Firstly a quick bit of housekeeping – blogging may be sporadic over the coming weeks and months because I am up to my eyes in other projects, starting with a talk at the University of Oxford’s Catholic Society, next week entitled “Catholicism and Feminism”. This post therefore will be mercifully brief.
On the subject of the Personhood Bill passed in Virginia, whilst whole-heartedly agreeing with the notion of personhood from the moment of conception, when it comes to the idea of a compulsory trans-vaginal ultrasound prior to an abortion, the answer has to be: NO, NO, NO!!
Has whoever dreamt up this scheme actually been subject to this procedure? I have had one or two in my time and it is a deeply distressing, invasive and humiliating procedure. It doesn’t matter how nicely the nurse holds your hand and comfortingly talks about where you are going on holiday, the procedure is still unpleasant and uncomfortable.
The medical grounds are spurious, I have been able to have an abdominal ultrasound that saw a sac at 5 weeks in pregnancy which is possible with a full bladder. By the time most women discover they are pregnant they are usually at least 5 weeks pregnant. Modern day detection kits may tell you earlier, but these tend to be the preserve of those hoping to conceive. Most who are attempting to prevent pregnancy won’t be testing 6 days before their cycle is due to start but tend to leave it a good week after a missed period, hoping that the delay is caused by stress or another factor. By this point, most women will be a good 4-5 weeks pregnant if not more. An abortion is an abortion, no better for the baby at whatever stage it is performed.
This kind of law buys into the silly polemic that one gets so sick and tired of hearing from the pro-choice lobby, such as “Stop poking around between my legs you vicious bigot”. It confirms every single negative prejudice held about those who wish to protect the lives of our unborn and speaking from an unashamedly pro-life perspective, it gives the impression that women who seek abortions must be punished. How does punishing women help to provide better pro-life solutions? A woman seeking an abortion may not be deterred but she will be resentful and humiliated. How does this treatment display care and compassion?
The state has no right to decide that a woman must undergo an invasive and medically unnecessary procedure. It damages the cause no end. A more sensible law would be that an abortion may not be performed until an abdominal ultrasound may be performed, which is normally possible at 5-6 weeks.
I suggest the following amendment as being the most appropriate if the legislators are adamant on committing pro-life suicide and retaining this barmy idea:
The partner of the woman presenting for abortion must be subjected to an anal probe in the name of equality. If the partner is unavailable then a representative of the legislature must make themselves available.
Horrendous idea. Utter madness. Not in my name.
Thank you well meaning GoPers. You can just see the foaming Guardian headlines over the forthcoming weeks. UK pro-lifers will be tarred with the same brush.
I’m usually very sceptical of clicktivism, it is a poor substitute for direct action, but I’ve decided to make an exception. For those who haven’t heard of the anti-abortion group, Abort 67, it’s worth checking out their site here.
Their protests outside the Wistons Clinic on Chatsworth Road are currently putting the wind up BPAS, who are so concerned that they have attempted to have the protesters, who are protesting legally, arrested on multiple occasions. No charges have been brought however. I spied various pro-choicers plotting some counter-action on Twitter, apparently today they were out “undercover” although sources tell me that Abort67 are well aware of the other side’s attempts to mobilise against them and are quite happy to engage in open discourse. In fact Andy Stephenson has offered to debate Clare Murphy of BPAS live on radio, after she denounced them, however she declined the invitation, despite the fact that BBC radio were happy to host the conversation.
All credit to Abort67, who are obviously managing to unnerve the pro-abort lobby, to the extent that they are attempting to have the group banned. They are a little bit stuck however, as they admit themselves on Twitter, these protests are legal, therefore they are getting their heads together to see how Abort67 may be stopped. How very democratic!
If further proof of their success were needed, sources tell me that pro-choicers now refuse to visit those schools who have been open-minded enough to allow Abort 67 in to show presentations to their (older) pupils, to offer a counter-opinion. Such is the effectiveness of the Abort 67 presentation, the pro-abort groups know that there is little they can do to counter it, other than attempt to lobby the church in Worthing in which members of Abort 67 worship. This has conversely resulted in an upswell of support for them.
Of course the usual accusations of harassment have been thrown about, I have not admittedly manned an Abort 67 demonstration, however I can testify to having met Andy Stephenson, the leader of Abort 67, a man who gives the impression of being overflowing with compassion and who possess all the aggression of a golden retriever on valium.
One of the things that the pro-choicers were attempting to crow about was what they presumed to be the relatively low site stats of Abort67. I am currently adding them to my blogroll, as well as a link to their video – warning it’s graphic.
I think it would be really helpful if ALL Catholic and pro-life bloggers could consider adding Abort 67 to their blogrolls, and/or sporadically linking to their videos. Even better get in touch with them, steel your stomachs for their material and see about organising local protests and rallies. Even better than that, give them some financial support if you are able. I really believe that they are worthy of our support, they seem to be the first group out there, along with 40 days for Life who are managing to seriously put the wind up the abortion clinics. This isn’t a plea to support them over and above any other pro-life group, that people may have affiliations or support for, I think Abort 67 are very different to other groups in that they are engaging in direct action, they are courageously going out there, risking the wrath and enmity of the public in order to confront people with the gruesome reality that constitutes abortion. Though many have their reservations about graphic imagery, it is becoming increasingly evident to me that in a society that wishes to sanitise abortion with pastel coloured logos and the vague language of social validation designed to subliminally influence and coerce women into believing that abortion is a simple clean procedure, people need to be aware of the reality, if hearts and minds are to change. What is interesting is to note that many women who have had abortions, actually thank Abort 67 upon seeing their displays, reporting that it has given them an increased awareness and a chance to heal or grieve. Many state that had they known then, what they know now, they would not have undergone the procedure. Others are resolved to protect themselves and their loved ones from ever experiencing such violence. No wonder BPAS and MSI despise them.
Abort 67 are passionate and courageous defenders of the unborn, who engage in direct action.They don’t impinge upon other organisations – their mission is not to provide counselling or assistance (although they will point people to organisations who will help), they are there to tell a story. They are prepared to do what many of us are not. For that they deserve our support and our prayers. Let’s give them the encouragement that they deserve, even if that is only a link on your blogroll. I do not care that Abort 67 are not a Catholic group. I do not care that they are Evangelical Christians. I care about the unborn and I give whole-hearted support to anyone, regardless of creed, race, gender or sexuality who is prepared to go out there and take action that pricks consciences and saves lives.
