I just finished reading a very interesting article in the November, 2008 edition of the journal called Archaeologies, put out by the World Archaeological Congress. A SUNY Binghamton professor, Reinhard Bernbeck, gave a very interesting discourse (pp. 390 to 413) on what structural violence is and how it is propagated in academics.
I am very interested in discussing how structural violence is propagated through the academic sphere, it was an eye opener for me. However, I would like to start discussion on structural violence first, as this was the first time I was ever introduced to this vocabulary. Also, the issue, in and of itself, has implications FAR beyond the academic sphere.
So, here is my shoddy attempt to discuss what Professor Bernbeck eloquently put forward in his journal article. I will also heavily rely on quoting him in order to make sure that his point is correctly brought forward.
I am going to focus on Berbeck's introduction in his paper, as it is a good summary. I'll start with quoting parts of his introduction (p. 391 to 392)...
"September 11, 2001 has weaned the West from the fascination with an "end of history"..., an idea that was taken to mean an end of major instances of collective violence and war. The radical reversal of tacit expectations on that day has led to a backlash, an over-focus on physical violence and aggression. Lonely voices...pointed out that [western] political structures of inequality were co-responsible for this event. Such opinions were sternly repudiated in an otherwise unisono public discource about "America's enemies". This climate made it all to easy to forget that anonymous structures of brutal socio-economic diaparities in a context of late capitalist exploitation could have anything to do with these attacks. Since then, the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq have been accompanied by proclamations and comments by politicians and intellectuals that frame these events in terms of personalized acts of direct aggression. In the present climate, the workings of faceless repression through underlying larger systems remain silenced. Some 40 years ago, the Western world was confronted with another war, but then, public discourse took a decidedly different turn. Opposition to the Vietnam war and the search for peace were driven by a discourse and vocabulary that recognized the working of large-scale structures of inequality...
Hannah Arendt had coined the well-known term "banality of evil" in her attempt to explain Adolf Eichmann's behavior as a... desk-bound murderer. He obeyed the law in order to make a career in the Nazi system. Arendt vividly described how doing one's secretarial job "normally" in the context of larger structures that include mechanisms for annihiliation can mean becoming a mass murderer without ever committing a direct act of violence (Arendt, 1964). Arendt's main point was that "obeying the law" cannot morally legitimize one's actions or inactions. This dark example of a link between violent structures and those who support them serves as a reminder that we ourselves need to reflect on how we are involved in large-scale structures, and what kinds of effects these structures may have." End of quote.
Soooo...that is a cut and paste quote from Bernbeck's article. While I always had an, "in the back of my mind' concept of what Bernbeck describes as structural violence, I never had a term to apply to it, nor had I given the concept much thought (until at least during the Bush administration, that is). I have become increasingly aware of how western capitalism (like most socio-economic institutions, I suspect) have an aspect to them where certain parts of the local, or global, population are not treated in an equal fashion under such institutions. While in the comfort of my nice warm home, while snoozing due to my well-fed belly, I never gave much pause to think about how this "way of life" may be damaging to other people, until of course I lost 2 friends in the World Trade Center on Sept. 11th. While my first gut reaction was, "how dare they", once the adrenaline wore off and I had some time to think, my next thought was the very unpopular "why"?" Why are these people so pissed off with us that they would wage war on America? That led me to question America's role in the events that have gone down in history as 9/11. A story is never one-sided and we, as a country, have given precious little thought to how our way of life may be damaging (i.e. causing local violence, starvation, death) to other people.
I think the individual does need to take stock and consider their role in a system that may hurt other people. I don't think people intentionally go out trying to hurt people, but I do think people intentionally bury their heads in the sand to avoid the very uncomfortable moral questions that inevitably surface when you start to dig too deep into such topics. All too often folks "forgive" the wrongness of their actions, or inaction, by claiming they are following the law; ignoring the fact that the law may be unjust or morally wrong. As long as it's legal, it OK (until it comes home to roost that is, as we are finding out with the Wall Street bail-out, hmm..). In an educated society such as ours, and in a society that claims to be as religious and faith based as we flaunt ours as being, I think it is long overdue for this nation to consider the collateral damage our way of life and policies are having on people outside our borders (and in our borders as well). It is long overdue for individuals to take stock as well.
