In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Kenyan hospitals overwhelmed by women injured by illegal abortion. Thank a “pro-lifer.”

abortion laws
Abortion laws world-wide. Red countries on the map: Abortion illegal in all circumstances or permitted only to save a woman’s life. Pink countries on the map: Abortion legally permitted only to save a woman’s life or protect her physical health. via.

Compare with:

maternal mortality
via (caution: disturbing images of dead children).

Notice anything?

Unsafe abortion is the leading cause of gynecological emergencies in Kenya, where the procedure is illegal. Several studies all yielded the same conclusion: Hospitals are overwhelmed with women injured (and sometimes killed) by illegal abortion. In one study, 43 percent of all women admitted for gynecological disorders were women who had unsafe abortions; in another, unsafe abortions accounted for 60 percent of gynecological emergencies; in another, 87 percent. More than half of the unsafe abortions in the second study were procured by girls under the age of 14.

Our current international policy promotes abstinence until marriage for women in developing nations (including Kenya). We cut off funding to any organization that so much as mentions abortion — including advocating for abortion rights to save the health and lives of these women. This policy — the Global Gag Rule — puts women and children’s lives in danger in an effort to appease our current president’s “pro-life” base. They’ll tell you that the Gag Rule is in place because U.S. tax dollars should not be funding abortions abroad. What they won’t tell you — because they’re lying through their teeth — is that U.S. dollars have been barred from funding abortions since the 1970s; U.S. dollars did not fund abortions abroad during the Clinton era, when the Gag Rule was rescinded; and U.S. dollars will never fund abortion abroad, even if the Gag Rule is lifted — unless the 1973 Helms Amendment is repealed, and that won’t be happening any time soon. So this isn’t about paying for abortions. It’s about allowing health care organizations to agitate for abortion rights. It’s about allowing health care workers to mention abortion as an option in countries where the procedure is legal. It’s about allowing clinics to fund legal abortions with their own non-U.S. money.

But ideology is more important than reality, and as we cut off health care funds and chant “just get married!,” the bodies pile up (keep in mind that the same clinics which provide reproductive health services are often the same clinics that provide safer sex information, sexual health education, HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention information, pre-natal care, and well-baby care).

Dozens of organizations and health care clinics have lost funding because of the Gag Rule. Restoring funding to the United Nations Population Fund, just one of the organizations whose budgets were cut, could prevent 2 million unwanted pregnancies and 800,000 abortions this year. Getting contraception to women who want it could prevent 22 million abortions, 23 million unplanned births, and 1.4 million infant deaths.

I covered this more in-depth a couple of years ago, and I’ll re-emphasize something I wrote then:

Bush’s policies have also exacerbated the global AIDS crisis, as many of the family planning clinics that were shut down or de-funded by the gag rule also served as HIV/AIDS education and treatment centers. The U.S. Agency for International Development, for example, provides more condoms to developing nations than any other organization, but its shipments have been scaled back or cut off completely to 29 countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East because of the gag rule.

Funding for condoms is so low that if all the condoms in Africa were evenly distributed to the men on that continent, each man would be allotted three per year.

In places like Kenya, nearly half of maternal mortalities are the result of unsafe abortions. The average Kenyan woman has five births, and lives until the age of 50. The majority of Kenyan women lack access to contraception. And while terms like “unsafe abortion” don’t sound particularly pleasant, let’s keep in mind what the reality of “unsafe abortion” actually is for many women. From a pre-election column I wrote in 2004:*

When you go to cast your vote Nov. 2, remember women like Hillary Fyfe, whose abstinence-based HIV prevention group Family Life Movement in Zambia lost $30,000 in U.S. funding due to Bush’s policies.

Fyfe has seen the results of the gag rule firsthand, as women induce abortions by “swallowing pounded glass, pushing sharp needles or other unsafe instruments through their uterus, pushing poisonous substances up their vaginas like cuttings from trees or roots, drinking bleach mixed with glass, or overdosing on malaria pills.

“All of the above end up with the death of both mother and child,” Fyfe writes. “Or the child dies and the mother is crippled for life. These cases are a daily occurrence.”

In countries where abortion is legal — like the United States — it’s one of the safest surgical procedures around. It’s safer than getting a penicillin shot. But because we love “life” so much, we’ll make it harder for women in poorer nations to have the same right to medical care and bodily integrity. And while we’re talking about how much we love babies, we’ll look the other way when desperate women are drinking bleach mixed with glass to terminate a pregnancy. We’ll look the other way when actual babies — you know, born ones — are dying. We’ll look the other way when children are orphaned because our international policies kill and maim their mothers. And we’ll still have the audacity to call ourselves “pro-life.”

via Feministing.

*Excuse the quoting-of-thyself. It’s just easier than re-researching every piece of information I’ve already written about.


74 thoughts on Kenyan hospitals overwhelmed by women injured by illegal abortion. Thank a “pro-lifer.”

  1. Am I to presume that the gag rule keeps our money from funding people who say “swallowing bleach and glass shards doesn’t work!” because that’s ‘talking about abortion’?

    *shudder* and the friggin’ Repubs want to claim they’re in Iraq because they’re SO into human rights, like, totally.

  2. Wow! Pro-lifers are on a roll today!

    It’s just ghastly (even though it’s not unexpected, unfortunately) how little our country values the health, well-being, and autonomy of women, both at home and abroad.

  3. Not that it alters your main point, but there’s at least on inaccuracy on the map: Western Australia improved abortion laws somewhat in 1998. Abortions are now legally available for any reason before 20 weeks. (In practice, the “mental health” exception was very liberally interpreted before then.)

    There are still conditions (a doctor other than the doctor performing the procedure must explain the procedure and offer counselling), and after 20 weeks a hospital committee is involved, so there’s still a long way to go. There is a good Marie Stopes clinic in Perth, but for less privileged rural women, access is still precarious.

    More info.