For those who will call us nutters or lunatics – what is that angers you so much? What is wrong with showing the procedure in all its reality? Would it be acceptable to abort a puppy or a kitten? Why is acceptable to do this to a human being? Name-calling makes very little difference in any event, in the words of Andy Stephenson:
We don’t care what you think about us. We care what you think about abortion and, the angrier you are now, the harder it will be for you to get the reality of abortion out of your head. If you have a functioning conscience and possess a level of intellectual honesty then you will eventually reason that you are right to be angry but you are just angry at the wrong people
The pictures are sick because what they portray is sick. We aren’t the ones killing the babies in the pictures, the abortionists are.
If people can look at the pictures and want to attack us that is the sure sign of a selfish narcissistic culture. When we look at pictures of the Holocaust, do we get angry at the teacher or the ones who committed the atrocity?
I think what surprised me most of all was the intellectual courage and honesty of the pro-choice feminist Naomi Woolf:
The pro-choice movement often treats with contempt the pro-lifers’ practice of holding up to our faces their disturbing graphics….[But] how can we charge that it is vile and repulsive for pro-lifers to brandish vile and repulsive images if the images are real? To insist that truth is in poor taste is the very height of hypocrisy. Besides, if these images are often the facts of the matter, and if we then claim that it is offensive for pro-choice women to be confronted by them, then we are making a judgment that women are too inherently weak to face a truth about which they have to make a grave decision. This view is unworthy of feminism.
In the meantime do you have the courage to take a look at the video below? Here is how the abortion providers describe it.
I’ve just finished writing a piece for this week’s Catholic Herald about the feminist and pro-life movements, which involved some research into the life and work of some of the pioneers of feminism in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. Women who led the way in terms of securing equality of education, employment and opportunity.
I was particularly struck by the words of the relatively obscure Sarah F Norton – public speaker, writer for feminist publications, and member of the Working Women’s Association who advocated for the education of women and girls and equal opportunity in the workplace and equal pay for women. We have very little detail other than her writings, but together with the better-known Susan B Anthony, they fought for the admission of women to Cornell University and as a result a year after her campaigning, in 1870, Cornell University became one of the first universities in the United States to admit women.
Writing in the feminist newspaper, Woodhull & Claflin’s Weekly, Norton denounced the proliferation of advertisements for the “fast increasing crime of foeticide” .
This passage will have particular resonance for anyone who takes issue with the ubiquitous nature of those blatant abortion post-conception advertisements, soon to filter in to our living rooms. Abortion advertising is clearly not just a twenty-first century phenomena or anomaly. Twas ever thus.
[C]hild-murder is an easy and every-day affair…. [C]hild murderers practice their profession without let or hinderance, and open infant butcheries unquestioned, establishing themselves with an impunity that is not allowed to the slaughterers of cattle…. Scores of persons advertise their willingness to commit this form of murder, and with unblushing effrontery announce their names and residences in the daily papers. No one seems to be shocked by the fact…. [C]irculars are distributed broadcast, recommending certain pills and potions for the very purpose, and by these means the names of these slayers of infants, and the methods by which they practice their life-destroying trade, have become “familiar in our mouths as household words.” …Is there no remedy for all this ante-natal child murder? …Perhaps there will come a time when… an unmarried mother will not be despised because of her motherhood… and when the right of the unborn to be born will not be denied or interfered with.
It would seem that we still have a long way to go.
I received the following comment from Clare McCollough at Good Counsel Network, showing that they are indeed aptly named. I thought it was worth publishing in a separate post.
Hi Caroline
I understand where you’re coming from (I can’t say I understand totally, because what every woman goes through is different of course).
I could take offence that you seem to suggest that no pro-lifer understands what you have described here. Or that you suggest that the only thing the pro-life movement can offer you is baby clothes. That’s not fair! We spend our lives working out ways for women to implement real solutions to exactly the type of problems you list here. However, I understand that you’re not in the easiest state of mind at present.
So just to be clear, I think there are ways you can be helped through this difficult time and would be glad to help. Good Counsel is on 02077231740 or email us at info@goodcounselnetwork.freeserve.co.uk
I agree with some of what you said about Counselling. It addresses part of the reasons why I didn’t support Nadine Dorries.
It’s possible too that a better method of NFP or one more suited to you is available – saying that doesn’t blame you for anything. Maybe there isn’t, but in any case, as a Catholic it seems a bizarre idea that anyone would walk around “blaming” a Catholic woman for getting pregnant. It’s what happens in Marriage. NFP is great in it’s place, but God didn’t say “Thou shalt use NFP and if it fails it shall be thine own fault thou art pregnant”…Many, many Catholic women who are open to life have faced the tremendous upheaval of a pregnancy at a time which seemed impossible. Catholic women are in this together, the really bizarre world view is the one that says “get married, enter into a life giving union with this man and use any gadget, gizmo, pill, gel, injection, patch or whatever to prevent the consequence…
It is not necessarily true to say Marie Stopes and BPAS wouldn’t make a judgement on you. One of the most frequent complaints I hear from women is “I think the lady I saw at that (Marie Stopes or BPAS) “clinic” is pro-life” When questioned further they think this because she was rude or agressive, shocked at their reason to abort, annoyed that they had aborted before, impatient when they were tearful or unsure. (A sad reflection of the media image of the average pro-lifer – but not a true image of the vast majority in my experience). We must steer clear of demonising anyone who works for MS or BPAS as not all understand the reality of what they are doing, but it is a mistake to believe that all who call themselves “pro-choice” are non judgemental and woman friendly. Many of them hate their jobs and blame the women who come to them for needing their services. This is well documented (see LIME 5 and many post abortion groups writings for evidence) and something
I have personally met with in “clinic staff” many times.
You face a difficult time at present, and you know life isn’t going to be easy even after the birth. My son didn’t sleep day or night for 2 decades after he was born (hang on he’s only 4 so that can’t be right, but it feels like it!) so I realise the way small children impact your life. But we would be glad to assist with the things you think would help and maybe even to put out a few other ideas that might help for you to consider.