I welcome your comments and the pointing out of ideas that I may have overlooked.
-M
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
History Made
I am THRILLED to see an end to Bush policies and PRAY that this is the start of a new era here in the States. I lived through history last night and I am really proud of America for electing the first black president in our history. What thrills me even more is that the man is intellectual about his business, no more cowboy diplomacy.
The war waged against reason and intellectual discourse in the country over the past 8 years has been particularly painful for me. I hope this is the start of great things. We still have a lot of work to do and Obama will have a horrific job of cleaning up Bush's mess, but I think we can get this done!
-M
The war waged against reason and intellectual discourse in the country over the past 8 years has been particularly painful for me. I hope this is the start of great things. We still have a lot of work to do and Obama will have a horrific job of cleaning up Bush's mess, but I think we can get this done!
-M
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Burqas
Well, my third post!!! My friend, port4u, started this discussion on personal e-mail and I have port4u's permission to post it here! Yeah! It is an interesting discussion that my husband piped in on too with an interesting anthropological aspect. I cannot do justice to Philip's discourse with me in this blog, but I think I caught the gist of what he was saying.
Finally, this discussion was started by having port4u send me an e-mail with a powerpoint attachment. I cannot figure out if I can attach or import files into this blog (if anyone knows how I can do that, please let me know). So, I will ask port4u if she has a hyperlink to that presentation and if port4u does, then I will add it to this post. Basically though, the powerpoint video shows Afghani women wearing burqas and the various life situations that they need to wear them in. The presentation, while in Spanish, is still fairly easily translated and the producers have humanitarian type questions on the use of the burqa and the affects on women's lives.
As such, for the time being, I will start this post with my reply to port4u and her replies, followed by my replies, etc. Feel free to give your 2 cents.
MY ORIGINAL E-MAIL RESPONSE
Dear Port4U,
The drivers licence was funny. Sigh...I have to be careful with who I send this too because I have friends who will use this video as an excuse to continue to justify their anti-Muslim feelings. My friend from grad school, ***, told me one time how she hated the Muslims because of what they did to their women. That she wanted to go up to a Muslim woman and "rip the head scarf right off of her head". While I completely understand her feelings on the subjugation of women, unfortunately, like alot of other things in life, this one issue will be the sole reason for hating an entire religion and hence support for a war waged on them. My continued frustration with educated people having no freaking common sense.
The only solution I see to this is to educate the Afghani people and then have them make their own strides toward equity between men and women. The treatment of women is so interwoven between their religion and culture that only loooonnnngggg term education will change the practice forever. Otherwise, we risk a back lash as Muslim conservatives think that the great western devil is trying to change them and then they feel justified in supporting militant fundamentalism. Oh what a tangled web. Sigh.
-M
PORT4U'S E-MAIL RESONSE
Finally, this discussion was started by having port4u send me an e-mail with a powerpoint attachment. I cannot figure out if I can attach or import files into this blog (if anyone knows how I can do that, please let me know). So, I will ask port4u if she has a hyperlink to that presentation and if port4u does, then I will add it to this post. Basically though, the powerpoint video shows Afghani women wearing burqas and the various life situations that they need to wear them in. The presentation, while in Spanish, is still fairly easily translated and the producers have humanitarian type questions on the use of the burqa and the affects on women's lives.
As such, for the time being, I will start this post with my reply to port4u and her replies, followed by my replies, etc. Feel free to give your 2 cents.
MY ORIGINAL E-MAIL RESPONSE
Dear Port4U,
The drivers licence was funny. Sigh...I have to be careful with who I send this too because I have friends who will use this video as an excuse to continue to justify their anti-Muslim feelings. My friend from grad school, ***, told me one time how she hated the Muslims because of what they did to their women. That she wanted to go up to a Muslim woman and "rip the head scarf right off of her head". While I completely understand her feelings on the subjugation of women, unfortunately, like alot of other things in life, this one issue will be the sole reason for hating an entire religion and hence support for a war waged on them. My continued frustration with educated people having no freaking common sense.