  4. Ok Jill, i just found this site… And this being one of the first things I have read… I must ask you to confirm something I read… Or maybe rephrase it so I better understand what you are saying/thinking… Or maybe I will just come back when I get some sleep 😉
    You said:
    ‘ “We’ll look the other way when actual babies — you know, born ones — are dying. We’ll look the other way when children are orphaned because our international policies kill and maim their mothers. And we’ll still have the audacity to call ourselves “pro-life.” ‘

    Are you saying that babies aren’t really “real live” babies until they get slapped on the rear?
    Cause thats what I am seeing…
    If thats where your going… I would suggest rethinking how you wrote it… For most of those “pro-lifers” out there with a basic knowledge of human life. Would rip you apart…

    Also… Why are people so quick to pass out condoms, birth control pills and free abortion tickets these days? And so slow to teach kids things like self control, responsibility, morality, honesty, love, humility… man… the more words I think of that would describe honorable virtues… The more I realize that our youth are being dumbed down… What happened to things like Chivalry? Most people these days don’t even know what that means…
    They would rather learn simple words like f**k(and not even know how to use it…) or tolerance(and not know how to apply it)

    I am happy you want to save lives… But you seem to want to just “feed the poor” But there is a saying…
    “give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, TEACH a man to fish and he will eat for a LIFETIME”

    Maybe instead of giving the kids a safer way to have sex… Or easier ways to get rid of those problems… We could start teaching them honorable virtues…
    Teach them how to fish… Instead of giving them a fish…

    I feel sorry for this generation… Technologically they are more advanced then ever… But in all reality they’re becoming more foolish… They try to gain knowledge, when what they really should be seeking. Is wisdom. A knowledgeable fool… Almost sounds like an oximoron… Sadly its becoming a common mindset amongst the young and even many of the “old” or to be more politically correct… “Mature”.

    I respect you for voicing your opinion… I really do.
    And in a NON accusing tone.

    Remember not to try and justify wrongdoings…
    That is becoming SOOO popular today… No one want to take responsibility for their actions… They will do anything to blame their problems on someone, or something else…

    Alcoholics now have a disease… Its not their fault anymore…
    Same with obesity… Or whatever the case may be… “scientists” just make up new crap to help appease our consciences…

    I don’t know if I will make it back here… But it has been… interesting reads…
    And don’t look at my grammar or spelling… its late and I dont feel like reading it over 😉

    Also… I have read a few pieces here and it seems as though MANY people here try and bash other people using cuss words… Which if done properly can be a “good” way of making someone look stupid… Or whatever…

    But like most people these days… They misuse them, and end up sounding like illiterate fools…
    So I will end on that… Watch what you say when insulting someone… If you try using uncouth words, then you will most likely end up sounding the bigger fool…

    good… morning all.

  5. wait….you mean bodily integrity and security of person are supposed to be, what, basic human rights or something? that’s crazy talk!

    (And can we talk for a second about how I came here to procrastinate and not write my paper about reproductive health as a human right / the global gag rule as a by-default violation of that right? Yeah. Thanks for guilting me into cutting my study break/procrastination time short.)

  6. Notice anything?
    Yes, I notice that both are co-determined by poverty and a lack of women’s rights.
    Even if legalizing abortion cut maternal deaths in half in poor countries, the map would look qualitatively the same.
    In the places where abortion laws and wealth are *not* correlated (e.g. it’s illegal in Ireland and legal in S. Africa), maternal mortality is smaller in the rich country.

    I don’t want to detract from your important point. This report from the UK government quotes a 2000 UN study that says that worldwide annual maternal mortality is over half a million with 68,000 deaths attributable to the 20 million unsafe abortions. The true effects of illegal abortions might be higher (even aside from underreporting) because (according to the report) there are 80 million unwanted pregnancies per year, and presumably lack of availability of safe abortion means deaths are attributed to a complication of pregnancy when the ban on abortion was indirectly responsible.

    I could say similar things about your post on Mississippi. Abortion restrictions are dangerous enough without you needing to confuse correlation and causality.

  7. Have a look at Ireland on those maps. No abortion, but low maternal mortality. How do they do it? They out-source their abortions. Irish women travel to the UK and mainland Europe for abortions – last year over five and half thousand of them. This being Ireland there is even a government body that funds counselling agencies that tell you how to obtain abortion overseas. No joke!

    Check out: the government agency: Crisis Pregnancy Agency, the campaign it runs: Positive Options and the Irish equivalent of Planned Parenthood IFPA, whose counselling service receives funds from the CPA.

  8. Not to detract at all from this map, but it’s also important to note the overall quality of medical care, general prosperity and health in the areas of highest infant mortality, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. I feel that poor access to medical care, malnutrition, insufficient social infrastructure and rampant poverty are at least as much at fault in the high rates of infant mortality as lack of access to legal abortion.

    Without going into a long diatribe against such factors as colonial meddling for centuries by European powers, the force-feeding of religion as a prerequisite to access to even the most basic of things that we take for granted, the absolute indifference much of the world shows towards the people who live in these regions (save lobbing a few thousand bombs in their general direction from time to time), and the horrors that power-mongering dictators visit upon their own people in the name of a tenuous grasp on power, allow me to say that the situation is far too complex to simply boil down into any singular cause.

    The lack of legalized abortion in these areas is simply one more nail in the coffin, not the only one.

  9. Which isn’t to say that criminalizing abortion is any more acceptable than the other things I’ve mentioned above, because it’s not.

  10. Just last night I learned that here in Nicaragua there have been at least 40 maternal deaths since January, more than double the rate registered in the same time frame last year. The change? Eliminating the legal protections for abortions where the mother’s life is in danger.

  11. i’m pro-choice up to the three month mark for strictly conservative reasons: i don’t want to see women get killed or injured due to an unsafe, illegal abortion.

    but i have a hard time finding empathy for women who drink bleach mixed with glass or insert sharp needles into their uterus to kill their fetus.

    the problem can’t be reduced to the simple: women are denied abortions therefore they resort to doing these things to their bodies.

    that makes the women who did this completely blameless. it also does not explain the map which seems to be dependent on poverty and education levels, not just access to abortion.

    look at saudi arabia for example. abortion is legal there, but maternal deaths are much lower than sub-saharan africa.

    i’d venture a guess that has something to do with saudi arabia’s wealth and education status. i’d venture that few women there would try to drink bleach with glass.

    an even more striking example is with india. there, abortions are legal, but the maternal deaths seem to be on par with other countries in it’s economic level.

  12. Even if legalizing abortion cut maternal deaths in half in poor countries, the map would look qualitatively the same.
    In the places where abortion laws and wealth are *not* correlated (e.g. it’s illegal in Ireland and legal in S. Africa), maternal mortality is smaller in the rich country.