Prayers are with you anyway.
God bless
Clare McCullough, Good Counsel
When I last wrote about what it was like to face an unplanned pregnancy, a commenter angrily wrote that they could not believe my cheek in asserting that I could now look a pregnant woman facing a crisis pregnancy in the face, that I was comparing myself to someone who had been raped when clearly there was no equivalence, I could never know how it could feel to be pregnant as a result of a rape.
Assuming that statement is correct, it must be remembered that trauma caused by an unplanned pregnancy is no less serious and distressing for a woman, regardless of how she came to be in that particular situation. Being avowedly pro-life does not somehow lessen the emotional or physical impact of an unwanted pregnancy. As a Catholic I feel under additional pressure to serenely grin and bear it, to plaster on a saintly smile and offer up every bout of retching for the Holy Souls in Purgatory, whilst declaring to the world how wonderful it is to be bringing another beautiful baby and human soul in the world.
Now whilst there is some truth in the latter part of that sentence, I know that once the baby is here, I will adore him/her, I will proudly post photographs of him/her on social media and proclaim “look, my baby is so beautiful, here is proof of the evils of abortion”, the reality of being pregnant and pro-life is somewhat different. The reason that I look at my babies and feel filled with horror at the idea of abortion is because I know quite how tempting that prospect is. I experience it on a daily basis. Looking at my babies once born, is an affirmation, not that one is needed, that I have undoubtedly done the right thing and if we’re going to psychoanalyse, is probably as much about assuaging my guilt for entertaining such abhorrent feelings whilst pregnant. One of my more unpleasant detractors said “if I see one more photo which says my baby is cute and abortion is wrong, I’ll throw up”, further consolidating that she had absolutely no idea what it is like to experience a pregnancy, let alone an unwanted or unplanned one.
Here’s the reality, warts and all. I will attempt to remain as dispassionate as possible and not whinge, but I think pro-lifers need to get a feel for what it is like when a woman is desperate, something that the pro-choice lobby, understand only too well.
I feel constantly nauseous. Not mildly nauseous, but full-on, I’m on the verge of throwing up big time here. Everywhere I go, a bucket or some sort of receptacle has to come too. I emerged from around the back of a shrubbery on campus yesterday, wiping tears from my eyes, mucous from my nose and surreptitiously dumping a plastic bag full of vomit in the nearest bin. Being British I cannot bring myself to face the mortification of using the campus toilets and bumping into someone I might know, or indeed that anyone might hear. If I’m not throwing up, I’m feeling that I’m on the verge of it at any second. Everything and everyone smells of cheese, even me. I disgust myself with my smell. Even my beloved children absolutely stink to high heaven. My beautiful baby is repellant, I can’t bear to have her anywhere near me, because she literally makes me sick, one whiff of her head and bleurgh I’m off. This is something of a problem, given that she refuses to drink anything other than breast milk and the odd bit of water. Every time she latches on to the breast, the surge of hormones as the milk is released causes another heave. Another issue is that she is, at not yet 9 months, going through separation anxiety. Put her down for more than 5 nano seconds and the million decibel screaming as if she is being tortured starts, thus setting off the toddler.
I’m exhausted. Not just a little bit tired, but as though my arms and legs are weighted down with lead. I feel constantly wiped out and struggling to keep my eyes open. When I’m at home with the children, I’m fighting sleep, but with a lively and boisterous 2 year old and the baby, it’s obviously not an option. What is exacerbating this is that due to a shortage of space in the house, there is nowhere to put a cot. Thus bunk-beds have been ordered, toddler will be evicted from her cot bed and the baby will then have a cot to sleep in. Until that time she is still in the bed with us and cannot get to sleep unless she is breast-feeding. She has now grown three teeth, so there is lots of biting, nights consist of being used as a giant human comfort blanket, my nipples made ultra sensitive via pregnancy hormones, spend the night being bitten or twisted, handfuls of flesh are grabbed, kneaded, scratched, pulled and pushed in order that the baby can slumber peacefully. As soon as the bunk-beds arrive, I anticipate a double dose of sleep trauma, toddler will be none too happy being evicted from her cosy cot, 7 year old will be getting frightfully stressed and coming to tell us every 5 minutes that toddler is talking, crying, whimpering etc (this happened on holiday when they shared a room) and baby will be apoplectic at having to sleep in a cot in a different room. There is a reason why sleep deprivation is used in torture techniques. It makes you desperate. What I have been doing, because I am a shocking, neglectful, lazy mother, is taking advantage of when my children are in University nursery to nip back home and catch a couple of hours of sleep.
The house is an absolute state and I am behind with my university work. I went to the much advertised Student Life building to get some advice about support, given I have a few late essays. I was told how to submit mitigating evidence but also told that there was no guarantee that my claim will be accepted. The highest I can achieve in my essays, if my claim is not accepted is 40%. This will do, it will get me a pass, but is more than a little frustrating.
So, to recap, I’m snowed under with university work, the house is its usual pigsty, I have three young children, I am utterly exhausted, my family live hundreds of miles away and I’ve no close friends nearby either. The parish we worship at is 10 miles away from our house, we started worshipping there before we moved, when Robin was still a vicar, have built a close relationship with the priest and have some friendships, but are still slight outsiders.
The thought of having another baby fills me with absolute dread. As soon as the nine month old reaches a vaguely manageable stage, yet another screaming newborn will be here. I have been pregnant and breastfeeding since February 2009. I have had 2 cesarians in two years, one in November 2009, one in April 2011. Neither of them have gone well. I have a phobia, a genuine dread and terror of childbirth. I feel sick, ill and rotten. I cannot believe that this is happening to me yet again, no sooner does my life begin to come together, then bang, I’m pregnant again. I also feel extraordinarily foolish for being pregnant, like I’ve done something wrong and incredibly stupid in my use of NFP; some would say its my fault for trusting in it, others would point out my deficiencies in not being able to use it properly. Either way it is my fault. In short I am not floating about in a state of pious tranquility that the Lord’s work is being fulfilled. I am miserable. I am letting just about everybody down, my husband, my family and my friends because I am finding it so difficult to function.