The only solution I see to this is to educate the Afghani people and then have them make their own strides toward equity between men and women. The treatment of women is so interwoven between their religion and culture that only loooonnnngggg term education will change the practice forever. Otherwise, we risk a back lash as Muslim conservatives think that the great western devil is trying to change them and then they feel justified in supporting militant fundamentalism. Oh what a tangled web. Sigh.
-M
PORT4U'S E-MAIL RESONSE
I agree with your take on the subject.
Here is a bit of information on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burqa. The section on Women in Islam is revealing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_Islam. It is the extremists like the Taliban who give Islam a bad name. There is nothing inherently wrong with religions. Religions are perverted and used by evil people for power and control. I do not agree with the idea of women not being equal in value to men.
Port4u
MY E-MAIL RESPONSE TO PORT4U
Hey Port4u,
Very interesting read on Islamic women. I completely agree...there is nothing wrong with religion...just the few nutcases who twist it to their own ends...very much like Christian fundamentalism in our own country.
Philip had a very interesting take yesterday when I told him about your e-mail and my reply. As an anthropologist, he described a people's religious beliefs as being the evolutionary cultural response to a geographic areas environment (that ranging from climate, to topography, to relationships with neighbors, etc). In his words, "these people have lived just fine for thousands of years with their religions and cultures, why do we feel the need to change it?" While he is not for the subjugation of anyone, he said he also understood that what looks like subjugation to us is another culture's ways of dealing with life in an environment that is completely different and foreign from ours. As such, he felt we should mind our own business and leave well enough alone. I understand where he is coming from.
Philip said he disagreed with the western world's need to "save" these "backward" cultures through education, diplomacy, and/or force. His analogy was, "How would Catholics like it if a feminist American went to rural Italy and told young 15 year old virgins that they should have as many sexual experiences as possible before getting married. That they should quickly shed the shackles of virginity." We both agreed that the Italian Catholics probably wouldn't like it very much at all and that the cultural backlash could very well turn deadly. He feels that that scene is no different from what we would do if we tried to "educate" Muslim women. His final comment was that we have become obsessed with turning the world into America. That we want to McDonald'cize, Wal-Mart'ize, Disney'ize the world, all in the name of "democracy and progress". All we are doing is destroying the uniqueness of the world's cultures for the almighty profit. I thought he had a great point.
Oh well, I thought that you would find that interesting. Maybe I should make a blog on facebook, can I do that? It would be a great place to get my friends opinions on stuff and have educated discussion, instead of my flooding folks e-mails with my opinion...which thanks to this election...I've become very vocal on lately. :)
Talk to you soon.
-M
PORT4U'S RESPONSE
I quite agree with what Philip has to say on the subject. I will add this: The reactions of the uneducated are too extreme here and abroad. It is not a simple subject and there can be no absolute answer for what to do about women’s rights in other countries or other human rights issues. I think there are some things that take place that are so immoral and harmful that it is right that we should intervene and try to educate and stop those things from happening. For instance, setting fire to ones wife if you happen to object to her morals or just wish to get rid of her. I many such cases organizations like Amnesty International do good work. Do you know that there are refugees who fled injustices in their own countries that are locked up in jails near our airports here in New York City right now. Some of them haven’t seen the light of day in years. Injustice takes place here as well as overseas.
Port4U
OK folks, that is the extent of it. Any further discussion? Looking forward to hearing from you.
Monday, November 3, 2008
PRO-CHOICE IS PRO-ABORTION
I'm moving this discussion out of my e-mail and into this blog. I've gotten a number of replies to this already (which is what prompted my creating a blog in the first place). This e-mail came from a friend and I am posting it here because she sent it out to several folks, meaning she wanted as many people as possible to read it. I replied to her personally, then shared my reply with my friends. What I will do is post the original e-mail, post my reply to the original e-mail, and then post the comments of one other friend who updated the statistics for me. The lady who updated the statistics for me gave me permission to pass this on, but I will keep her name anonymous until she feels like coming on herself and passing another comment, if she would like. Anyone else who would like to comment, please feel free to do so. Many thanks!
