Sunday, January 26, 2003

The Right To Freedom From Offspring

Interesting reading today...

Although the entire article is worth a look, the most startling bit from the NY Times' 30 Years After Roe v. Wade, New Trends but the Old Debate is:

Abortion is taken so much for granted in America today that most women surveyed by a group of clinics in Washington State did not know that it had ever been illegal.

Eek.

I suppose that could be a good thing -- possibly an indicating that the right to choose is really, really ingrained in my generation. So ingrained that even though its taken for granted, any real attempt to take the right away will be greeted by disbelief and then rage at government impudence (hopefully).

The second interesting read is actually a chestnut by my standards -- due to West Coast road tripping, it sat in the e-mail cue since Thursday.

Titled 30 Years After Roe v. Wade, How About Choice for Men?, its a recent column by a fellow named Glenn Sacks.

Although I don't agree with many of Sacks' columns, he occasionally has interesting thoughts and this column contains several:

Feminists are legitimately concerned that, if abortion were banned, the government would be exercising control over a very intimate and important part of a woman's life. But when a woman forces a man to be responsible for a child only she wants, and when the state child-support apparatus takes a third or more of his income and jails him if he comes up short, isn't the government exercising control over his life?

The "Choice for Men" movement seeks to give fathers the right to relinquish their parental rights and responsibilities within a month of learning of a pregnancy, just as mothers do when they choose to give their children up for adoption. These men would be obligated to provide legitimate financial compensation to cover pregnancy-related medical expenses and the mother's loss of income during pregnancy. The right would only apply to pregnancies which occurred outside of marriage, and women would still be free to exercise all of the reproductive choices they now have.

Pretty kewl - hmm?

I am all for freedom of choice for everyone involved...

However, in the next paragraph Sacks whines a bit about the unreliability of condoms and the finality of vasectomy -- but I don't have much pity for guys there.

Most men hate wearing condoms -- the phrase "in a raincoat" has become trite.

Another NY Times article -- this one on the wonders of condoms as a method of disease prevention -- chuffs up this gem regarding what to say to get a man to use one:

The most persuasive technique simply involved withholding sex unless a condom was used. As one young woman put it, "I would say, `If you're not going to wear a condom, then we're not going to do it.' "

Regarding the nonexistence of options other than condoms and vasectomy -- most guys I know wouldn't take a male version of the pill if it was available. They don't want to mess with their body chemistry -- which makes me question my eager embrace of long term hormone based birth control...

But I digress.

Aside from the 30th anniversary of Roe -- abortion cropped up by surprise this past week: in some serendipitous fashion the second book on tape I chose for the road trip was the unabridged reading of John Irving's The Cider House Rules.

I've only ever seen the movie and recognizing that it does deal with abortion -- that theme seemed subsumed by the unrequited love of Tobey Maquire's character for Charlize Theron's...

So -- it was surprising to see how much the book focuses on Dr. Larch (Michael Caine in the movie) and his evolution into an abortionist. Lots of medical history I'd never heard before and some very sobering descriptions of the results from back alley work.

Very controversial stuff.

In retrospect -- I am surprised the movie got made. Best Picture Oscar and all.

Maybe if the book was required reading, fewer women being interviewed by clinics in Washington state would be so ignorant.

Yeah right.

I can hear the religious out cry it would provoke already.

posted by Bohica at 11:19 AM