    Well, sort of. As other commenters have pointed out, Ireland outsources its abortions to the UK. As for South Africa, poverty is still a huge problem, but deaths from abortion have dropped 91 percent since the procedure was legalized. In many sub-Saharan African nations, abortion-related deaths account for as many as half of all maternal deaths. That definitely lowers the maternal mortality rate.

    And look at South Africa on the maternal mortality map — sure, it’s not as low as Ireland, but it’s a lot lower than many other countries in the same region.

  13. I could say similar things about your post on Mississippi. Abortion restrictions are dangerous enough without you needing to confuse correlation and causality.

    Where did I claim causality? I noted that there are significant overlaps between restrictive abortion laws and maternal mortality rates. They are correlated, but I never claimed that the abortion laws were the cause of the high maternal mortality rates. I do think that they’re a cause — and an important one — but certainly not the only one.

    As you point out, issues like general women’s empowerment, poverty, a history of colonialism, health care access, etc all intertwine and influence both abortion laws and maternal mortality. That was more the point of the map — that there are intertwining oppressions, and that one cannot separate reproductive freedom from health care and other human rights. At least not without disastrous results.

  14. Dude. What’s up with the ignorant troll-fest?

    Fab, I have a question for you. You say: “that makes the women who did this completely blameless”

    What on earth do you think they should be blamed for? Not having access to proper reproductive care? Not having access to or the choice to use birth control? Or is it simply because they are female?

  15. The lack of legalized abortion in these areas is simply one more nail in the coffin, not the only one.

    Agreed. And that lack of abortion rights is highly correlated with lack of women’s rights in general, which is itself correlated to all the other things you mentioned (post-colonial societies, etc). My intention wasn’t to say that abortion rights are the only factor influencing maternal mortality, rather that a whole slew of oppressions are grouped together in many of these countries, and that issues like health care access, education, human rights, etc are tied to both abortion and maternal mortality.

  16. an even more striking example is with india. there, abortions are legal, but the maternal deaths seem to be on par with other countries in it’s economic level.

    India is a country with sharp economic divisions. Wealthy women are able to obtain legal abortions and proper pregnancy/birth care, poor women are not. If abortion were made illegal in India, maternal death would likely rise even higher as only the very wealthy would be able to go abroad to abort, and the moderately wealthy would then resort to illegal abortions.

  17. Dude. What’s up with the ignorant troll-fest?

    why do you say i’m trolling?

    i’m not trying to do anything here other than examine your argument.

    and i’m not doing that in a disrespectful manner, so i don’t really appreciate being called a “troll”.

    Fab, I have a question for you. You say: “that makes the women who did this completely blameless”

    What on earth do you think they should be blamed for? Not having access to proper reproductive care? Not having access to or the choice to use birth control? Or is it simply because they are female?

    here’s the thing jill, i agree that there are women who needlessly die because they want to get rid of unwanted pregnancy. that right there is the main reason why i take the clintonian approach of supporting abortion so that it’s legal, safe, and cheap.

    so please quit extrapolating from my post in an effort to paint me as someone who hates females.

    i have a hard time empathizing with a woman who takes bleach with shards of glass in order to kill her fetus.

    there’s a point in these discourses where the blame is either placed squarely on the heirachy or on the oppressed. but the middle ground is to say look, there is no excuse for a women to drink bleach with glass even if there were no abortive alternatives available. the alternative given those circumstances would be to have the baby and live with it.

    the women of saudi arabia, egypt, algeria, chile, etc seem to be doing that.

    that’s all i’m pointing out here.

    i can try to understand why someone would be driven to do something like this, but i can’t empathize with it.

  18. Firstly, Fab, there is a difference between the words “Jenna” and “Jill.” In fact, with the exception of the first letter, they have nothing in common whatsoever.

    Secondly, why could you not empathize with someone who is desparate, has no decent reproductive knowlege or education, no access to medically accurate and safe procedures, and no real hope of gaining any of those things?

    I understand that it is hard to fathom and, indeed, upsetting to imagine, but to place blame upon them? How dare you blame someone for something in which they had no choice?

    How do you know that these women a) can carry the fetus to term without dying or grave injury b) that they can afford to carry it to term or c) that they don’t have a myriad of other reasons why carrying to term is unthinkable? Who, exactly, are you to judge them?

  19. Firstly, Fab, there is a difference between the words “Jenna” and “Jill.” In fact, with the exception of the first letter, they have nothing in common whatsoever.

    ahem….

    well that’s embarrassing.

    sorry jill.

    jill posted before and after you, so my eyes kind of glazed.

    but i’ll get to the rest of you post later.

  20. but i have a hard time finding empathy for women who drink bleach mixed with glass or insert sharp needles into their uterus to kill their fetus.

    Judge not lest ye be judged. Who are YOU to judge another woman’s circumstances? Have you ever lived in the African bush? Want to know what the level of education is there? How about Kibera, the slum outside Nairobi where two MILLION people live in running sewage and cardboard shacks. Do you know what desperation is? When you HAVE no rights and most especially no right to refuse your “husband” from forcing you to have sex. No, Fab, I think you need a re-think. It’s unconscionable to judge these women from your comfortable spot in the developed world, with computer and all. That is the worst kind of hypocrisy. for shame.

  21. to have the baby and live with it.

    Oh please. Ever heard of starvation? Or do you mean, have the baby and watch it die? There IS no more food.

  22. First, Fab needs to shut up. You have no idea what it is like to not be able to feed the children you have. Many of these women are desparate, and they don’t have birth control or basic health care. The risk to their own life in often an attempt to save the children they already have.

    Second, Jill I am going to have to agree with aram on this one. I think the much greater issue is poverty. Poverty correlates with maternal and infant mortality, and there is a direct causal link.

    I think a better comparison than Ireland would be Central America, which is poor, but not as poor as Subsaharan Africa. Both areas are very restrictive on abortion, but maternal and infant mortality are much lower.

    It does not take away from your larger point that some of the maternal mortality could be decreased by making aboriton legal, but I can guarantee you that if you went out and talked with African women and asked them what they want, abortion is fairly far down on the list. Education for themselves and their children, birth control, vaccinations, anti-retrovirals, safe drinking water, electricity, shoes, shelter, a reduction in violent crime (especially that directed at women and children), roads, cars, and a whole host of other things would rank well above abortion.

