Margaret Somerville | Friday, 15 August 2008

Affirming life

“I am carrying this baby as long as he will let me, and will not be the killing hand.”

My Saturday morning luxury is breakfast-in-bed reading newspapers.

The Globe and Mail on July 19 had an article by Cate Cochran, "Why not just talk about it?" that discussed women's reluctance to speak about having had an abortion and Toronto photographer Kathryn Palmateer's Arts4choice project in which women who have had abortions tell her their stories and pose for a portrait as a way of breaking the silence. It was thoughtful, but strongly pro-choice in the sense that all the women featured believed they had made the right choice in having an abortion.

Just after reading this, I went downstairs and opened my email to find one from a woman whom I'd never been in contact with that had come in at the same time as I was reading the Globe article. It tells a very different story, one of a pregnant woman's truly remarkable, life-affirming and life-respecting response to a tragic situation and why she decided against abortion.

One reply from pro-choice advocates to the story this woman tells, would be that she had a choice and decided to continue her pregnancy and that is consistent with their stance. That's correct, if you focus just on having choice. But if you focus on the substance of the choice she made and why, and compare that with the substance of the choices made by the women featured in the Globe's article and why, there's a night-and-day difference. These two stories reflect two very different sets of fundamental values.

But, overwhelmingly, only the pro-choice values stories are being told in the general media. The pro-life values stories are dismissed as being too personal, just based on religious belief, and so on. (Why one set of reasons for holding certain values is regarded as automatically validating these values in the public square and the other set of reasons as necessarily invalidating the values based on them is an important question that I can't explore here.) The point is that this imbalance in media coverage means there is not a balanced approach to the abortion debate in the public square and, whatever our own personal stance on abortion, we should all be concerned about that. I can't recall ever having seen even one story like the one below in a major newspaper, but pro-choice ones, similar in tone and content to the story that appeared in the Globe, are not unusual.

So, in an effort to change that, here is one courageous woman's story explaining her reasons for deciding against abortion (edited to ensure privacy and for length, and used with the permission of the author):

*******

Dear Dr. Somerville:

I'm sure that you have probably heard many stories like the one I'm about to tell, but wish to share mine with you anyway... I secretly pray that by telling my story to you, that in future debates (on abortion)... you will be able to reference the circumstances of my situation (not directly of course) to help clarify for people some realities I have been experiencing.

So, to begin...

I am a happily married, 32-year-old Catholic and a teacher. This past February, after seven glorious months of marriage, my husband and I discovered we were expecting a baby in October. My doctor confirmed the happenings of a "regular" pregnancy, and we refused any genetic testing.

Then, at a scheduled 20-week ultrasound, the technician discovered something in her sonographs that caused her to consult with the radiologist. He told us that our baby appeared to have hydrocephalus, and that we would be referred to the "high-risk maternal unit" at the (university teaching hospital in our area).

Four days later, Dr G, a fetal maternal specialist, informed us that our baby actually had holoprocencephaly (a hole in the brain stem), much fluid in his brain, and a severe heart condition. At this point, Dr G. offered a few options (not necessarily in this order): a termination of the pregnancy; the opportunity to perform an amniocentesis; or an uninterrupted continuation of the pregnancy.

Termination was not an option for me, and I informed the doctor of this immediately. He was extremely supportive of this decision, despite obviously disagreeing (with references to "quality of life"), and said that he would happily monitor me through this pregnancy, and future ones.

The next day, Dr G performed an amniocentesis. It was my understanding that results from the amniocentesis might have the ability to indicate the cause of our baby's abnormalities, and therefore help to determine possible future developments related to the pregnancy. Dr. G was certain that the results would show that one of five known "lethal" chromosomes was responsible for our baby's health and that our baby would die quite quickly after birth (if he made it that far).

So far (a month and a half after the initial information was passed down), no testing has shown a cause of the abnormalities. Long story short, Dr G's "certainty" was discounted. He honestly says that he cannot predict whether our baby will die in utero, shortly thereafter, or whether he will live for a time. We have been told by another specialist (heart doctor) that our baby's heart condition can be repaired with surgery, but leaves that decision to us considering the severity of the brain condition. Both doctors have indicated, that should we wish, during labour, our baby can receive an injection that can stop his heart before he is born (which of course is also not an option in our opinions).

As I am writing this letter, the little one in my womb is moving around, kicking his mother, and hopefully enjoying a refreshing swim. I am told that he knows no pain, and that while he is in the uterus, he is as safe as can be. I walk him every day, talk to him often, and pray for him always. I tell you this because I want you to know that, despite the grim outlook described above, I am carrying this baby as long as he will let me, and will not be the killing hand. After his birth, if he lives longer than a few days, my husband and I will let ourselves be advised by doctors, but do not intend to extend extraordinary means to keep our little one alive (as hard as that will be). Our prayer is simple: that we will get to meet our little one, tell him that we love him, and watch him fall deep into a sleep that will bring him to heaven.