My husband is working really long hours, if I defer my degree again, then I’ll be liable for the higher £9,000 a year fees, if I give up, then I’ll never be able to get a job. This getting a job business is actually quite important. If for some reason my husband is not ordained, then instead of spending these few years training for a career, he’s been working in, what can be, a pretty back breaking job paying £5.90 a hour. He’ll need to do something else, as will I. Even if he is ordained, then it is not fair to expect the Catholic Church to pay for my upkeep. So the degree is important.
As an aside, perhaps people can understand why I may be just a tad short-tempered at the moment. Perhaps they can also understand why, given we gave up everything in order that my husband could cross the Tiber, and given that I have received unprecedented amounts of abuse for defending Catholic social teaching, it is more than a little galling to be called “liberal, pro-life lite, misleading the faithful and reinventing Church teaching” and had the fact that we are not cradle catholics thrown back at us by some of the traditionalist Catholics. It’s why I’m having a twitter break for a short while. Anyone looking through some of the early comments on this blog can see some of the abuse that I’ve had to put up with, being called a fundamentalist, extremist and other such names. It is just laughable to have my faith called into doubt this way. There has been absolutely no understanding that I might be feeling extremely vulnerable at present – name calling of the most un-Christian kind and aggression has been de rigour. It has been worse than anything previously faced, not simply because of the spiteful derision, but because this has come from brethren in Christ. Although I am to blame for perhaps overreacting, I think bloggers who devoted two consecutive blog posts to me and tweeters who embarked on consecutive twitter rants, need to ask themselves how they feel they might be coming across?Twitter does not allow for nuance, nor does it allow pause for thought. When faced with tweet after tweet after tweet, the blood starts pumping, the breathing quickens, hackles rise at the invective writ large in front of you and the emotional temperature is raised. This is not good for anyone and certainly not righteous. I would urge all Catholic tweeters, just to stop, pause and think. Things might not be meant aggressively, but that is certainly how they come across.
It’s fair to say that I am not Mrs Duggar, floating about in euphoric bliss about the Lord’s will being done, having conceived baby number 21. If only I were. This pregnancy is proving to be a huge spiritual test. I feel like asking “Lord, why me, again”, but am focusing upon Romans 8.
Why am I spilling like this – firstly, its to let people know in no uncertain terms that I am having a hard time. It’s to let pro-lifers know that pregnancy is often a terrible physical and emotional ordeal. I am effectively being forced to give birth, as the pro-choicers would put it, because for me there is no other choice. What I have to do, in the words of Mama Odie, from Disney’s Princess and the Frog (currently showing 24/7 in these parts) is to dig a little deeper. What we want and what we need are not always the same things, doing what is right, is not the same as doing what is easy. There are times when I feel that I would literally do anything to not be pregnant right now, I would make some kind of Faustian pact that didn’t actually involve taking the life of my chid or indeed selling my soul. If someone would offer me a solution to take away the pregnancy and the sickness, I would be mightily tempted.
This is what pregnant women face and this is what is on offer at Marie Stopes and BPAS. I know that were I to visit, they would not sit in judgement, but would validate my feelings of despair and negativity whilst offering a way out. This is the reality that anyone dealing with a pregnant woman has to face. I wrote a lot this summer about non directional counselling, my feeling was that women must not be bullied and hectored. I still stand by that, but my opinion has changed slightly. The only thing that is stopping me from not aborting this baby, is the fact that I know that it would be the killing of a child. I am 9 weeks pregnant. That’s definitely a baby, not a potential life, but a real live one. Abortion providers make moral judgements for women, they tell women that aborting children is acceptable and understandable. It might be the latter, but whichever way you look at it, when an abortion counsellor recommends a woman for an abortion procedure, they are making a moral judgement.
Pro-choice people understand only too well how difficult it is for a woman, which is why they hate us pro-lifers piling on what they believe is unnecessary guilt and pressure. But where I have changed my mind, is that actually, a woman needs to know that if she aborts her baby, she is killing her unborn child. There can be no getting around that fact. Women need to see ultrasounds and understand the choice that they are making. Someone needs to put the reality to them that abortion is the ending of a life. It’s an uncomfortable truth and it is what has people so up in arms, because they feel that women don’t need to know that, it’s easier to put the whole idea out of their minds, in a separate box to be dealt with later. This does not necessitate religious reference or hectoring, but simple facts. Here is your baby – here is what it looks like – the decision is still yours, but it is precisely because of the nature of abortion, that you may well feel some emotional trauma afterwards, particularly if you are already vulnerable.
I know that Marie Stopes and BPAS would offer me the solution that I wanted, but it would be a decision entirely centred around me, my feelings and my life as it stands now. The unborn baby would not feature at all, and thus spurious arguments would be used as qualification such as “its not really alive, it’s not viable”. That’s why this so emotive, desperate women take decisions to make their lives better, decisions that seem understandable, but decisions that are ultimately morally right or wrong. Either abortion is right, or it is wrong. What pro-lifers have to do is understand this desperation and fight to offer decent alternatives for women in these situations, as well as helping women to see the reality of their actions. What would help me? Someone to advocate at University, not only for the late penalty to be taken off my essays, but also to allow me to bring a newborn baby to lectures and seminars next year. Someone to help fight so that if I do defer, I don’t have to pay the higher fees. Ultimately we need people to fight for better conditions for pregnant women in terms of careers, so that they are not forced to put them on hold, or their prospects aren’t damaged by career breaks. That would get down abortions no end and would be a far more productive use of time than philosophically debating same sex marriage. Pro-life groups have to make it easier for women. I don’t need baby clothes, I need practical and career help.
No doubt aborting this baby would improve my short term health no end. It wouldn’t do much for the baby’s. No doubt I shall be filled with grace and blessings. But understand this – it is far from easy. I feel forced to set a shining example, when really all I want to do is to collapse into a hormonal mess. Faced with no alternative I just have to cope and dig a little deeper, I think it’s what most do when they are up against it. But I need people to be gentle. I needed a break from pregnancy. Desperately.
So, I said I’d do one final post, before a break of a few weeks, and here it is. As will become obvious I do want comments to continue to pour in as I think that this could actually prove very constructive.