    My sisters-in-law are African women, all born in Nigeria and all living in America. Two of them have had serious pregnancy related problem while they were here in the US. In one case the child, born 3 months premature would not have survived in Nigeria. In the other case my sister had post delivery preclampsia (yes very strange) the nearly killed her, and she would have likely died in Nigeria. Their grandmother died in child birth, and their mother was lucky have 8 children with few complications. If you talk to them, they will tell you they want the medical technology and the health care infrastructure that the US has. They never mention abortion.

  23. Jill: To me the original post seemed to imply causality, and that the illegality of abortions accounted for a majority of maternal deaths, rather than the 15 or 20% that seems more accurate, and would still be a hugely important deal. You didn’t say it outright, but I still feel like the implication was there, especially with your opening two maps. But this is a matter of interpretation, so I suppose reasonable people could differ.

    Just like you implied that in Mississippi, the high infant mortality rates are because of the anti-child/woman/family policies of the nominally “pro-life” politicians in charge. I’m inclined to be sympathetic to this claim, but you really have to separate out the effects of poverty when saying that, for example, red states spend less per child on social services. This report lists state spending on health care as a percentage of gross state product. Mississippi is near the top of the list with 4.4%, but if you look at it per-capita then New York’s 4.2% works out to be nearly twice as much.

    I want to be convinced that it’s because of policies associated with anti-choice politics, but I’m not yet.

  24. Secondly, why could you not empathize with someone who is desparate, has no decent reproductive knowlege or education, no access to medically accurate and safe procedures, and no real hope of gaining any of those things?

    you do not need decent medical knowledge to know that inserting needles into your uterus or drinking bleach isn’t a good idea. let’s get real here.

    let’s agree that they are desperate, but i won’t agree with your premise that being desperate justifies or excuses doing something like this.

    there’s a point where there is such a thing as personal responsibility.

    to compare apples and oranges, i can understand what drives people to suicide, but unless there was some sort of specific mental illness, i can’t feel sorry for them for doing it. or to take it a step much further, i can understand the conditions and circumstances that might make a suicide bomber, but i can’t empathize with one.

    it was still his/her choice.

    that’s the mentality i have with this.

    it’s sad that women are stuck in positions like this, but there are some women who deal with it and continue to live their lives raising the baby.

    How dare you blame someone for something in which they had no choice?

    that seems pretty ridiculous to me.

    according to you, no one oppressed should be blamed for their actions.

    How do you know that these women a) can carry the fetus to term without dying or grave injury b) that they can afford to carry it to term or c) that they don’t have a myriad of other reasons why carrying to term is unthinkable?

    i don’t know and i’m not going to assume one way or another. i just know that there are other women in their circumstances who do not do this.

    justifying this behaviour isn’t going to help.

  25. Second, Jill I am going to have to agree with aram on this one. I think the much greater issue is poverty. Poverty correlates with maternal and infant mortality, and there is a direct causal link.

    Yeah, of course. I don’t deny that poverty is a huge issue — I’m pointing out that these varying oppressions (poverty, post-colonialism, lack of women’s rights, lack of health care) are all intertwined. Poverty is obviously the largest causal factor, but it isn’t the only one, and abortion rights are correlated with general economic well-being and better health,

  26. Fab needs to shut up. You have no idea what it is like to not be able to feed the children you have.

    i’ll say exactly what i want to say, when i want to say it. you have absolutely no control over my words.

    if one of the moderators wants to ban me from this site or ask me to leave i’ll respect that.

    but that’s up to them, not you.

    thank you

  27. Whoa, I was going to respond to Fab and then everyone else did.

    If I could just add one thing, I’d say that inability or refusal to empathize is probably getting in the way of understanding. Personally, I would often condemn people for making decisions that felt to me irrational, self-destructive, evil or whatever; but then after, usually with some difficulty, making an effort to empathize with them, I could understand their choices much better.

    Try, really hard, to imagine what it would be like to be pregnant, desperate, uneducated, without a reliable source of information about health risks, and willing to take unknown risks because of the known dangers of having a baby (not all health-related).

  28. Fab said:

    you do not need decent medical knowledge to know that inserting needles into your uterus or drinking bleach isn’t a good idea. let’s get real here.

    Indeed? How did you come about this, exactly? If you have been told, “what you need to do is x,” and you have never received contradictory information, how are you supposed to assume that it will cause lasting physical harm?

    Fab says:

    let’s agree that they are desperate, but i won’t agree with your premise that being desperate justifies or excuses doing something like this.

    Being desperate justifies a great deal. It justifies murder, it justifies theft, it justifies all sorts of actions we would consider criminal. It justifies those things by even our law. I would like you to make a coherent argument why being desperate to rid yourself of a pregnancy does not justify any action taken by the one wishing to rid themselves of a debilitiating and possibly-life threatning condition.

    according to you, no one oppressed should be blamed for their actions.

    Bullpucky. However, being oppressed to that level does indeed excuse a great deal.

    justifying this behaviour isn’t going to help.

    Actually, viewing the circumstances without moral judgement and with understanding will allow us to pinpoint the cause of the issues and advance possible solutions. What will blaming these women do to resolve the problem, pray tell?

  29. What Fab doesn’t realize is that for many of these women choosing abortion is being prolife. They are trying to save the lives of the children they have, who in some cases are malnourished already. How is having one more mouth to feed going to help that woman and her children?

    I think we need to send Fab to the slums of India or the rural areas of subsaharan Africa and see how well s/he fairs? Dude if you can find reliable birth control and health care in rural Botswana.

  30. Intersting how “face of the nameless” only talks about kids, ignoring that we’re talking about grown women who in many cases are married.

  31. I actually gave up on Face of the Nameless. I think that particular person is far beyond any hope of recovery.

  32. Being desperate justifies a great deal. It justifies murder, it justifies theft, it justifies all sorts of actions we would consider criminal. It justifies those things by even our law.

    ~jenna

    no, i’m sorry, it really doesn’t.

    there are a lot of people oppressed, some choose to act responsibly some don’t.

    that’s the only difference here.

    would like you to make a coherent argument why being desperate to rid yourself of a pregnancy does not justify any action taken by the one wishing to rid themselves of a debilitiating and possibly-life threatning condition.

    a) you’re assuming that the pregnancy is life-threatening

    b) my understanding is that life-threatening pregnancies can be terminated in these countries, so…

    c) i’m going to assume that these terminations are done for other reasons, possibly economic.

    if these are done for economic reasons, then why not argue passionately about getting rid of the economic burdens? the solution to kill an unborn child in order to save yourself the burden of feeding him/her, has got to be one of the most disgusting examples of machiavellian, amoral rationalization.

    there are actually very few people literally starving in this world (hunger is not the same as starving). we should be working on ways to alleviate that hunger rather than resort to justifying abortions.

