Becoming Pro-Life
A Former Registered Nurse Tells Her Story
For years I was unwaveringly pro-choice and supported the idea that women should be allowed to decide what happens to their own bodies. I believed that pro-lifers stood in judgment of women and wished to control their lives and their bodies.
My husband, however, was pro-life and this became the one topic we could not discuss. While we never fought about abortion, any discussion left us both wondering incredulously how the person we loved could be so stubborn and so wrong! We could not even agree to disagree, so we avoided the topic.
As a registered nurse I understood fetal development well. I had a child and had seen her ultrasound images. However, the one thing I did not have a clear understanding of was the abortion procedure. Even in nursing school this was never taught. My confusion was compounded by the fact that miscarriages are called ‘spontaneous abortions’ in the medical world. I imagined abortions to be basically the same as a miscarriage. Having had two miscarriages, I understood the deep sadness that accompanies a miscarriage. With a miscarriage there was no active, intentional destruction of life: it just happened and often could not be prevented. If this was what an abortion was like, I could not fathom why pro-lifers were so hostile.
Then one day a radio program stated that it was going to record the sounds of an abortion. I was horrified, yet I found myself unable to turn the dial. At the last minute the program was censored and removed from the air. The next day the host explained that the program had been a hoax. His intention was to make listeners think carefully about what it was they had expected to hear.
I began to consider that pro-life activists might have a point. Perhaps a woman exercising her right to choose an abortion might be doing more than simply maintaining control of her own body. I then ‘felt’ pro-life, but was still swayed by arguments that abortions should be kept ‘safe’ and legal and available in the case of rape or incest or to protect the life of the mother. Therefore, I still considered myself pro-choice.
My opinion shifted once again when I was pregnant with my third child. The doctor ordered an early ultrasound, nine weeks into the pregnancy, because he could not detect a heartbeat. I saw my child with a head, little arms and legs and, right in the center of the chest, a tiny flashing heartbeat. Those little limbs were gently moving in response to the pressure applied to my belly by the ultrasound probe. This was no lump of tissue or clump of cells. It was clearly a baby. It bore no resemblance to the fetal development photos I had seen in school. Those looked like little sea horses. This was a person.
As I started to consider that abortion might not be a plausible ‘choice’, I began to stumble upon information about the details of abortion procedures. I heard about saline abortions in which the womb was filled with a concentrated salt solution to chemically burn the baby to death. I found out that in a routine abortion procedure the cervix was dilated and the live baby was generally cut apart with surgical tools and suctioned out. Those that were not dismembered were simply suctioned into a sink or garbage can and thrown away with the medical waste. I could not find literature that told me how long it would take the baby to die under those circumstances.
I learned that in a late term, or partial birth, abortion labor was induced and the baby delivered feet first so that only its head remained, face down, in the birth canal. The abortionist shoved a pair of surgical scissors into the skull through the nape of the neck. Then the scissors were forced around inside the skull to destroy the brain, or a suction device was inserted into the hole created by the scissors and the brain was suctioned out. This was done to a living human without anesthesia. If delivery had not been interrupted to kill the baby, the labor would have resulted in a live birth.
I began to question those things I had believed in the past. If an abortion simply removed tissue, why was it necessary to kill that tissue by chemical burns or dismemberment? If a baby could be fully delivered except for its head, how did killing it benefit the health of the mother? Would it not be less physically traumatic to the mother to have the baby delivered quickly, rather than retaining it in the birth canal while it was killed? Weren't late term abortions actually increasing the risk to the mother?
What would happen to the woman later in her life if she decided to have a baby? Would she have trouble becoming pregnant, or carrying a pregnancy to term? How would she feel when she learned the developmental milestones of the child in her womb and felt it moving? Would she feel anger and shame at her past decision to have an abortion? Would her past decision interfere with her ability to celebrate these milestones? How could she trust a medical establishment that had lied to her, either directly or through omission, about fetal development at the time of the abortion?
I also considered the issue of ectopic (tubal) pregnancies. I wondered if research into saving these babies, by finding a way to transfer them into the womb, might have been aggressively pursued if society had more respect for life. How many parents could have been saved the trauma of having to remove, and thus kill, the child growing outside of its mother's womb if we supported the research necessary to save those lives? The only choice offered to a woman with an ectopic pregnancy is the destruction of her child. Couldn't we be more medically advanced than that at this point, especially when one considers how many pregnancies get their start in a laboratory?
When friends ask me why I have become pro-life, I have several analogies that I share to try to help them understand my strong position. In the case of rape, or incest, I offer this up. If a woman has been raped and cannot bear the emotional strain of physical contact with her husband, murdering him would be illegal. It would also fail to turn back the clock and erase the rape. To suggest that it would be acceptable because of her emotional state is absurd. He is innocent of any wrong doing, even if his presence causes her distress. How is it different to kill an innocent child because the baby's presence might remind the mother of a trauma? This argument also implies that a rape resulting in a pregnancy is somehow more traumatic than any other rape, which is demeaning to all rape victims.
Friends will then say, ‘Surely you would be okay with abortion in order to save the mother's life?’ I shock them by answering that no, I would not. I have given this careful consideration, since I have three children. If I had a high-risk pregnancy, and chose to kill my child to save my life, I would be sending my children the message that my life is more important than my child's. Would I want my three children left motherless? Of course not, but I would not kill any of my children, born or in my womb, in the interest of self-preservation.
My analogy for having an abortion to protect the life of the mother is this. If a woman was attacked by a bear while holding her three year old, would it be acceptable for her to throw her toddler to the bear so that she could escape injury? I have been told that this is not a fair argument because a mother has a relationship with a toddler. Okay then, shall she throw her newborn? Since infants are small and unable to live without support, much like a pre-born child in the womb, maybe that would be more acceptable than throwing a toddler? An abortion is almost the exact same action. A small human is torn apart, limb by limb, without anesthesia. Meanwhile, its mother leaves the scene alive but with an indelible emotional scar.