Let’s be honest. There is no coherent pro-life movement in the UK. I have spent hours pouring over pro-choice literature, academic studies, political analysis, I follow them like a hawk on social media and I have to concede they are expert operators with cogent strategies, smooth PR machines who are able to drive headlines and influence public opinion. I know one or two people who have attended their meetings incognito. I’ve thought about doing the same, with the addition of a black wig and my glasses. What I have been told is that the pro-choice lobby are friendly, very well-organised and above all democratic, transparent and accountable.
What do we have to counter that? A disparate bunch of well-meaning squabblers, and I admit in some respects I may not have helped, but it pains me beyond belief to see the mess our side are in; whilst we squabble, bicker and fight, countless die.
I know all the arguments about Catholic teaching, about Christian teaching and so on and so forth, there is a time and a place to evangelise and I don’t simply mean in Church, but trying to base legislation upon Biblical, Scriptural or Magisterial Authority has not worked since before the Enlightenment. I think we have to draw an important distinction between Christian evangelisation and attempting to achieve our goals. Of course the two are inexorably linked and should complement and support each other, but campaigning for the dignity of the unborn and sick and elderly does not necessitate or require theology or biblical exegesis. We can draw on that to other Christians or in the course of general apologetics, but appealing to God, whilst trying to convince an atheist as to the horror of abortion, or why it is not right to put to death terminally ill or elderly people, is simply not going to wash.
It seems to me we have two options:
Option one
We all agree that I am a cheeky bumptious upstart who has no business sticking her opinionated nose into pro-life politics. If I want to do something I can rattle some collecting tins in Church, attend coffee mornings, bake cakes for pro-life charity sales, maybe do a bit of typing for the Pro-Life times or some such, but generally get back to my life of witness by continuing to have as many babies as I can until my uterus falls out.
In the meantime, the internecine squabbling continues, positions are more firmly entrenched than ever before, pro-life groups carry on doing what they’ve always done, groups are as polarised as ever before, John Smeaton retires in ten years time and passes on the family firm to his son, whilst LIFE carry on doing what they do. Both groups do some things well, but no real progress is made, things just tick on as before, it’s all about the damage limitation.
In the meantime, Dorries pushes for the 20 week reduction and fails miserably, much to the cheers of her detractors. Bouyed up by Nadine’s failure, the pro-choice lobby, decide to push on with their agenda, the requirement for the second doctor’s signature is removed, pro-life groups are no longer allowed to present in schools and are barred from carrying out any pregnancy counselling. Marie Stopes and BPAS build more and more clinics, abortion numbers go up, more sex education is thought to be the solution, more condoms and morning after pills are given out and so the cycle continues. Who knows, they may challenge for an overturning of the abortion pill to be administered in a clinic and will probably start hawking mobile abortion services, or even dial-an-abortion whereby a woman can have her consultation over the phone and the pill delivered by courier.
In short, doom and death.
Option 2
How about a meeting? (I won’t come, I promise, I’ll be too busy skulking or giving birth or something, besides I don’t want to be lynched by anyone). I know this seems incredible, I know we aren’t going to get x, y and z to actually sit down together in a room and begin to talk, dear me no, that could never happen could it, because of things that happened 20 years ago.
How about a team of professional mediators and ALL the major pro-life players and when I say ALL, I mean ALL? Not just representatives from SPUC, LIFE, Right-to-Life, but everyone, from people like Peter Saunders, to John Smeaton, Jack Scarisbrick, to Phyllis Bowman, Josephine Quintavelle, Ed Rennie, heck even Lord Alton, EVERYONE, lets get them all together to sit down, agree common goals and talk, to see where we can all go from here.
What I would love to see is a consolidation of all groups, – one huge group with different arms and focuses, say a euthanasia arm, an education arm, an outreach arm, a political arm, a research arm and so on and so forth. Consolidation has to be the name of the game in this day and age. It’s a clunky analogy but look at the airline industry. All the little airlines could not survive single handedly, routes were being duplicated, losses were being made and so we’ve seen some mergers in order to ensure survival. I know that the pro-life movement is not a business, but surely if we had one movement, one that was democratic, transparent and accountable, then certainly Catholics would know to whom to donate in good faith, as would Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, people of all faiths and none. We seem to have so much duplication and wastage and yet no coherent strategy.
I know there are so many thorny issues to be thought through, I know there are many competing egos, but surely with professional mediators and then with the help of management consultants (sorry, but they would need to be a prerequisite) we could take stock of the resources and expertise available, consolidate and move forward? I know there are issues such as LIFE only do non-directive counselling and really Catholics must tell people the truth that abortion is the killing of a baby and morally wrong, but surely there has to be areas of consensus and commonality?
I really don’t think we can carry on as we are, it’s 2012, it’s time to finally sort this mess out, and getting everyone together in a room seems a good place to start. If the Irish peace process can manage to get Gerry Adams and David Trimble around the table, then there’s hope for all of us.
Which brings me to something that I’ve always wanted to do. One of those poll jobbies. Over to you. What do you think? Maybe the first thing we can organise is that long overdue rally?
I defy any one not to be blown away. Proof that science and theology are not mutually exclusive. I see the hand of the Creator, the breath of the Divine. Not simply mere chance, but purpose.
Steve Jobs’ legacy is not only that of the beautiful sleek shiny products that were to transform technology, not simply the hours of pleasure he brought to countless children and families by his innovations at Pixar, but what is also true is that he is undoubtedly the pro-life beacon, the Beethoven of our age.
Jobs’ biological father was a Syrian political science professor named Abdulfattah John Jandali and his biological mother was student Joanne Carole Shieble. They met at the University of Wisconsin but didn’t marry according to Jandali, because Joanne’s Jewish father forbade her from marrying a Syrian.
Jobs’ birth took place in 1956, 17 years before Roe v Wade legalised abortion in America and thus his mother clearly felt that she had no other choice. In another interesting twist, the original prospective adoptive parents had a change of heart, deciding not to adopt Steve as they really wanted a girl, hence he went to the second parents on the list, who received a late-night phone call to inform them that a baby was available.
Perhaps of more interest is the fact that Joanne almost called a halt to the adoption, refusing to sign the papers when she realised that the working-class Jobs’ family did not have college degrees, echoing some of the decisions made by today’s social workers when deciding upon issues of suitability of prospective couples. How would Jobs’ life turned out had he been adopted elsewhere? Imagine what we would have lost had he not been born? Like Beethoven Jobs was a creative visionary, the circumstances of his birth were hardly ideal and yet he brought pleasure and will continue to do so, to countless millions.