With each new day, I learn to accept this situation. For example, I know that I cannot change my circumstances, and therefore must proceed with the daily grind of life. In other ways, it becomes more difficult. It is a very odd experience to be pregnant, knowing that I may never get to bring my baby home from the hospital, and that instead of anticipating his whole life, I may have to prepare for his funeral and burial.

At times, it's hard to see other pregnant women, to hold newborns, and to discuss things like cribs, strollers, and nursery decorations. Still, I am extremely confident in my decision not to "terminate" this pregnancy, and to allow my son the opportunity to live for as long as he can.

We are in awe of how our little one continues to live despite his abnormalities. I say he must really be extraordinary to be discounting all medical theories with respect to chromosome-gene results, and his longevity. I tell him that even the doctors aren't sure why he's lived so long (most babies with these abnormalities self-abort long before now), and that he is special because of this.

As I said in the beginning, I am telling you my story because I want you to know (and to tell the world), that there are women who do not wish to "terminate" their pregnancies despite devastating news, and that the option of abortion is definitely offered past the point of 12 weeks. In fact, I am sure that for many women, abortion is strongly recommended in cases like mine, especially if women do not have a strong belief about it originally. As I told you, several references to quality of life were made at the initial meeting with the high-risk physician. And, I firmly believe that had I not been so definitely opposed, the option of abortion may have been the end of my story (until all the psychiatric bills of course).

Cheers,

M.G.

*******

The very heart of parental love is that it's unconditional -- you love your child simply because he is your child. This kind of love is under serious threat in the search for the perfect child made according to the parent's specifications, who they hope will fulfill all of their utopian fantasies. M.G.'s story is one of immense unconditional love. It brings us back to the essence of our humanity in the most intimate of our relationships, that with our children to whom we pass on life.

Margaret Somerville is director of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law at McGill University, and author of The Ethical Imagination: Journeys of the Human Spirit.


Comments to Affirming life have been disabled. Thank you for your contribution.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
John Thomas said... United Kingdom | Fri, 22 Aug 2008 at 9:23 pm

Yes, Enrique, Margo, it’s “so called “pro-choice"”, and “so-called “choice"” (it has been said that the vast majority of women who have settled for abortion (or been talked into it by so-called “care” professionals) have later said that, because of their circumstances, etc., “I just had no choice but to ...”. As usual, the language twisted to make the unspeakable acceptable is actually the opposite of reality; deception.


Prad said... Australia | Tue, 19 Aug 2008 at 10:36 pm

I have just read a blog on a popular news site (Australia) on popular opinion on abortion (and left my two cents worth!).

This article brought a tear to my eyes - what a contrast to the utilitarian and inhuman views to my previous read.

Thank you M.G for sharing your story - truly human - you and your family certainly have my prayers for support during this difficult time.


margo somerville said... Canada | Tue, 19 Aug 2008 at 1:16 am

Yes, you are correct, Enrique Alonso de Velasco, in your analysis of the language used. I have a policy, however, of using the characterization that people choose for themselves, unless it’s seriously misleading to do so, although often an explanation such as you have given is a good idea. Thank you for providing it.

I am highly aware of the strategies involved in choice of language (see my recent article “Speaking to a Secular Society” on Mercatornet), but I take that approach in order to be respectful to those with whom I disagree. Sometimes pro-choice advocates label pro-life advocates “anti-choice” which is the equivalent re-labelling on the other side and I think fails to show the required respect. It’s to try to win the debate through labelling, rather than through solid arguments. Also it tends to reduce the debate to a squabble over names, rather than thoughtful discussion of the deeper issues. But let me reiterate that I agree with you: Language (especially names) is never neutral; words matter.

Margo Somerville


Enrique Alonso de Velasco said... Netherlands | Mon, 18 Aug 2008 at 7:12 pm

Thanks for this beautiful article. It’s touching and inspiring.

I’d like to comment on something that might have passed unnoticed to most of the readers from English speaking countries, who are used to the ‘nomenclature’ imposed by the pro-abortion activists. I refer to the next sentence:

“It was thoughtful, but strongly pro-choice in the sense that all the women featured believed they had made the right choice in having an abortion.”

I’d suggest to never use the term ‘pro-choice’ without quotation marks, since the mother of the article has made in my opinion a much more free and tough choice than the others, who decided to ‘terminate their pregnancy’.

They are not pro-choice and we are not against abortion, we are simply for unconditional respect to human life.