ORIGINAL E-MAIL
With all due respect, please consider the facts below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xkT_W5l9-k&feature=related
Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700
Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.
Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.
Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.
Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.
Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).
At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.
Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.
Abortion coverage:
48% of all abortion facilities provide services after the 12th week of pregnancy. 9 in 10 managed care plans routinely cover abortion or provide limited coverage. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds, virtually all of which are state funds. 16 states (CA, CT, HI, ED, IL, MA , MD, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) pay for abortions for some poor women.
MY RESPONSE
Hey *****,
These are very interesting statistics. Are there more recent ones? There is a very strong correlation between family income and rate of abortion, so obviously poverty is a strong factor BUT not the only one.
Another thing to ask is what is the religion of the women having abortions? That isn't addressed in this poll (or any others I've seen either). In NYC, where the hispanic and black population is very high (I don't know the numbers), ALL of the hispanic people that I have ever met are Catholic. Black people tend to lean towards protestant, well actually...American black people (folks who trace back to slavery times) tend to be protestant...Black folks that are from the Caribbean tend to be Catholic. But at any rate, I would bet a good amount of money that most of these people are church going folk. If this is true, then priests and preachers are not doing enough from the pulpit, or through special church programs, to give these girls (and their families) the moral guidance to abstain from sex, find birth control, or have adoption as an alternative to abortion.
Again, I am an advocate for more proactive methods of reaching out to people to give them the guidance they need to make the right moral choices, instead of trying to regulate morality through the U.S. Constitution (where it doesn't belong). If the Conservative perspective is to keep government out of our lives...that has to include our moral lives, as well as our economic lives. If you let politicians tackle poverty (which is half the problem here) and the churches stay out of politics and tend to the moral keep of their flock, then we probably would have made alot of headway towards changing the grip abortion has on our young people. Divide and conquer mentality. By supporting politicians who are anti-lower and middle classes (anti-poverty), but pro-life...we are cutting off our noses to spite our face. The place for moral guidance is in the home and in the churches, not in our government.
As I mentioned to you before...free will is the divine gift God gave me at my conception. It is my responsibility to decide my own moral path (with help from my church). In my perception, it is against God's will to have the government regulate my moral choices. A faith untested is not worth having. Conservatives can't have it both ways..you can't deregulate the government's role in business and economics, but then regulate our moral lives.
So, I disagree with the subject line in this e-mail....pro-choice does not equate to pro-abortion. Pro-choice indicates that a person is using the divine gift of free will, which no other person, politician, priest, whoever has the right to take away. It is my choice to have an abortion or not, and I will suffer the consequences of my actions come judgement day. As such, I am pro-choice, however, that does not translate into pro-abortion.
My two cents.
-M
E-MAIL WITH UPDATED STATISTICS
As an abortion provider myself, I can tell you that some of these statistics are woefully out of date (in particular the one about 48% of abortion facilities providing services after 12wks in the pregnancy). Since the time that these statistics were put out, the number of 2nd trimester abortion providers has dropped rapidly due both to the "graying" of providers and the regulatory difficulty of having a facility that provides these types of procedures. For instance, in the state where I practice (NJ) there are only 2 providers who do terminations past 12 wks (you need to be a licensed ambulatory surgery center in order to provide these procedures)-- NJ is one of the most liberal states when it comes to abortion law (only NY and CA have more liberal laws than us). For late 2nd tri procedures (the ones that fall into the 1 -2 % category)-- there are only 6 providers in the country that regularly do procedures (in NY, CA, KS, NE, NJ)-- since these procedures are most often performed on patients diagnosed with severe fetal abnormalities, the very young (15 and younger) or (relatively speaking) older women (40+) , it means that these women and their partners often need to travel great distances to receive care (these are not actual statistics-- this is just from experience in my office over the past 5 years).