The pro-life vision extends from moment of conception to moment of natural death. Steve Jobs received his diagnosis of terminal cancer in 2004, being told he had 3-5 months left. No-one would have blamed him had he sought a painless swift death, instead of years of gruelling medical treatment, including reported transplants. And yet his impending death inspired him to go on to greater heights of achievement, including the iPhone and the IPad. He made his peace with the daughter whose existence he had denied for years and admitted his behaviour had been less than perfect. Death, he said, gave him focus and clarity.
He made his final public appearance, 2 days before his death, facing his illness with quiet courage and determination.
Not bad for an unplanned baby who dropped out of college.
So, those wise people who wish to rule us in Europe have decreed that “medical staff should withhold information about the sex of the foetus“, because the practice of sex-selective abortions have reached worrying proportions in former soviet states. Yet another reason demonstrating why the EU in its correct format is such a phenomenally bad idea. The countries that constitute the European Union are so culturally disparate it is absolutely impossible to form generic rules for all 27 member countries.
I’m pro-life – why aren’t I supporting anything that may have a positive effect in terms of reducing abortions?
There is no evidence to suggest that this measure would have a demonstrable effect on the abortion rate. Similar laws have been effected in India since 1996 to little avail. Countries such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Albania and Georgia have reputations for corruption and thus it is likely that these laws would either be ignored, the penalties for breaking them would prove insufficient as a deterrent and parents with enough of a vested financial interest in the sex of their unborn child would not be averse to slipping the sonographer a few extra lek. It would be unenforceable, although no doubt countries such as the UK, where the practice of sex selective abortion would appear to be thankfully rare would obey to the letter, with swingeing fines imposed by Brussels at the first hint of any inadvertent violations.
I have to confess to being ambivalent about ante-natal screening. It was only during my first pregnancy that the reality of it really hit home. Far from being the opportunity to see my baby there on screen and find out what sex she was, I lay there alone during the 20 week scan with the monographer saying “if I go quiet, it doesn’t necessarily mean that anything is wrong, it’s just I need to concentrate”. At that particular scan she was training a student, thus single measurement and test was described with a level of painstaking detailed medical accuracy, which I have not experience since. It hadn’t occurred to me quite what they were checking for (I was in a state of denial generally and thought that the scan might help me with coming to terms with the baby, particularly if I could find out the gender). When I heard statements such as “you need to look for and count the four chambers of the heart filling up and emptying, there’s the tibia, that looks fully formed and intact, check the kidney function and the jaw and palate seem to be intact, there’s a continuous plate”, I suddenly realised with chilling accuracy what they were looking for and why the scan was taking place.
In my subsequent pregnancies I have been extremely reluctant to attend the scan, as to do so seems to endorse the NHS objective of choice. One of the major reasons for ante-natal screenings is to give the parents the option of abortion should the child be seen to have a major disability. I know that I would never abort an unborn child, so in many ways it seems something of a pointless exercise and not one that I wish to endorse. I don’t think that I would ever choose to have the nuchal fold screening for Down’s Syndrome again, even though I have with all of my three children. My rationale has always been, that if it were to be discovered that my child had Downs, I would want to do lots of reading and to be fully prepared. The only test that will definitively tell you whether or not your child will have a chromosomal abnormality is a Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS) or amniocentesis which both carry risks of miscarriage. Given that I wouldn’t want to do anything which may incur a miscarriage, I wouldn’t therefore opt for these tests, if the nuchal fold screening came out with a high risk result. All the nuchal fold test will do, is give you an accurate risk factor, which will then encourage you to spend the rest of your pregnancy worrying or alternatively opt for a test which does not come without its fair share of anxiety.
Ante-natal screening should not be condemned as a bad or something to be discouraged however, foetal medicine is making leaps and bounds and many babies’ lives have been saved as a result of ante-natal diagnostic tests. Information in itself can never be bad, it is only what people choose to do with it.
This is why I have such an objection to this proposal, it is truly illiberal in nature as it wishes to withhold information from the responsible majority in a misconceived attempt to legislate for the minority. Though there are many who prefer not to find out the sex of their baby in advance, liking the element of surprise (to me the surprise of the baby is enough) there are many others who benefit from this information. I am one of those as is my husband. We were always dying to know the sex of our unborn child, not least so I knew whether or not I needed to retain my stash of baby girl clothes or had the excuse was required to go shopping. It helped in terms of choosing names, itself a labour of Hercules, but crucially it helped us to get to know our babies, to bond with them and to help accustom the other children to the idea of a baby brother or sister. Of course sonographers are not infallible and do get these things wrong, but all of ours have been unequivocal, “there’s no boys’ bits which can only mean one thing”. Apparently the identification of a girl is known as the McDonald’s syndrome, the female sex organs look something like a hamburger when viewed on screen.
If one applies the test of harm, then of course, no harm would have come to us had we not been told the sex, we would have undoubtedly loved and accepted our babies regardless, but it was helpful, not least in terms of helping my husband to bond with his unborn children, because men are physically excluded from the experience of pregnancy and yet they still need to provide support. Finding out the sex of our unborn children was an extra little added bonus.
If this legislation were to be enacted, it would cause severe difficulty for private clinics who provide private 3D imaging services for parents wishing to have a video of their unborn chid in utero, many of whom will offer a gender diagnosis. It won’t impact our abortion rates which are already the highest in Europe, but will simply be the Eurocrats telling me that I cannot be trusted to know the gender of my unborn child. Of more concern is the diagnostic blood test for gender available over the internet at 7 weeks, but if we don’t want people to abort on the basis of gender, then there is a simple solution. This is the inevitable consequence of abortion as a choice. Logically why is it morally acceptable to choose to abort on the basis of lifestyle, but not on the basis of gender?
Abortion is a tragedy, regardless of the reason it is carried out. A child aborted due to its gender is no more tragic than a child aborted due to the fact that it is less than physically perfect. Whilst the EU threatens Hungary with financial penalties for promoting adoption instead of abortion, then it has absolutely no moral authority to prevent parents from finding out the sex of their unborn, if that is their choice.
I am a passionate defender of the rights of the unborn as well as the elderly and the terminally or chronically sick. I believe that every life is of equal value and worth , from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death.