    Actually, viewing the circumstances without moral judgement and with understanding will allow us to pinpoint the cause of the issues and advance possible solutions. What will blaming these women do to resolve the problem, pray tell?

    it’s not about “blaming” them. its about acknowledging that these actions are wrong, and coming up with a comprehensive plan that takes into account the cultural, religious, economic, and social backgrounds of the people.

    do not reduce this problem to one of abortion. abortions are also denied in saudi arabia, egypt, chile, etc.

  33. I think we need to send Fab to the slums of India or the rural areas of subsaharan Africa and see how well s/he fairs? Dude if you can find reliable birth control and health care in rural Botswana.

    ~ rachel

    it’s very presumptuous of you to assume that i’ve never been to the slums of the third world.

    I say ban FAB.

    yes.

    the best way to preach open-mindness is to silence those you disagree with.

  34. Hmmm.. I think we need a BINGO card with vague references to 1985 by Orwell. Maybe, the Trolls BINGO card. Fab would be “If you ban me coz I’m an asshole then you’re just silencing dissent”

  35. Jill said, “Yeah, of course. I don’t deny that poverty is a huge issue — I’m pointing out that these varying oppressions (poverty, post-colonialism, lack of women’s rights, lack of health care) are all intertwined. Poverty is obviously the largest causal factor, but it isn’t the only one, and abortion rights are correlated with general economic well-being and better health,”

    Fab pissed me off so much that I forgot to respond.

    I think you should have made this much more explicit. The word poverty is not in the original post, and it appears in the comments for the first time in Aram’s post.

    With all due respect to your argument, I feel the way the piece is currently constructed makes it seem like one of those “western feminist women” know best posts. The voices of women in these countries gets lost in the discussion. I am fairly certain that the women in developing countries feel that poverty alleviation would do much more solve the reproductive rights health care problems and improve the status of women and children. If you look at studies, this is what they tell us.

    To me the abortion issue is relevant, but only as it relates to reproductive rights, poverty, and health care.

  36. fab @ 35:

    so you have been to the “slums of the third world”, then?

    i think the women in question here are well aware that swallowing glass and puncturing their organs with sticks is “not a good idea”. it’s not something they’re doing for kicks. but they don’t have other options. “have the child and live with it” is not an option. it’s a punishment, at least when you phrase it that way — a punishment for women with so little power in society that they don’t have the right to consent to sex, often. they have no access to birth control, often. they can’t afford another child, often. what would you have them do?

    their situation is bad enough that risking death from poisoning or internal bleeding is PREFERABLE to trying to “have the child and live with it”. we don’t know why, though we can guess, of course: poverty, starvation, abandonment and/or physical abuse are likely involved. but regardless of the reasons, these women would rather risk dying in an exceptionally painful way than to take your non-option of “have the child and live with it”. that certainly says something about how shitty their lives are, doesn’t it? isn’t that a huge fucking sign that reproductive care and social reform are desperately needed in these places?

  37. Desperate times produce desperate measures… and not only in poor countries. I’m reminded of the young woman (in Texas?) who had her boyfriend beat her in the stomach with a baseball bat in an effort to induce a miscarriage because for some reason I forget (I think a time limit and the no helping minors get to another state law), she was unable to obtain an abortion.

    There are, of course, other stories such as this, even if not of that precise method.

    I find Fab’s inability to empathize with the situations of those who are in desperate times appalling, but not at all surprising – had more people this ability, the world would be in a much different place, I think.

    There are so many intersecting issues in matters such as this as they relate to poorer countries… death from AIDS as well as a myriad of very preventable diseases has decimated many families and support systems which may have in times made it quite so devastating to deliver and support yet another child, even if the father (who may, in some cases… especially in war torn areas… be a rapist and not a companion or husband) was not around for some reason.

    Conversely, those same death statistics, in times when there food to put on the table, healthcare and real family planning advice available, a sense of some sort of security and lack of war, access to water (which not all places have) and jobs and so on, would traditionally (especially for poorer, rural or farming families) encourage some to have a number children to sort of “replenish the supply”, so to speak. Also not always an optimal situation, especially for the woman, but if the other factors are present (as well as the right and education to say no, and to space out or limit families), then it’s up to them.

    There are, I agree, many different intersecting oppressions here, including poverty, post-colonialism, healthcare and so on… I also agree that one of the most important is poverty.

    Also, while I agree that access to safe, legal abortion is one of the keys to preventing the death and disablement of these women, there is a big error in concentrating on that and not on the other factors as well… after all, when your choice is between having a baby that you cannot feed, or that maybe will die of AIDS or a preventable disease within a few weeks, or that will cripple you because your body cannot handle it, due to whatever factors related to your situation, or that you fear for because you yourself are dying of a disease and there is no support system – and abortion, then there really ARE no choices.

  38. . Fab would be “If you ban me coz I’m an asshole then you’re just silencing dissent”

    what a crock.

    kate is not a friggin moderator, and i am responding to her as i would any other member who tells me to “shut up”.

    the petty insults and namecalling is growing very tiresome.

  39. rachel says:

    With all due respect to your argument, I feel the way the piece is currently constructed makes it seem like one of those “western feminist women” know best posts. The voices of women in these countries gets lost in the discussion. I am fairly certain that the women in developing countries feel that poverty alleviation would do much more solve the reproductive rights health care problems and improve the status of women and children. If you look at studies, this is what they tell us.

    how exactly is this different from my statement:

    “it’s not about “blaming” them. its about acknowledging that these actions are wrong, and coming up with a comprehensive plan that takes into account the cultural, religious, economic, and social backgrounds of the people.”

