/b]
uh, michelle do you realize what you just admitted by saying this? You admitted he was baiting, wth?
Thu, 2008-01-24 17:18
#38
Can we continue this in rabble reactions if you feel it's that important?
Fri, 2008-01-25 16:12
#39
remind
Well, in this lead up to January 28, the anti- human rights peeps, have started a transit system ad campaign. It is national and will soon be coming to a city near you, make those complaints when you see them to the Transit authority and the City Council.
quote:
Pro-life ad pulled from bus shelters
The city has pulled a pro-life ad from its bus shelters after a handful of complaints."We don't think it's appropriate for that medium to be used for controversial community messaging," said Hull.
The same ad is running in cities across the country. Schultz said Fredericton was the only city to reject the shelter poster after a council vote.
Councillor Brian McHattie said he asked for the ads to come down after his office heard from upset residents. "For me personally, it definitely was offensive." Personal opinions on abortion aside, he said the city shouldn't been seen to support or promote either side of such a controversial issue. "It's totally inappropriate for the city."
[url=http://www.thespec.com/printArticle/310754]http://www.thespec.com/printA...
h/t BP
Sat, 2008-01-26 10:47
#40
Hi all - I was watching CityTV from Victoria BC the other day and saw a pro-life ad aimed at young women. Basically, a female basketball coach was regretting the abortion she had never come to terms with, and wanted to warn her team members. At least, that's how I received this message. The gist was, abortion will cause you great psychological damage so beware. Can a case be made for false advertising here? Does anybody know anything more about this ad? I can't even remember who is running it - possibly Birthright.
Sat, 2008-01-26 11:59
#41
quote:
Originally posted by Barbara Freeman:
[b] Can a case be made for false advertising here? Does anybody know anything more about this ad?[/b]
Indirectly, that's what happened [url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2008/01/26/abortion...
quote:
Metrobus has pulled an anti-abortion advertisement from its buses and shelters in St. John's after complaints from the public.The ad, funded by the Right to Life Association as part of a national campaign, appeared on at least two buses in the N.L. capital that were used as travelling billboards before it was withdrawn.
Critics said the ad gave the impression that late-term abortions are common in Canada.
The ad reads: "Nine months… the length of time an abortion is allowed in Canada. Abortion. Have we gone too far?"
Metrobus removed it Thursday night, saying the ad was misleading because there's no evidence that late-term abortions are common.
"We did do some research," said Metrobus manager Judy Powell.
She said the transit company took its lead from the code of the Advertising Council of Canada. One of the provisions states that [b]if a statement is misleading or inaccurate, it should be removed[/b].
Sat, 2008-01-26 13:10
#42
remind
quote:
Originally posted by Barbara Freeman:
[b]Hi all - I was watching CityTV from Victoria BC the other day and saw a pro-life ad aimed at young women. Basically, a female basketball coach was regretting the abortion she had never come to terms with, and wanted to warn her team members. At least, that's how I received this message. The gist was, abortion will cause you great psychological damage so beware. Can a case be made for false advertising here? Does anybody know anything more about this ad? I can't even remember who is running it - possibly Birthright.[/b]
You can most certainly make a complaint against the ad to CityTV, and state that there is absolutely no proof to those connentions contained within the ad, you might also want to private message choice joyce who you can reach through
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=24&t=001318]this link[/url] to another thread about anniversary celebrations of 20 years.
Sun, 2008-01-27 11:37
#43
Anyone in Ottawa going to be at the rally tomorrow at noon?
Sun, 2008-01-27 15:20
#44
A group I worked with recently for the Toronto Cultures of Resistance event seems pretty great - an organization of (I think) mostly young women who are doing reproductive rights activism, and I think their focus is on access.
[url=http://www.canadiansforchoice.ca/index2.html]Canadians for Choice[/url]
Mon, 2008-01-28 09:29
#45
[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080128.wcomment0128... pro-choice article[/url] from the Globe.
This time from a women in her twenties.