I realize that some medical conditions, such as cancer, require treatments that can endanger the health of the unborn child. That is not justification to kill that child. Death is not kinder than living with a birth defect. Apply this argument to an older child who suffers disability from an accident or illness and it is clearly ridiculous.
I did hear of a case years ago of a woman in a coma after an automobile accident. She was in her first trimester of pregnancy. The doctors said that she and the baby would both die if she remained pregnant but she might survive if she were not pregnant. Her family fought an enormous legal struggle but finally was granted permission to have the abortion performed. The mother did live, with major mental deficits. That is exactly the type of case that should be settled in court, after being given careful legal and ethical consideration. It is not a situation that should form law for all of society.
Most women have abortions because they choose to not have a baby. A woman may be unmarried or concerned for her career. She may feel that a child is a poor financial risk. The baby's father may want her to have an abortion to avoid the responsibility of a child. The reasons used to justify having voluntary abortions are many and varied.
Not long ago the American public declared Susan Smith, the mother who strapped her young sons into their car seats in her minivan and drove it into the water leaving them to drown, a monster. The boys were in their mother's care where they should have been safe. Instead, she killed them so that she could be with her boyfriend. The boys' father wanted to love and raise them, but apparently she wanted to leave him and have no further attachments. The only difference between this and abortion was the size of the children and the fact that they were living outside the womb versus living in the womb.
Many people proclaim that we ‘cannot legislate morality.’ Technically this position is correct I suppose; one cannot legislate someone else's mind to think morally. But if this were a valid argument we would have no laws against immoral acts such as robbery, arson, rape, and murder. This fundamentally unsound argument is offered as an excuse to do nothing to stop abortion. I believe that good people support this position because they wish to avoid being labeled mean spirited or a religious zealot. Thus, we have been verbally beaten into silent submission by a fragment of society unconcerned with our national morals.
This brings to mind the pro-abortion slogan I most despise: ‘If you don't like abortion, don't have one.’ By simply replacing the word abortion with rape, murder, or any violent, self-serving action, it becomes evident how disingenuous this statement actually is.
Christian scripture tells us that God knew us before we were in the womb and that he formed us in the palm of his hand. So, when does life begin? Clearly God values every life long before we are even aware that it exists. By standing aside and allowing abortions to occur in the name of freedom of choice, we choose to NOT defend God, denying our Lord and our faith.
I am amazed that some believe we should use abortion as a means of population control because of fears that the earth cannot sustain our growing numbers. On the surface, while the method is terrible, many may think the concerns are valid. However, God clearly commands us, in scripture, to multiply our numbers and he promises to provide for our needs. He even created a symbiotic relationship between plants and animals. Plants need carbon dioxide to produce food and they release oxygen as a waste product of this process. Animals cannot survive without oxygen and produce carbon dioxide as a waste product. Each is designed to thrive in the presence of the other. To disbelieve God is to deny faith in His promises and commands. The point to be made about sustainability is that we, as Christians, are called to be stewards of the gifts that God gave us - this planet and each other. We should not be slaves to a ‘divine mother Earth’ that has become the religion of choice for many in our modern society. He directs us to be our brothers' keeper and to be charitable to those in need. I doubt that his intention was that we kill the children of those in need.
I had another realization recently when I found that those who support life do not hate women or want to make their lives miserable. Instead, they seek to protect women from a segment of the medical and political communities that would manipulate them into harming themselves and their children.
Women who have had abortions report that they were told tissue or cellular matter was being removed. They were not informed of the development of the child in their womb, nor were they informed that other options were available to them. The pro-life community organizes support groups for women suffering from the trauma of abortion. They also help women locate adoption services and provide crisis pregnancy centers. Pro-life groups pray, and work, for the healing of these adult victims of society's manipulations.
Some leaders of the pro-abortion movement seek money or power and would lose both if women were informed of the real choices they faced. Every abortionist is clear about what they are doing. They know that they are violently killing a living human being. Why would any healthcare provider participate in such an activity if not for personal gain?
The rest of the pro-choice community seems to consist of individuals who have not connected the dots. They may, as was the case with me, simply not realize that an abortion is horrible death for a defenseless child. They are mostly well educated, compassionate people who look at the immediate relief that an abortion may seem to offer a woman. They do not consider the long-term impact on her life, after throwing her child to the bear that is abortion.
During WWII most of the German people stood quietly aside and allowed the unwanted of their country to be taken away and murdered. The world judged them harshly for allowing this to happen. They were silent out of fear, but why should we be afraid? No one is going to kill us for speaking up. Are we so fearful of being labeled ‘radical’ that we will do nothing? Would you stand by and do nothing if you saw a baby being dismembered right in front of you? Does the fact that abortions happen on the other side of a door justify our silence and inaction?
I do not accuse women who have had abortions. Their pain must be extreme. I pray daily for their healing. My hope is that someone who reads this and supports legalized abortion may reconsider that perspective. I seek to offer words that may help someone who finds it difficult to articulate their pro-life position to friends and family. Finally, I hope that when we find ourselves involved in a discussion about abortion we will not remain silent. We can start small and say something like, ‘I am pro-life. I cannot imagine the pain that an abortion causes a woman and her family.’ I hope that we find ourselves able to defend our position with gentle compassion. The person to whom we speak may be a woman who had an abortion and needs to know that the pro-life community loves her and mourns with her. We may be talking to a man about to demand that his girlfriend have an abortion. I hope that we may all find the strength to defend God, our faith, and the lives of those waiting to be born.