Planned Parenthood of Southwestern Oregon plans to offer medication-induced abortions at its clinics in Ashland and Eugene beginning sometime in March.
Cynthia Pappas, Planned Parenthood’s executive director, said the organization’s board of directors decided to offer the service to provide women with an option for terminating a pregnancy in the comfort and privacy of home. Medication-induced abortions use drugs to expel a fetus. The federal Food and Drug Administration approved their use in 2000.
It’s noteworthy that part of the impetus for making this form of abortion available is that local doctors are reaching retirement age. Hmm, I wonder why there aren’t more young abortion doctors? I wonder if its the fear of anti-choice terrorism?
In other news, the ever-progressive state of Utah is thinking about making miscarriage illegal. That’s right, something that occurs naturally in 1 out of 6 women is being legislated against. As usual, Dan Savage does an excellent job extrapolating the insanity by explaining how this law would have to be executed, if done fairly and properly:
If every miscarriage is a potential homicide, how does Utah avoid launching a criminal investigation every time a woman has a miscarriage? […] And how is Utah supposed to know when a pregnant woman has had a miscarriage? You’re going to have to create some sort of pregnancy registry to keep track of all those fetuses, Utah. Perhaps you could start issuing “conception certificates” to women who get pregnant? And then, if there isn’t a baby within nine months of the issuance of a conception certificate, the woman could be hauled in for questioning and she could be indicted for criminal homicide if it’s determined that she intentionally or accidentally induced a miscarriage.
But here is my question: how does behavior like this from the government not make liberals run like crazy from public health care? Reproductive rights, among the most fundamental and private rights a person has, are over-legislated and tightly controlled, which is why there is an abortion debate in the first place. How is it that the very people desperately fighting for rights don’t see that the thing preventing them is not their political opponents, but the government’s very dominion over the issue. If no one has the right to tell a person what to do with his or her body, why then does the government even have a say? My problem with Roe v. Wade is not that it established the legality of abortion but that it did not restrict government interference on the issue in total. How the government even has dominion on how or what I do with my body is something I still do not understand. And does everyone somehow think that when health care is a central government issue, it’s going to become less politicized?
Those in favor of liberal reproductive rights should be banging down the door for fewer regulations on health care and be damn right terrified of public health care. But of course, they’re not.
Bioethics is controversial.
No one endorses the ideas or concepts explored here, not even me.
You will develop a strong opinion about something you find here. I want to hear it. Philosophy is a conversation.
popbioethics [at] gmail [dot] com
Long Form ArticlesWhy Mass Effect is the most Important Science Fiction Universe of our Generation