This story is all kinds of fucked up: a pregnant woman in Essex, UK, was sedated and had her baby forcibly taken from her womb via C-section because she was not taking her medication for bipolar disorder. The child is now 15-months-old and in the care of social services. The woman, an Italian who was in the UK for a Ryanair training course, is now trying to get her child back. Keep reading »
Voters in Albuquerque, New Mexico defeated a proposed ban on abortion after 20 weeks in a special election yesterday. The ban would have criminalized all abortions after 20 weeks, including those resulting from incest and rape or in cases when a women’s health is at risk. Had it passed, Albuquerque would have become the first city in America to adopt such abortion restrictions. The measure was defeated 55 percent to 45 percent, with only one-fourth of the city’s voters casting a ballot, according to the New York Times. All women in NM would have been affected by the ban, as the only two clinics that perform these rare second- and third-trimester abortions are located in the city. Keep reading »
Amanda Mellet, a 38-year-old Irishwoman, is filing a petition with the United Nations Human Rights Committee to challenge her country’s ban on abortion. In Ireland, a predominantly Catholic country, abortion only recently became legal if it is necessary to save the mother’s life. In November 2011, a pregnant Mellet was devastated to find out that her fetus had Edward’s system, a fatal abnormality that causes mutations to the heart and other organs.
She was told that her daughter may not survive the pregnancy, and that if she did, she’d die shortly after birth. If Mellet carried her to term, she wouldn’t know until delivery whether she was even still alive. She and her husband decided that terminating the pregnancy was the most humane thing to do for her child, who, if born alive, would spend her only few hours on earth in a hopeless struggle for survival.
Her doctors, however, were legally unable to perform the abortion. Keep reading »
I first wrote about my abortion in the spring of 2012. At that point, it had been seven years since my procedure, and something that never crossed my mind. Although the majority of the responses were overwhelmingly positive and other women took to the comments section to share their own abortion stories, those who were against my right to choose were, of course, cruel and heartless in what they had to say. For the next several days, I was attacked on Twitter and emailed threats by religious zealots, and was event old that my mother should have aborted me so I couldn’t abort my baby. (Someone explain that logic to me, please.)
A week later, despite all the hate being thrown my way, I wrote a follow-up piece declaring that I was happy that I wrote about my abortion, because I was. I was just as happy that I wrote about i as I was that I had the abortion in the first place. It was an election year with women’s reproductive rights at the forefront of many candidates’ platforms. It was this fact that made me write about my abortion; I wanted to put a name and face to the issue. I wasn’t ashamed. Looking back, whatever guilt I felt the day of my abortion was guilt that I didn’t feel guilty at all. I had gotten pregnant accidentally despite having been on the Pill, I was in no way emotionally or financially ready to have a child, and abortion, for me, was not just a solution, but a gift. My abortion, in many ways, saved my life. Keep reading »
Fund Texas Women, a nonprofit that helps support women who seek abortions, has warned that anti-choicers are encouraging members of Christian groups in Texas — where abortion rights have just been gutted — to join an email list of volunteers to take women to abortion appointments. But instead of actually taking women to their abortions, the group Abolish Human Abortion warns, “it’s a wonderful opportunity to minister to an abortion-minded woman for an hour while you DON’T take her to her clinic.”
Or, you know, like, kidnapping. Keep reading »
“I am pro-life. I care about the life of every child: every child that goes to bed hungry, every child that goes to bed without a proper education, every child that goes to bed without being able to be a part of the Texas dream, every woman and man who worry about their children’s future and their ability to provide for that future. I care about life and I have a record of fighting for people above all else.”
Texas state senator Wendy Davis, who is running for governor of the Lone Star State, spoke at the University of Texas at Brownsville on Tuesday and pissed off anti-choice conservatives by reclaiming the term “pro-life.” I’ve always been bothered by the term “pro-life” being used by anti-abortionists because 1) it implies that those who support Roe V. Wade are “anti-life” or “pro-death,” 2) many so-called “pro-lifers” are against abortion even when pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, 3) repealing Roe V. Wade, as many “pro-lifers” want, would result in the deaths of women who will do what they must to terminate pregnancies they don’t want, and 4) many anti-choicers are against government programs that actually support families and allow children a decent quality of life. As far as I am concerned, Wendy Davis’ definition of being pro-life is more accurate than the one anti-choicers peddle because it recognizes the lives that exist outside the womb. [Valley Morning Star]