The
Abortion Question
I
have read with interest Y.G.’s “Pro-choice v/s
Pro-life” and Heera Manee’s “Abortion ? Let us
promote our women” (Mauritius Times, No. 2875) and
I am asking you to let me tell your readers why I disagree
with them on most points.
When
Y.G. states that “the majority of Mauritian society today
accepts the idea of termination of unwanted pregnancies”,
I am not aware of any survey/study in support of his
assumption/presumption. Even if such were the case, I ask
myself : “Is the majority always right ?”
Y.G.
states : “rich
women can always buy their way out…”. I ask myself : “Is
everything that the rich can afford (and which the poor
cannot) good ?” Think of opium, crack, ecstasy, etc.
Y.G.
is right in stating “Today we are having doctors with huge
experience practicing it, which shows that it is a very
lucrative market…” Such doctors are, I am afraid,
misusing their knowledge and, in my opinion, are comparable
to the person who, with his knowledge of padlocks, has
turned into a burglar instead of a locksmith who can help
you out when you have mislaid your key.
When
Y.G. states that “the Catholic Church … has doggedly
defended the right to life”, to me the work “doggedly”
has an innuendo but “passons”. The main point is
“what’s wrong with defending the right to life”?
Is
it not paradoxical that where the death penalty even for
aversed murderers whose case has been rejected by the Privy
Council has been suspended or abolished, there is an outcry
for legalisation of abortion, which is the killing of
someone who has not been given “le droit à la parole”,
the chance of defending itself? It does not even know what
is the charge against it. Is it because it is one more mouth
to feed, maybe at the expense of its existing sibs? Would
that be such a crime as to deserve summary execution? Is it,
as has been reported in France, because it is upsetting the
mother’s holiday plan?
Is
it because it has been found to have a defect already? Such
defects that are detectable pre-natally are almost always in
its physique ; mental handicaps are at present mostly
undetectable. Physical defects are amenable to treatment,
sometimes even by an operation in utero. Legalisation of
abortion for physical defects will leave the number of
births of the mentally handicapped unchanged.
Is
it the product of rape or incest? Killing it will not cure
the mother’s traumas. Why not let it be born and then
given into adoption : the adopting couple knowing full
well the circumstances of its coming into being will be
acting “en toute connaissance de cause”. Here is another
paradox : there are so many infertile couples who are
prepared to spend so much to have a “test-tube” baby and
so many who are prepared to abort.
Is
it of the “wrong sex”? In January this year the ‘Times
of India’ referring to ‘The Lancet’, the respected
medical publication, stated : “According to this
study on female foeticide by an Indo-Canadian team, about
500 000 unborn girls – one in 25 – are aborted in India
every year. Even more disturbing is the fact that the
“girl deficit” is more prominent among educated
families. The researchers attribute this to the rampant
misuse of ultrasound technology for pre-natal sex
determination. Clearly the 11 year old legal ban on
selective abortion of female foetuses has not curbed this
abhorrent practice… it is sad that there is not enough
public outcry against such barbarism.”
As
far as I can remember. about 20 years ago in Rajastan,
India, they passed a law whereby the father asking for, and
the doctor practising an echography to find out the sex of
the fœtus are liable to a fine of Rs 3 000 each ; if
it is the mother asking, it is Rs 1 000.
It
has been reported that in some districts in the People’s
Republic of China, there are 4 boys to each girl. The fact
of simply being of the female sex is turning out to be a
fatal handicap ! What would the unmarriageable boys be
doing is anybody’s guess. Beggars can’t be choosers :
it will turn out to be an unexpected way to promote women.
The men will come on bended knees offering a dowry!
The
Catholic Church was opposed to the use of “artificial”
methods, i.e. not occurring in nature, e.g. condoms,
diaphrams for family planning and in fact promoted “Action
Familiale” to apply existing knowledge about female
fertility. Likewise it is against sterilisation (tubal
ligation, vasectomy) because of their mutilating character.
However,
it is teaching forgiveness of the sinner while condemning
the sin.
As
a medical practitioner I can say that one does not need to
be a Catholic or to belong to such other religious groups
opposed to legalisation of abortion to the pro-life. A
medical practitioner when he reflects on his knowledge of
embryology, unless he is obnubilated by money, cannot but
regret the destruction of such a marvel as the living
organism developing in a uterus. Have you, dear reader of
these lines, ever asked yourself how come that your cornea
and your eye lens are transparent ? Your limbs started
out as a bud from your trunk, but unlike the buds on the
trees they do not be come rigid but become mobile by virtue
of the joints. How joints develop is a marvel but one takes
our joints for granted until one of them gets immobilised
say after a “foulure” (sprain) ?
After
48 years of medical practice I have not ceased to learn of
and marvel at the wonders of the embryo.
Yes,
I nearly overlooked another marvel. Throughout pregnancy
there is an immunological tolerance by the mother of the fœtus
which, being the bearer of the DNA of its father is a
“foreign “tissue” and ought to have been rejected ;
after birth such rejection will occur if any part of the fœtus
is grafted onto its mother.”
Many
people say that the final decision rests with the woman. I
agree on the condition that she is fully informed.
Doest
she know that even in France where abortions are carried out
in well-equipped hospital by experienced practitioners,
complications still occur, even fatal ones? Doest she know
the long-term consequences on her bodily health such as
increased risks of infertility? Does she know that many
women on reaching menopause come to regret having aborted
and develop depression? Does she know what the Mahatma
Gandhi said about abortion?
Would
she wonder what would have been the fate of the fœtus if
been allowed to survive ?
Dimitri
Mendeleev (please read up his contributions to science) was
the 13th – some say 15th – child of his mother. Charles
Darwin was, as far as I can remember, the fifth child.
Is
she aware of the pressures of consumerism in present-day
society ? To exaggerate I can even say that we are in a
culture of the disposable, including the spouse or the fœtus.
Is
she aware that all governments are dreading the problems of
“ageing populations”, contributed to by a declining
birth rate?
Has
she not heard the expression “Qui peut plus peut moins” ?
If so, if you allow abortions, killing, i.e. the extreme of
violence, do not wonder if violence against children becomes
more common and brutal.
“Qui
peut plus peut moins” : if a doctor prescribes to a
pregnant woman a substance which turns out to have harmed
the embryo he is liable to prosecution. If abortion is
allowed, then such a doctor should be allowed to get away
scot-free !
Modern
day humankind is like a child who on meeting a caterpillar
and in its ignorance, is tempted to kill it because it looks
ugly to him ; if he is told that if it is spared it
would become a beautiful butterfly, he would relent and be
that bit wiser.
Humankind
has lost its key, its humanity.
The
key to the problem of unwanted pregnancies is EDUCATION, not
simply instructions as to the structure and mechanics of the
sexual act, but education on sexuality.
Before
one starts driving one’s car, one should make sure that
the driving wheel, the brakes, the horns, the amount of fuel
for the planned journey and the engine are all right. What
permits Alonso to drive his vehicle at 200 km/hr is that he
has confidence in his brakes.
Dr
F.S.L. Ip,
MB Ch.B (Hons), FRCP Ed. OSK
Port Louis
Y.G.’s
Comments
Dr
Ip as usual is outstanding at defending his turf. He has
come up with very forceful arguments. We will only request
that he should now leave the moral high ground for more
hardnosed pragmatism. Portugal, which is still one of the
strongholds of Catholicism in Europe, is planning to
introduce softer laws on the issue of abortion. Mauritius is
still sitting on the fence.
|