    ?

    newsflash: i got the same “western women know best” vibe from jill’s original post. you simply took my inability to empathize with women who swallow glass as a personal insult and decided to go on your personal tirade against me.

    you need to let go with the vindictiveness.


    kid says:

    i think the women in question here are well aware that swallowing glass and puncturing their organs with sticks is “not a good idea”. it’s not something they’re doing for kicks. but they don’t have other options. “have the child and live with it” is not an option. it’s a punishment, at least when you phrase it that way — a punishment for women with so little power in society that they don’t have the right to consent to sex, often. they have no access to birth control, often. they can’t afford another child, often. what would you have them do?

    i completely understand that oppressed women would take desperate measures to get out of their circumstances.

    i’m not going to continue to explain why i don’t particularly “feel” for women who come up with destructive ways to abort their fetuses, but i will say that we must emphasize alternatives to abortion.

    surely there’s a lack of condoms available, right? and if these societies are simply so patriachral that males won’t use condoms, then why not advocate giving out the morning after pill to people?

    it’s very troubling to me to see people try to use abortion as a birth control method.

    or worse, a quick fix to a complex structural problem.

  40. Because plan b isn’t 100% effective. because no method of BC is? Because some women can’t take plan b?

    Really, your ire is misplaced, and that is why people are responding with anger.

    It’s your rhetoric, not necessarily your point, that is creating the response, and that’s because rhetoric often speaks volumes of a person’s internal thoughts and structure.

  41. Because plan b isn’t 100% effective. because no method of BC is? Because some women can’t take plan b?

    so that’s why it’s best to simply not advocate it’s use?

    telling societies that have absolutely no healthcare infastructure to start allowing safe abortions is pretty chimeric, pie in the sky, western idealism.

    It’s your rhetoric, not necessarily your point, that is creating the response, and that’s because rhetoric often speaks volumes of a person’s internal thoughts and structure

    don’t arm-chair psychoanalyze me.

    i’ve been pretty upfront about my disdain for abortions that are done for economic/social reasons. but i’m also pretty
    much a social libertarian – i support the right for an elective one within the first trimester.

    the fact is, women will be getting rid of unwanted pregnancies anyways; i can support a safe, legal way for them to do that because i do not want women to die.

    in a similar way. i can understand the conditions that a drug user came out of, and i will support his access to safe needles, but i won’t advocate drugs or empathize with people who chose to use them.

  42. Fab,

    Once again the privliege of never being in the same circumstance shows you have the leisure of passing judgment without never knowing what it is to be in those shoes…

    a) you’re assuming that the pregnancy is life-threatening

    No assumption here. I worked in Post Abortion Care all over Kenya from the West in Kisumu to the North East in Lamu and I’ve seen too many women in the 18-30yr range present parities of 3+1 (3 live births and 1 dead) and higher ones for older women. Do you really think that most women living in rural areas don’t understand what it is to not be able to take care of their living children, risk their lives having another child, and then hearing how a potion, metal rod, punch, poison will help them avoid the pregnancy?

    b) my understanding is that life-threatening pregnancies can be terminated in these countries, so…

    Actually they cannot, in countries were abortion is legal, training is in the procedure is restricted to specialists i.e. OBGYN. This means that the vast majority of women in poor countries (most of whom reside in rural areas) will NEVER be able to afford or have access to such care (most specialists live in the cities). This is exactly why Post-Abortion Care became a necessary training program to arrest the number of (clinical and spontaneous) abortion related deaths BECAUSE the majority of women affected lived in rural areas.

    c) i’m going to assume that these terminations are done for other reasons, possibly economic.

    Really, you know what they say about making assumptions, right? When you reality is such that you can’t afford to be pregnant when you’re not well nourished, your children barely have enough to eat so that now that you’re more likely to be ill due to your pregnancy, not being able to provide and care for your family, and risk dying due to your pregnancy, “the economics” are less to be economic rather than survival.

    Now, if you had added the need for access to free or heavily subsidized contraceptive and reproductive health care I would considered yours a reasoned argument, but you further buttress your arrogant argument with this baseless statement.

    there are actually very few people literally starving in this world (hunger is not the same as starving). we should be working on ways to alleviate that hunger rather than resort to justifying abortions.

    The fact that the vast majority of people in this world and more so in sub-saharan African countries continue to struggle on less than $1/day is a reality that is accepted by every credible aid organization working in the international arena. The fact that no one here has yet to dissociate the need to improve access to food as well as access to contraception and reproductive health services shows just how far you’re willing to stretch your argument in the name of psuedo-intellectual opposition.

    With that said, I’m done with you and anyone else who chooses to intellectualize the lived experiences of the vast majority of women in the world (who it must be said again and again, are almost ALL women of color).

  43. My third paragraph should read “in countries were abortion is illegal training in the procedure is restricted to specialists.

  44. One more thing about poverty. I think we’re all pretty much on the same page about poverty being the biggest contributor to maternal mortality. But I don’t think I’d say that that means we should work on/talk about poverty instead of international abortion rights.

    1. These are usually false choices.

    2. Legalizing abortion or rescinding the Gag Rule would be very obvious ways to produce huge health gains while it’s less clear what the best way to reduce poverty is.

    I think the only problem with the original post is that it exaggerated the significance of abortion and thereby downplayed the role of poverty.

  45. Fab, what’s offensive is that you think whether or not you “empathize with” or “feel for” particular women in particular circumstances has any relevance to this discussion. Feminism is about trusting women, as autonomous human beings, to make their own choices about their bodies and their lives given their circumstances. Yes, this means some or even many women will make choices you don’t agree with, especially when their circumstances are as dire as these Kenyan women’s are; certainly no one here is arguing that glass and bleach abortions are a positive thing. If you want to discuss unsafe illegal abortion on a feminist blog, however, you’ll need to set aside your personal distaste for these choices, and instead focus on how to improve the well-being of women.

  46. Now, if you had added the need for access to free or heavily subsidized contraceptive and reproductive health care….

    my issue was with using abortion as birth control, in a later post i said that alternative forms of birth control like plan B should be available for women.

    if you’ve been to the third world, you know just ridiculously horrid all medical care is there.

    so, it will not only would it be ridiculously hard to tell people who are living in these cultures to legalize abortion, but it would be next to impossible to provide safe abortions there in the first place.

    i like plan B. i like condoms. i like doing pretty much anything before an actual fetus develops.

    but once a fetus starts growing, i’m very leary about anything that hints at eugenics.

    apparently that’s just me though.

  47. Possibly anorexics deserve to die too, I mean it’s obvious if you don’t eat, you are going to die….

    But for some reason that seems kind of mean to think like that doesn’t it…

    Lo

  48. Feminism is about trusting women, as autonomous human beings, to make their own choices about their bodies and their lives given their circumstances. Yes, this means some or even many women will make choices you don’t agree with, especially when their circumstances are as dire as these Kenyan women’s are; certainly no one here is arguing that glass and bleach abortions are a positive thing.

    those two statements of yours seem contradictory.

    i argued that the women were responsible for their decision to drink bleach and the response here, was that they were simply a product of their environment.