Only 10% of all medical schools provide training in abortion care and when they do, it's generally only 1st trimester abortion care, which means that if one of our patients who has travelled to us from out of state or from a great distance can't access emergency care if she needs it b/c most docs aren't trained to handle emergencies of this nature.
The majority of the patients that I see describe themselves as people of faith (and I have seen, literally every religion from catholic, jewish, christian, buddhist, muslim and evangelical (and many others) represented in my office). Statistically (and you can check this through both the CDC and the Alan Guttmacher Inst-- AGI actually collects the most comprehensive statistics in the country as almost all abortion providers in the country hand over demographic information to them annually) more catholic women have abortion than women of any other organized religion.
56% of women who choose an abortion are already parents, and most choose to have a termination out of because they are considering the welfare of the children that they have already and their ability to provide for them.
Margaret is absolutely right in that the ability to make private medical decisions and decisions about family life should not be regulated by the government-- and being pro-choice most certainly does not translate into being pro-abortion. Ever patient who walks in our door receives birth control counseling and birth control if she wants it or is medically a candidate for it. But the reality is, even with 100% perfect birth control use, no method of birth control is 100% (even tubal sterilization has a 1% failure rate). The need for abortion will always be there and until we, as a society, create a better environment for motherhood (more supportive both socially and economically), a better system for women who would prefer to choose adoption and better education and access to birth control, we will not see abortion numbers decline.
***
Abortion provider and member of the board of the Abortion Care Network and the National Coalition of Abortion Providers.
ORIGINAL E-MAIL
With all due respect, please consider the facts below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xkT_W5l9-k&feature=related
Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700
Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.
Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.
Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.
Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.
Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).
At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.
Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.
Abortion coverage:
48% of all abortion facilities provide services after the 12th week of pregnancy. 9 in 10 managed care plans routinely cover abortion or provide limited coverage. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds, virtually all of which are state funds. 16 states (CA, CT, HI, ED, IL, MA , MD, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) pay for abortions for some poor women.
MY RESPONSE
Hey *****,
These are very interesting statistics. Are there more recent ones? There is a very strong correlation between family income and rate of abortion, so obviously poverty is a strong factor BUT not the only one.
Another thing to ask is what is the religion of the women having abortions? That isn't addressed in this poll (or any others I've seen either). In NYC, where the hispanic and black population is very high (I don't know the numbers), ALL of the hispanic people that I have ever met are Catholic. Black people tend to lean towards protestant, well actually...American black people (folks who trace back to slavery times) tend to be protestant...Black folks that are from the Caribbean tend to be Catholic. But at any rate, I would bet a good amount of money that most of these people are church going folk. If this is true, then priests and preachers are not doing enough from the pulpit, or through special church programs, to give these girls (and their families) the moral guidance to abstain from sex, find birth control, or have adoption as an alternative to abortion.
Again, I am an advocate for more proactive methods of reaching out to people to give them the guidance they need to make the right moral choices, instead of trying to regulate morality through the U.S. Constitution (where it doesn't belong). If the Conservative perspective is to keep government out of our lives...that has to include our moral lives, as well as our economic lives. If you let politicians tackle poverty (which is half the problem here) and the churches stay out of politics and tend to the moral keep of their flock, then we probably would have made alot of headway towards changing the grip abortion has on our young people. Divide and conquer mentality. By supporting politicians who are anti-lower and middle classes (anti-poverty), but pro-life...we are cutting off our noses to spite our face. The place for moral guidance is in the home and in the churches, not in our government.
As I mentioned to you before...free will is the divine gift God gave me at my conception. It is my responsibility to decide my own moral path (with help from my church). In my perception, it is against God's will to have the government regulate my moral choices. A faith untested is not worth having. Conservatives can't have it both ways..you can't deregulate the government's role in business and economics, but then regulate our moral lives.
So, I disagree with the subject line in this e-mail....pro-choice does not equate to pro-abortion. Pro-choice indicates that a person is using the divine gift of free will, which no other person, politician, priest, whoever has the right to take away. It is my choice to have an abortion or not, and I will suffer the consequences of my actions come judgement day. As such, I am pro-choice, however, that does not translate into pro-abortion.