I give my time, my effort and what little spare money I have to the pro-life cause. What do the various organisations actually do to deserve my money? They did not support the Right to Know campaign, on the grounds that the potential reduction in abortions could not be quantified; it could not be ascertained precisely how many women may take up the offer of independent counselling and because Crisis Pregnancy Centres could be put at risk.
Let me address these points one by one.
Why does the precise number regarding the potential reduction in abortions matter? It is obvious that if women are given truly independent counselling, off the premises of the abortion provider and allowed to think and talk through all of the options, that some may well re-consider an instinctive reaction to abort a pregnancy and decide to continue the pregnancy. Even if just one life was saved, this would have been worthwhile – since when was the pro-life cause utilitarian in nature? Indeed a utilitarian attitude is the very antithesis of a pro-life mentality, one that is generous to every single individual.
Again, does it matter how many women may or may not have taken up the offer? Is this not ungenerous and contrary to the spirit of the pro-life cause. We know that abortion HURTS women. This is why I feel so very strongly about abortion. We know, it hurts women as much as it does their children. We provide post-abortion counselling and listening. How many times have women rung up, often in the small hours of the morning, wanting to talk through their hurt and pain with someone who will understand? Women who have felt pressured, by their partners, by their families, by the expectations of society, to abort their unborn child. Society does not allow a woman to grieve after abortion. She has exercised her choice, a perfectly valid and legitimate one, so what is there to be upset about? If she recognises that this was a life, she is told that she is being illogical, this was after all, only a cluster of cells, not a real person (despite the fact that by the time of even the earliest abortions, the foetus is fully formed), not a viable human being so there is nothing to get upset about. If the humanity of the unborn child is admitted, it only compounds the woman’s grief.
Part of our ministry involves helping to heal the physical and emotional aftermath of abortion. I have spent hour upon hour listening to women crying because, in their words “I killed my baby and I don’t think I can ever forgive myself”. “I didn’t want to, but I felt I had no other choice”, “if I could have my time again, I would never have done this”, “I was unprepared for the grief, it was like hitting a brick wall at 60 miles an hour”, “no-one warned me that I was going to have to experience a type of labour, until it was too late”, “the procedure left scars on my cervix which could have left me infertile”.
We know the reality of abortion, we witness the aftermath all the time. There are many women I have spoken to, who may not have changed their decision to abort their child, and whilst none of us could ever sanction the death of an unborn child, is it not better that a woman who decides to proceed with an abortion, does so in a state of informed knowledge, so that she may be prepared for the potential ordeal? An abortion, very much like childbirth, is the unknown. Nobody can experience it on behalf of the woman, nobody can say with any certainty how she will feel afterwards. Surely it is better that she may be informed of all the risks and options available to her, in order to alleviate her suffering at the other end. The study produced in the Journal of Psychiatry last week which was a review of all major studies to date, stated that women who had been through abortion were 81% more likely to suffer from mental health problems. A woman who has experienced an abortion is 55% more likely to suffer mental health issues than a woman who is forced to continue with her unplanned pregnancy.
Don’t we owe it to WOMEN, to have fought this issue just a bit harder, rather than focus purely on the numbers? We know that unlike the ardent pro-choicers, that we cannot assume that a woman knows her own mind. This is not sexist or misogynist, but accepting that due to the misogynist nature of today’s society, women are very often coerced into aborting their unborn babies because a pregnancy is not convenient. A woman’s fertility and subsequent pregnancies must not simply be seen as an inconvenient side effect of gender, for which a remedy must be found. To compel a woman to disregard the natural product of her innate sexuality is oppression.
I have heard countless women tell me that in their hearts they didn’t want to abort their babies, they experienced a visceral reaction towards their unborn, as one woman said to me “I just wanted to be challenged”. An unplanned pregnancy is terrifying. I should know, I have experienced two. No-one can go through it for you, but just one statement “it will be fine, you can do this” is all it takes to offer comfort and support. Countless women state that there was nothing “wrong” with the counselling or consultation (although bear in mind it is the lack of counselling that women testify as being one of their regrets) it was simply that they went into an abortion clinic, stated why they felt ambivalent about the pregnancy, why they felt that abortion might be the option and this was confirmed to them, no alternatives were offered or discussed. Obviously the abortion clinics trusted that the women knew their own minds and had already made their decision. Once the doubts about the pregnancy had been outlined, the discussion was moved on to methods of abortion.
We owed it to women to get this amendment through, which is why I vehemently supported it. Not simply to reduce the numbers of abortions, not just to abolish the one-stop-shop nature of the abortion clinic, but to help women and avoid some of the terrible stress and trauma that will be experienced by so many women. I wonder how the 600 women who had an abortion today are feeling? I wonder how many of them had access to truly independent counselling? I wonder how many of them really had absolutely no other option?
This was so minor, it would have done absolutely nothing in terms of changing the laws surrounding abortion, but it could have done a great deal to alleviate suffering and distress and we absolutely stuffed this one up.
Let’s be honest, everyone knows that Nadine Dorries is something of a political liability. She has a tendency to be rather elastic with the facts, her parliamentary style has something to be desired and she is considered a loose cannon by the Conservative Party. Whatever she did in the run-up to Wednesday (I have heard some unsubstantiated rumours) it upset her own political ally enough that he basically told her to shut up and sit down in Parliament and then proceeded to desert her in battle, in a humiliating and unprecedented switch to the other side. Whatever Nadine had done, it had seriously riled Frank. He treated her with utter ruthlessness, as did the Conservative Leadership.
But let’s not just blame this on Nadine. We know what her style is and her personal reputation. We know that she is a PR disaster and yet she ploughs on regardless. We know that whatever else she is principled and crucially we also know that she surrounds herself with a team of numpties. This campaign was a disaster from start to finish. Way back in March, those in the know predicted, look, this isn’t going to go anywhere. They know Nadine’s history and saw the utter carnage of the 2008HFE bill. Those running the Right to Know campaign made some basic and fundamental errors and were lacking in professionalism. One example being that templates for people to contact their MPs were noticeably lacking.