The imposed term ‘pro-choice’ is part of the international campaign designed to let us believe that believers are no friends of freedom and of personal choices, but sheep who follow the dictates of some religious leaders. In fact it’s the opposite.


Lisa said... Canada | Mon, 18 Aug 2008 at 7:45 am

What a beautiful testament to unconditional love and faith, and that ‘pro choice’ is indeed a 2-sided issue!

Dr Somerville, please let us know the outcome.


A. Gotera said... Canada | Mon, 18 Aug 2008 at 4:03 am

Life starts at conception when God infuses a soul that “mitogenizes” the growth of “human being” in the womb of a mother. Stopping this fetal development is killing a “human person” who is helpless to complain for the crime.
Our prayers and well-wishes for the mom, M.G.
A great story to tell...thanks Margaret Somerville.


Ronk said... Australia | Sun, 17 Aug 2008 at 11:23 pm

Actually, John Thomas, I think we’re better off not knowing the rest of the story (even though of course it’s very important to that particular family) because for us it doesn’t really matter. The point of the story is the mother’s choice was good, loving and the correct one, no matter what the final outcome.


Nike Ramos said... Philippines | Sun, 17 Aug 2008 at 6:04 pm

You are so correct.  In the Philippines the newspapers only report pro-choice and pro-contraception issues and commentaries and most of them are just noise.


Charles M. Sendegeya said... Uganda | Sun, 17 Aug 2008 at 2:33 am

Truly befitting tribute to a Most Selfless Woman (mother-to-be) and Supportive Husband,
The whole world will conspire to help you through that pregnancy---with a kind of support that you do not see, cannot touch and may never know.

Thank you Margaret.


Stella McLeod said... -- | Sat, 16 Aug 2008 at 11:59 pm

I have been in the situation of giving birth to a baby who died a week later because of severe abnormalities. We knew via a late scan at 29 weeks that there was “some evidence” she would probably be disabled with a certain condition. While the effects of the conditon can vary greatly, I was aware that death was a possibility. When our daughter was born she was put on a ventilator, but died a week later. While I was fortunate that no one suggested having an abortion, I am very conscious that legally she could have been aborted because she had a condition that was “incompatible with life”. The week we had with our daughter was very precious despite being a very stressful time and we have the knowledge that by allowing her to be born she was given a chance to live. We also experienced an outpouring of love from those who knew us, particularly at our baby’s funeral.

In contrast a couple I know gave in to pressure to have an abortion at around 30 weeks because the baby had a disability which meant it would supposedly die anyway. The abortion procedure lasted several days and in the end the dead baby (who was killed in the womb by an injection) had to be removed via a caesarian. The parents alienated themselves from people who could have offered support, and held a private grave-side funeral. As we have never heard whether the baby actually had the suspected disability, I do wonder if the pre-natal diagnosis was correct.

M.G. you will never regret giving your baby a chance at life, even if the pessimistic diagnosis is correct. On the other hand there is always a chance the diagnosis and/or prognosis is wrong, and miracles do happen. But whatever happens this baby is God’s gift of love to you. You are in my prayers.

Stella


Meg said... Thailand | Sat, 16 Aug 2008 at 6:06 pm

Thank you for your article and for sharing M.G.’s letter. It’s a beautiful and courageous witnessing of parental love.


Arthur Escamilla said... Australia | Sat, 16 Aug 2008 at 5:53 pm

Margaret

Thank you for sharing this story with us. The little one can be very proud of his parents. Please ensure MG that she is not alone.

P.S. I look forward to reading an article about this: “Why one set of reasons for holding certain values is regarded as automatically validating these values in the public square and the other set of reasons as necessarily invalidating the values based on them”.

Arthur


shirley buxton said... United States | Sat, 16 Aug 2008 at 4:14 pm

A precious portrait of true mother love.

Thank you. My prayers will continue for this dear person and for her baby, a life created by God.


brian pollard said... Australia | Sat, 16 Aug 2008 at 4:04 pm

it’s a privilege to be able to commend your correspondent. her letter is so full of love and true humanity - features so often totally excluded from the discussions of abortion.


Maria Doll said... Canada | Sat, 16 Aug 2008 at 3:36 pm

M. G., you, your husband & baby are in my prayers...what a beautiful testament to love.  Prof. Somerville, if you could let us know how the baby is doing, that would be most appreciated.

This reminds me of a story of a friend of mine who was told her baby would have no brain stem and wouldn’t live long.  She should abort, blah, blah, blah.  Anyway, she had her baby and her little girl had not only a brain stem but a brain and is now 7 yrs old.  The dark spot on the original ultra-sound was a slow growing brain tumor.  The nurse who pressured her to abort at the app’ts cried when she saw the baby.  Things may be better than we think for M. G.’s baby…

God Bless,


Page 1 of 2 :  1 2 >