[trigger warning: infertility. enjoy this happy otter instead.]
First of all, it's the pregnancy equivalent of starving children in China ("fine, send my food to them"), and just as asinine. I doubt any of these people would suggest that starving people in their neighborhood be allowed to enter their homes without permission and take whatever they want out of their pantries, would they? Um, no. I also sincerely doubt any of these people would support a measure to take organs from people without permission to give them to those dying of organ failure. "What? You have two working kidneys, you only need one. She doesn't have any, don't be selfish."
However, perhaps these prolifers have a point. It's so unfair that some women have unwanted pregnancies while others can't have wanted pregnancies**. But it's not enough to outlaw abortion. After all, most women who go through with an unwanted pregnancy don't give the resulting child up for adoption, they keep it and raise it themselves. That doesn't help infertile people. And prolifers are all about helping the infertile.
So here's my modest proposal: Every five years, we figure out exactly how many infertile people there are in the US who desire children. Currently, that's 7.3 million women***. That's a lot of people, but don't worry, there are (as of 2000) 23 million women between the ages of 20 and 34- prime childbearing (yet adult) years, which means there are (subtracting the infertile total from the general total. rough, I know.) 15.7 million women who are fully capable of providing children for the infertile.
Those 15.7 million women are being terribly selfish by not voluntarily getting pregnant with a child solely for the purposes of giving said child to an infertile woman, and that needs to end. So, every 5 years, we'll have a lottery. 7.3 million fertile women of prime child bearing age will be required to immediately get pregnant, have the baby and give it to an infertile women. Some women may have to do this twice, as prime childbearing yet adult years span 14 years, but don't worry, it's only fair.
No, these women will not be compensated for their trouble. I've never heard of anyone invoking infertility as an argument against abortion state that women with unwanted pregnancies should be compensated for their efforts, so it will be up to you if you are chosen in the lottery. Don't complain, as the possessor of a working reproductive system, it's only your duty.
*I do appreciate the pain of infertility. In fact, I think infertility treatments should be covered by insurance in the US at least to the level infertility treatments are covered in the UK. I am not in any way mocking the pain of infertility, merely the argument that one person's infertility justifies taking away the bodily autonomy of another person.
**Terribly unfair, in fact, however two wrongs don't make a right.
***I have no idea why I can only find this statistic for women. I guess men are never infertile.
I am not in any way mocking the pain of infertility, merely the argument that one person's infertility justifies taking away the bodily autonomy of another person.
ReplyDeleteYeah. It doesn't make any sense. That's like saying that some people are lactose intolerant, so no one should be allowed to consume milk products. Obviously it's different in scope, but it's an easier idea to wrap your mind around if your brain is so tightly wound it can only hold false dicthotomies...
After all, most women who go through with an unwanted pregnancy don't give the resulting child up for adoption, they keep it and raise it themselves. That doesn't help infertile people. And prolifers are all about helping the infertile.
There's also the fact that infertile people don't seem to be particularly likely to adopt unless it's an item of last resort, anyway. And they're probably going to try to find a specific baby, rather than deign to go to places where poverty-stricken kids are having kids destined to be poverty-stricken.
I don't think anyone should be allowed to make the, "Don't abort, give the kid up for adoption, otherwise you're a horribly selfish person!" argument until all the foster homes and orphanages have to be closed due to lack of clientele.
I actually wrote about this a long time ago on my old blog. At least, it was a similar idea to this, and about what actually happens rather than what the pro-lifers seem to think would happen. I wish there was some way to get that difference across.
...
ReplyDeletei don't want kids. i'm pretty happy that i can't have them.
maybe that's just me...?
that aside, i'm with Geds - every time i turn around, i run into another horror story of the US's foster system, etc. we have TOO MANY UNADOPTED CHILDREN ALREADY - what the fuck, people!
i seriously don't even UNDERSTAND anti-abortion arguments; for the most part, the people wanting abortions are the SAME people that anti-abortionists don't want having babies, so WHY!?!?!?!?
The Girls Who Went Away. I cannot say enough about this book.
ReplyDeletetotally off topic, but in case you haven't seen it PF - a "smoking gun" in the case against the Vatican for covering up pedopriests:
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_ireland_catholic_abuse