  49. The fact that the vast majority of people in this world and more so in sub-saharan African countries continue to struggle on less than $1/day is a reality that is accepted by every credible aid organization working in the international arena. The fact that no one here has yet to dissociate the need to improve access to food as well as access to contraception and reproductive health services shows just how far you’re willing to stretch your argument in the name of psuedo-intellectual opposition.

    i’m not stretching my argument. i don’t think the idea that we need to support abortion because these people are too poor to have the baby is morally sound. it has some validity in strict realpolitik terms, but i’m just inserting my own value judgement here.

    while i am not one who believes a fetus is the same as a mother, i also do not believe it is simply a bundle of cells that can just be disposed of because it could be an inconvenience.

    i look at this from a slippery slope approach where i see many people who could be eliminated in order to allow the family to survive (elderly or sick children would be a start).

    apparently, that’s just me though.

    and just note, i’m not saying abortion should be illegal because of this. i just don’t like the idea for purely visceral reasons.

  50. Good lord, sorry for all my typos earlier..I was pissed and multi-tasking.

    I agree with Aram that it’s not “poverty or abortion;” we can and should talk about both. However, I also think the causal link Jill made was a little off. There is indeed a correlation; that is obvious. But if we made abortion legal in these countries tomorrow, I suspect that the maternal mortality rate wouldn’t change much.

  51. fab:

    for chrissakes, no one is ADVOCATING abortion as first-line choice for birth control. please reread the original post. the topic being discussed here is the global gag rule, which blocks US dollars from going to any organisation that discusses abortion. ever. in any context. a lot of organisations that provide referrals to abortion providers or provide counselling for abortion are also organisations that provide contraceptives and reproductive education. even if they’re not abortion providers, they’re not able to recieve the funding they need to operate effectively, thanks to this rule.

    the glass-and-bleach abortions we keep going on about in this thread are the DIRECT RESULT of this gag rule, because this rule leads to underfunding of reproductive health providers for purely political reasons. since the providers don’t have the money to work effectively, to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies in the first damn place, women get pregnant, get desparate, and take desparate action. and sometimes, they die. Plan B and the Pill don’t enter into it. the providers don’t have the resources to even meet the demand for condoms, which are a hell of a lot cheaper.

    that’s what the post is actually about. if you can’t be bothered to empathise with women in truly fucked-up circumstances, at least try to keep up with the conversation.

  52. for chrissakes, no one is ADVOCATING abortion as first-line choice for birth control.

    i never said anyone did.

    that’s what the post is actually about. if you can’t be bothered to empathise with women in truly fucked-up circumstances, at least try to keep up with the conversation.

    actually, if you notice, my initial post wasn’t countering anything jill said. i made a comment about how i couldn’t empathize with these women, and that conversation morphed into what we have here.

    to some of the deities here, my inability to feel for these women makes me a troll.

  53. I had to sit through a triumphant sermon about last week’s ruling in my former church on Sunday (it was my nephew’s Christening), celebrating what a “victory” it was for those who “value life.” They made a convenient black and white case of the subject and it was obvious that the people voicing this opinion were (supposedly) celibate men who would never be forced to deal with an unplanned pregnancy on any personal level. Although nothing judgmental was said outright, I felt so resentful by the end. The sermon was met with an enthusiastic round of applause, minus the emphatic non-applause of myself and my beau, which drew a staredown from the altar.

  54. actually, if you notice, my initial post wasn’t countering anything jill said. i made a comment about how i couldn’t empathize with these women, and that conversation morphed into what we have here. ~me

    okay i looked back at it, and it does look like i unfairly reduced jill’s position while trying to explain why i didn’t empathize with the women.

  55. Fab, not to be rude, but I don’t think anybody here much CARES that you don’t empathise with these women. Possibly because this post, and the public health problems it references, are Not. All. About. You.

    You say you think elective abortion should be legal in the first trimester? Fine, then quit emoting all over the comments section about how it’s such a terrible thing and these women are so irresponsible. Your personal feelings on morality (which you’ve already said you don’t want to make the basis for public policy) are not the subject of this discussion.

    If you want to talk about how icky abortion makes you feel, find a thread where it’s relevant, or start your own damn blog. We are trying to have a conversation about a public health crisis and the related public policy issues (and your personal views are irrelevant to policy discussions, as you yourself have said) here, not yet another debate about the morality of abortion.

    THAT is why people are getting irritable with you. Try staying on the fucking topic if being called a troll hurts your feelings. It’s amazing how polite people can be when you’re not sabotaging their discussion and changing the subject to yourself. You aren’t as fascinating as you think, particularly in comparison with a meaty conversation about public health, reproductive issues, systemic poverty, lack of education, and lack of access to services.

  56. the fact is, women will be getting rid of unwanted pregnancies anyways; i can support a safe, legal way for them to do that because i do not want women to die.

    Why the cutoff? Does it magically become something different at 13 weeks that it wasn’t at 12?

  57. I’m going to put Fab on moderation because he’s making it too much about his own issues and we’re getting very far afield from the point of the post.

    I’d really love to hear more from Sewere, who has actual first-hand experience in the country we’re talking about here.

  58. Fab, not to be rude, but I don’t think anybody here much CARES that you don’t empathise with these women. Possibly because this post, and the public health problems it references, are Not. All. About. You.

    actually i was expecting people to take issue with the rest of my post which was:

    look at saudi arabia for example. abortion is legal there, but maternal deaths are much lower than sub-saharan africa.

    “i’d venture a guess that has something to do with saudi arabia’s wealth and education status. i’d venture that few women there would try to drink bleach with glass.

    an even more striking example is with india. there, abortions are legal, but the maternal deaths seem to be on par with other countries in it’s economic level. ”

    one person did explain how india’s maternal mortality rate is based on it’s huge social/economic divisions, and i think that’s very valid.

    but india also has a frighteningly high incidence of gendercide which is committed by the wealthy and middle class who can afford ultra-sounds and abortive procedures.

    Why the cutoff? Does it magically become something different at 13 weeks that it wasn’t at 12?

    you don’t want this to be an abortion debate, so i’ll refrain from answering that.

    let’s just say it has something to do with embryology and leave it at that.

    and someday, i hope to hear when your cutoff point is.