Mon, 2008-02-11 20:27
#46
Jake Epp's "Unborn Victims of Crime Act" - [url=http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3127600&... C-484[/url] - is coming up for a vote in Parliament on March 5. It's got the [url=http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/nov/07112104.html]Blue Meanies[/url] gloating. This bill poses a real danger to abortion rights, to the rights of all pregnant women, and to women's equality rights in general.
Please sign this [url=http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/oppose-bill-c-484/sign.html]petition... to call upon Parliament to oppose this bill. To learn more, visit the [url=http://www.arcc-cdac.ca]Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada[/url] website.
Thanks! (Pass it on...)
[ 11 February 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
Mon, 2008-02-11 20:46
#47
M. Spector
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=006927]We have a thread on that bill.[/url]
Mon, 2008-02-11 20:51
#48
laine lowe
Thanks for providing those links martin. I have already written to my MP (and NDP member) and Dion to express my concern. From what I understand, chances are good that the NDP and Bloc will whip their caucus to vote against this bill. I'm not so sure about the Liberals and we know there are a few retrogrades in their ranks when it comes to what they deem "morality" issues.
Tue, 2008-02-12 08:09
#49
remind
One wonders what will happen to this Bill should the government be brought down by the March 1 deadline Harptoon has set for the Senate?
The Lifesite report stated 66% of NDO were in favour of this Bill? Does anyone know if this is true?
Wed, 2008-02-13 06:00
#50
Just got this announcement by e-mail:
International Women's Day Symposium:
Canadian and International Laws and Policies on Abortion and their Impact on Women's Rights
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
The Law Society of Upper Canada
130 Queen Street West, Toronto
4 p.m. - Panel Discussion - Donald Lamont Learning Centre
6 p.m. - Reception - Convocation Hall
The Law Society of Upper Canada, the Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic, the Feminist Legal Analysis Section of the Ontario Bar Association and the Women's Law Association of Ontario are pleased to invite members of the legal profession and the public to their annual symposium and reception to celebrate International Women's Day.
Is the right to abortion a litmus test for women's rights and status in a society?
2008 marks the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Morgentaler, which struck down the law on abortion in the Criminal Code. A panel of legal experts will discuss the significance of the decision in Canada and its impact on women's rights. Speakers will discuss international perspectives on abortion and what they mean for the status of women in different jurisdictions. Following the discussion, a reception will be held to celebrate International Women's Day.
ADMISSION IS FREE
RSVP by March 3, 2008 by calling 416-947-3413 or by e-mail: [email protected]. For more information, contact Rudy Ticzon at 416-947-3314 or visit the Law Society website at [url=http://www.lsuc.on.ca.]www.lsuc.on.ca.[/url]
Sun, 2008-02-17 06:53
#51
[url=http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=283931&p=3]Why I Am an Abortion Doctor[/url]
Excerpts from remarks delivered by Canadian doctor Garson Romalis - a man with two murder attempts against him - on Jan. 25, at the University of Toronto Law School's Symposium to Mark the 20th Anniversary of R. vs. Morgentaler (published in the National Post-It, February 4, 2008)
quote:
( . . . )I can take a woman, in the biggest trouble she has ever experienced in her life, and by performing a five-minute operation, in comfort and dignity, I can give her back her life. ( . . . )I am honoured to be speaking today, and honored to call Henry Morgentaler my friend. I have been an abortion provider since 1972. Why do I do abortions, and why do I continue to do abortions, despite two murder attempts?
The first time I started to think about abortion was in 1960, when I was in second year medical school. I was assigned the case of a young woman who had died of a septic abortion. She had aborted herself using slippery elm bark ( . . . ) It is called slippery elm because, when it gets wet, it feels slippery. This makes it easier to slide slender pieces through the cervix where they absorb water, expand, dilate the cervix, produce infection and induce abortion. The young woman in our case developed an overwhelming infection. At autopsy she had multiple abscesses throughout her body, in her brain, lungs, liver and abdomen.
I have never forgotten that case. ( . . . )
Worth reading the whole piece, if only to remember what the Epps, Lees and Harpers would bring us to in a munute given half a chance.
[ 17 February 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]