We know that the pro-choice lobby would blow this amendment out of all proportion. We know how slick their PR operation is. It should have been obvious that they would attempt to carry out a sting operation on Crisis Pregnancy Centres and thus pro-life organisations should have had their house in order. What in the name of all that is holy, is Care Confidential still doing with a manual that bangs on about “sin and grieving God” etc etc. What an own goal. The pro-life cause already has an image of being weird religious fundamental Christians, despite the fact that there are many secular adherents. Stuff like this does not help and is really indefensible, both in terms of PR and more importantly in terms of practice. Now that I am a practising Catholic, I would obviously find religious spiritual counselling enormously helpful. When I had my first unplanned pregnancy I was a lapsed Catholic, more agnostic than anything else, and had a counsellor attempted to talk to me about God, I would have gone running straight to the first abortion clinic. Women who are frightened do not need to be given religious guidance, unless they specifically seek it. It is utterly counter-productive and loses all professional credibility.
ALL of the pro-life organisations who carry out counselling should have foreseen this and should have had their house in order. The PR handling by LIFE of the Guardian sting was a joke. It was left to bloggers like Archbishop Cranmer to sort out the mess and LIFE owe His Grace an enormous thank you. They are lucky to have such an erudite, principled, influential and impassioned supporter. Even if he is dead. It says something when they leave it in the hands of someone who died over 500 years ago. I gave this month’s donation to His Grace’s collection plate. He was a much worthier recipient than any of the so-called professionals.
I am hoping that Damian Thompson will elaborate further, but believe me the emails I have seen between Ben Quinn of the Guardian, Sex Education for Choice and certain individuals at LIFE defy belief. My dog could have done a better job. These stings should have been preempted, those volunteers requiring additional training should have been identified, so that what scant “evidence” there was, could have been disregarded. Furthermore LIFE had the opportunity to launch a pre-emptive strike and did not.
So we’ve utterly failed. SPUC can laugh at LIFE’s incompetence whilst not grasping the reality that absolutely nobody takes them seriously in the first place. Crisis Pregnancy Centres are now at risk, NOT because of Nadine’s amendment, but because they didn’t have their house in order. Everybody blames Nadine and yet her amendment did not have the potential to threaten them, it was their own ineptitude.
Speaking in the Catholic Herald, in a horrendous and false capitulation to abortion providers, which no-one can condone, Josephine Quintavelle says that the Dorries amendment was flawed from the start and warns about it splitting the pro-life movement. What pro-life movement? A disparate group of organisations, none of whom seem to be able to produce any coherent or united message. LIFE, despite being a non-denominational organisation have to fight off accusations of “religious nut jobs” whereas SPUC are quite happy to go with that. On the one level, there’s nothing wrong with an openly Catholic pro-life organisation, except, ahem, surely this should be the responsibility of the CATHOLIC CHURCH? Where were they in all this? Where were the Catholic MPs? Why doesn’t the Catholic Church in the UK speak out more about abortion, why does it not do something to build up a solid pro-life movement, instead of handing thousands of pounds of parishioners’ money to organisations that are as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike?
If the Catholic Church was able to martial the huge amount of grass-root support in the pews into a tangible organisation, then no longer would people be able to claim that Catholics weren’t all against abortion. Moreover there would then be a very strong and influential arm that could add considerable weight to any secular or political pro-life organisation. What I really don’t get is why there are so many different disparate pro-life groups? It’s incredibly confusing for someone wanting to engage in activism and wanting to know which mast to affix one’s colours. They are all sinking ships.
I commented in support of LIFE on Iain Dale’s blog the other day and was instantly worried that by supporting one group, I may then alienate another. It shouldn’t have to be like this. Why can’t everyone unite and pool resources and expertise, or is that just too simplistic? So and so did x to so and so and ne’er the twain shall meet. Meanwhile SPUC rule themselves out of serious discourse by focusing upon internal politics and rulings of the Catholic Church, discussing seemingly irrelevant issues such as homosexuality, LIFE leave themselves open to stings, Right to Life fights valiantly led by a stalwart of the movement, one for whom I have enormous respect, but who is now an octogenarian and I have absolutely no idea what the Pro Life Alliance do, other than to sit back and blame the convenient scapegoat and say whatever seems politically expedient.
Damian Thompson said that young pro-lifers are in despair. I don’t know if he counted me amongst those, but he is right. His suggestion was that we scrap the lot and start again. I’d love to Damian, it shouldn’t be down to me, a mother and student, to be analysing stats and finding interesting narratives, such as I did in the teenage pregnancy rates. I found another interesting one the other day, which would have supported Dorries’ campaign no end. I rang someone up and asked them what to do with it. “Sit on it” I was advised, “it will come in handy later, Dorries’ campaign is going nowhere and her people won’t know how to use this information properly.” I was stunned that no-one else seemed to have highlighted my discovery which upon further expert discussion was not only feasible but entirely logical. Why had no-one else drawn attention to it? Why was this missed?
I don’t want to start another pro-life organisation, I have neither the political expertise or experience, though I don’t think anyone could doubt my passion. It would only be just another splinter group. What I want to achieve is cohesion and unity. Let’s have one strong pro-life group together with a very strong Catholic movement. Membership of the two do not need to be mutually exclusive, however we need to ensure that there is a group not only for Catholics, but for those of all religions and none. If we couldn’t get this trifling amendment through, against the mighty budgets and slick operation of the pro-choice groups, what chance do we have on the bigger, more substantive issues? I have expended so much emotional energy for this, and I will continue to fight and fight, but right now it seems like a losing cause. If we’re not careful all pro-life organisations are in jeopardy and buoyed up with this success, I shouldn’t be surprised if we see forays into getting the second signature removed and time-limits extended. The Conservatives have shown they have little stomach for the cause, it’s not politically expedient. The most worrying implication of this, and believe me this will have implications for Catholics and Christians everywhere, is that votes of free conscience seem to be under threat. This is a huge threat to democracy and society as a whole and yet no-one seems to have batted an eyelid.
For those who didn’t support this because it didn’t mean an end to abortion or the numbers weren’t big enough, or they were too embarrassed by Dorries, next time I speak to a distressed woman, who feels that she was pressured into a quick decision or wasn’t given all of the available information, I shall comfort her as usual and tell her that she must not blame herself. She should blame all of those who let their ideology get in the way of an amendment that could have meant the difference between life and death.
The Catechesis of Caroline 