    I’m going to put Fab on moderation because he’s making it too much about his own issues and we’re getting very far afield from the point of the post.

    you’re free to do that, but i think it’s pretty unfair to place the blame on me when i was trying to defend myself from being called a troll for saying i don’t empathize with the women of the OP. my overall issue was not much different from several other posters here, but that was ignored by the subsequent posters. so let’s quit pretending like i’ve been making this about myself.

  59. aram, I don’t think that the talk/writing should be on poverty instead of global abortion rights either. The effects of the Global Gag Rule, for one thing, have been devastating to women and families in many different countries. I am a great believer in safe, legal and accessible abortion rights as part of an overall reproductive rights/justice strategy.

    I just think it could be… um… counterproductive (depending on what the goal is and who the target audience is) to write about people whose populations have been decimated by many different factors over the decades – many times the direct or indirect results of Western government’s and corporation’s policies – to speak only, or even primarily, of abortion without further context or rounding out of the situation.

  60. Folks,

    I would love to share more about the Post-Abortion Care project. I have a meeting running through the afternoon, so if you have questions please post them so that I can have a starting point.

  61. Abortion and gynecological issues relating to abortion are far from the only problems in those countries. They also have some of the highest fetal and maternal death rates around-which, BTW, changes the “pregnancy is safe” issue considerably.

    The extraordinary poverty there is almost certainly the main contributor to the lack of medical issues. but the gag rule certainly adds a lot to the chain. Women who are pregnant, or who are injured in an attempt to terminate a pregnancy, can’t easily escape poverty. It’s a fairly vicious circle.

    And in that vein, I’ve certainly seen some pretty compelling arguments that the gag rule is larger in effect than it seems. The ability to control one’s procreation is almost a precondition to the ability to escape poverty.

  62. I agree with Aram that it’s not “poverty or abortion;” we can and should talk about both. However, I also think the causal link Jill made was a little off. There is indeed a correlation; that is obvious. But if we made abortion legal in these countries tomorrow, I suspect that the maternal mortality rate wouldn’t change much.

    Ok, one more time: I wasn’t arguing a causal link. I was pointing out a correlation. The post was about an article on illegal abortion, which is why I focused on that issue. Just because I write about one thing doesn’t mean that I don’t think other things are just as (or more) important.

    The poverty issue is so blatantly obvious that I didn’t think it was necessary to mention it in a post where I was talking about a very narrow issue which is inherently tied to poverty. Especially to an audience like Feministe, where I assume that people know the most basic issues and fundamental facts — like the fact that a quick perusal of the maps shows that maternal mortality is highly correlated with poverty. Duh.

  63. Should the US fund organizations that agitate for abortion rights in other countries? I’m pro-abortion, but surely there’s something to be said for not externally funding sides in the internal politicial debates of other countries. That’s pretty sensitive territory.

  64. Nik, who the hell in this universe is ‘pro-abortion’? I mean, seriously, come on. I don’t know anybody who is pro-abortion, as opposed to pro-choice or pro-women having autonomy over their own bodies.

    And the question is irrelevant. As far as I know, the US has *never* funded organisations which agitate for abortion rights in other countries. They have in the past funded organisations which provide birth control and education regarding reproductive issues, and acknowledge that illegal abortion exists (hard not to acknowledge it when so many women are dying of it), but not for a long time now. That whole global gag rule and abstinence-only thing has cut funding from a lot of organisations which neither offer abortions nor lobby politically for their legality.

  65. my issue was with using abortion as birth control

    Which is, of course, horseshit, because abortion is birth control. It’s also taking responsibility for one’s actions. It is also being pro-life, as someone mentioned earlier. Just because you focus on a clump of cells and assign them greater rights than that fleshy object surrounding the womb does not mean you’re “pro-life” or anything you want to blindly label yourself as. Your type of policies obviously deeply affect the lives of women in negative and truly horrific ways. Non-assholes ususally recognize when their bullshit hurts other people, but as we’ve seen time and time again, “pro-life” and “asshole” are inextricably linked.

  66. “Abortion as birth control” is faux-lifer for “those sluts can’t be bothered to take a Pill if they won’t keep their legs closed”. Which is also horseshit. How many women really think having the inside of your uterus scraped or vacuumed is so much more fun than putting in a diaphragm?

  67. Criticising ‘abortion as birth control’ is an easy way of distinguishing between acceptable abortions and unacceptable ones. Acceptable means the abortion the faux-lifer has (or their girlfriend/wife/sister/daughter), because SHE had a good reason. Unacceptable means the abortions had by women the faux lifer in question don’t know personally, and can therefore deride as promiscuous whores who should’ve kept their legs closed and were probably being careless with hte birth control, because that’s what stupid whores do.

    It’s a circular argument, but it’s handy if someone wants to maintain their ‘pro-life’ image while still giving a moral pass to their abortion or that of a loved one. And BTW, so-called pro-life women have abortions at the same rate as women who call themselves pro-choice. They’re just very quiet about it, because that particular abortion was different.

  68. BTW, I’ve never had an abortion myself. I just dislike hypocrisy. And my eldest cousin’s two children would never have been conceived if she hadn’t aborted a planned, wanted pregnancy owing to serious health problems. She wasn’t guaranteed to die, but her odds weren’t great, either. And th e odds of her ever getting pregnant in the future if she didn’t get immediate treatment were kind of slim.

    My cousin isn’t “special,” she’s just another woman who has sufficient intelligence to decide for herself what she is prepared to do with her own body. And if she’d chosen to abort that pregnancy for non-medical reasons, chances are she would’ve had a damn good reason to do so. But she doesn’t have to justify herself to me, anymore than she has to justify to me why she’s chosen to try and have a third child even though she’s been advised that from a medical POV, she’d be better off packing it in and enjoying the two healthy kids she already has.

    If it were up to me, she or her husband would take permanent measures to ensure she couldn’t get pregnant again. Because that would make ME feel better, and I’d have one less thing to worry about. But it’s NOT up to me, and that’s a good thing, because she’s by far the best judge of what kind of risks she can handle. Life is a whole lot easier when you trust women to make their own decisions. And not just the ‘special’ women you know and care about, but all of them. Chances are every pregnant woman in the world is special to someone. And we should get the hell out of her way.

Comments are currently closed.