My two cents.
-M
E-MAIL WITH UPDATED STATISTICS
As an abortion provider myself, I can tell you that some of these statistics are woefully out of date (in particular the one about 48% of abortion facilities providing services after 12wks in the pregnancy). Since the time that these statistics were put out, the number of 2nd trimester abortion providers has dropped rapidly due both to the "graying" of providers and the regulatory difficulty of having a facility that provides these types of procedures. For instance, in the state where I practice (NJ) there are only 2 providers who do terminations past 12 wks (you need to be a licensed ambulatory surgery center in order to provide these procedures)-- NJ is one of the most liberal states when it comes to abortion law (only NY and CA have more liberal laws than us). For late 2nd tri procedures (the ones that fall into the 1 -2 % category)-- there are only 6 providers in the country that regularly do procedures (in NY, CA, KS, NE, NJ)-- since these procedures are most often performed on patients diagnosed with severe fetal abnormalities, the very young (15 and younger) or (relatively speaking) older women (40+) , it means that these women and their partners often need to travel great distances to receive care (these are not actual statistics-- this is just from experience in my office over the past 5 years).
Only 10% of all medical schools provide training in abortion care and when they do, it's generally only 1st trimester abortion care, which means that if one of our patients who has travelled to us from out of state or from a great distance can't access emergency care if she needs it b/c most docs aren't trained to handle emergencies of this nature.
The majority of the patients that I see describe themselves as people of faith (and I have seen, literally every religion from catholic, jewish, christian, buddhist, muslim and evangelical (and many others) represented in my office). Statistically (and you can check this through both the CDC and the Alan Guttmacher Inst-- AGI actually collects the most comprehensive statistics in the country as almost all abortion providers in the country hand over demographic information to them annually) more catholic women have abortion than women of any other organized religion.
56% of women who choose an abortion are already parents, and most choose to have a termination out of because they are considering the welfare of the children that they have already and their ability to provide for them.
Margaret is absolutely right in that the ability to make private medical decisions and decisions about family life should not be regulated by the government-- and being pro-choice most certainly does not translate into being pro-abortion. Ever patient who walks in our door receives birth control counseling and birth control if she wants it or is medically a candidate for it. But the reality is, even with 100% perfect birth control use, no method of birth control is 100% (even tubal sterilization has a 1% failure rate). The need for abortion will always be there and until we, as a society, create a better environment for motherhood (more supportive both socially and economically), a better system for women who would prefer to choose adoption and better education and access to birth control, we will not see abortion numbers decline.
***
Abortion provider and member of the board of the Abortion Care Network and the National Coalition of Abortion Providers.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Introduction
Hello everyone,
My friends and I have been having a great time sharing ideas back and forth on our personal e-mails. However, in consideration of those who would rather not HAVE to look at opinion e-mails every time they check their mail, I thought it might be better to start a blog! Then we could continue the conversation here.
I welcome all well thought out, informed, researched opinions on this blog. I do not expect (nor do I want) folks to agree with me all the time. My goal is to establish meaningful exchange of ideas, in order to promote a well informed citizenry. I DO NOT WANT opinions that are not backed up by researched facts. I also do not want mean spirited comments meant to piss people off. Diverse ideas given to promote intellectual debate is the name of this game.
Many thanks,
Maggie
My friends and I have been having a great time sharing ideas back and forth on our personal e-mails. However, in consideration of those who would rather not HAVE to look at opinion e-mails every time they check their mail, I thought it might be better to start a blog! Then we could continue the conversation here.
I welcome all well thought out, informed, researched opinions on this blog. I do not expect (nor do I want) folks to agree with me all the time. My goal is to establish meaningful exchange of ideas, in order to promote a well informed citizenry. I DO NOT WANT opinions that are not backed up by researched facts. I also do not want mean spirited comments meant to piss people off. Diverse ideas given to promote intellectual debate is the name of this game.
Many thanks,
Maggie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)