An article from a few years ago but relevant given the recent opening of an abortuary in Belfast. Since it opened there has been a constant vigil outside . Nobody wants this abortuary in Belfast.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/oct/09101501
Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:15 EST
By Kathleen Gilbert
ANN ARBOR, Michigan, October 15, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – “There was a leg and foot in my forceps, and a ‘thump, thump’ in my abdomen. Instantly, tears were streaming from my eyes.” So writes abortionist Lisa Harris in a disturbing article relating her experiences as an abortionist, particularly her anguished and “brutally visceral” experience of dismembering an 18 week gestation unborn child, while 18 weeks pregnant herself.
In the article, entitled “Second Trimester Abortion Provision: Breaking the Silence and Changing the Discourse,” Harris, an abortionist and assistant professor at the University of Michigan, explains the ethical position that she says helps her and other abortionists continue practicing despite the moral and psychological hurdles involved in what she describes as an undoubtedly “violent” procedure. The article was originally published in “Reproductive Health Matters” in May 2008.
“Abortion is different from other surgical procedures,” Harris writes in her candid article. “Even when the fetus has no legal status, its moral status is reasonably the subject of much disagreement. It is disingenuous to argue that removing a fetus from a uterus is no different from removing a fibroid.”
Harris says that there is a need to “cross borders and boundaries (including seemingly inflexible ones like ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-life’)” in order to “reflect seriously on the question of how providers determine their limit for abortion,” and warned that the issues surrounding the question “may frankly be too dangerous for pro-choice movements to acknowledge.”
Harris then describes how she once performed an abortion on a woman whose fetus was at 18 weeks gestation. Ironically, Harris herself was pregnant at the time, and her baby was also at 18 weeks gestation.
Consequently, she explains how she was “more interested than usual in seeing the fetal parts when I was done, since they would so closely resemble those of my own fetus.”
“I went about doing the procedure as usual,” she writes. “I used electrical suction to remove the amniotic fluid, picked up my forceps and began to remove the fetus in parts, as I always did. I felt lucky that this one was already in the breech position – it would make grasping small parts (legs and arms) a little easier.”
With my first pass of the forceps, I grasped an extremity and began to pull it down. I could see a small foot hanging from the teeth of my forceps. With a quick tug, I separated the leg. Precisely at that moment, I felt a kick – a fluttery “thump, thump” in my own uterus. It was one of the first times I felt fetal movement. There was a leg and foot in my forceps, and a “thump, thump” in my abdomen. Instantly, tears were streaming from my eyes – without me – meaning my conscious brain – even being aware of what was going on. I felt as if my response had come entirely from my body, bypassing my usual cognitive processing completely. A message seemed to travel from my hand and my uterus to my tear ducts. It was an overwhelming feeling – a brutally visceral response – heartfelt and unmediated by my training or my feminist pro-choice politics. It was one of the more raw moments in my life. Doing second trimester abortions did not get easier after my pregnancy; in fact, dealing with little infant parts of my born baby only made dealing with dismembered fetal parts sadder.
Harris concludes that the “visually and viscerally different” component of a second-trimester abortion, as opposed to a first-trimester one, leads to questions such as: “What kind of dissociative process inside us allows us to do this routinely? What normal person does this kind of work?”
To answer the questions, Harris notes that the “violence” of abortion must be acknowledged, and relates a “bizarre” experience she once had of observing a premature baby struggling to survive immediately after dismembering an unborn child the same age:
The last patient I saw one day was 23 weeks pregnant. I performed an uncomplicated D&E procedure. Dutifully, I went through the task of reassembling the fetal parts in the metal tray. It is an odd ritual that abortion providers perform – required as a clinical safety measure to ensure that nothing is left behind in the uterus to cause a complication – but it also permits us in an odd way to pay respect to the fetus (feelings of awe are not uncommon when looking at miniature fingers and fingernails, heart, intestines, kidneys, adrenal glands), even as we simultaneously have complete disregard for it. Then I rushed upstairs to take overnight call on labour and delivery. The first patient that came in was prematurely delivering at 23-24 weeks. As her exact gestational age was in question, the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) team resuscitated the premature newborn and brought it to the NICU. Later, along with the distraught parents, I watched the neonate on the ventilator. I thought to myself how bizarre it was that I could have legally dismembered this fetus-now-newborn if it were inside its mother’s uterus – but that the same kind of violence against it now would be illegal, and unspeakable.
Harris then goes on to explain that she rationalizes the bizarreness of the situation by the “location” of the baby, whether it is “inside or outside of the woman’s body,” and “most importantly, her [the mother's] hopes and wishes for that fetus/baby.” However, she says, “this knowledge does not change the reality that there is always violence involved in a second trimester abortion, which becomes acutely apparent at certain moments, like this one. I must add, however, that I consider declining a woman’s request for abortion also to be an act of unspeakable violence.”
Harris points out that the abortion lobby’s discomfort with “the violence and, frankly, the gruesomeness of abortion” has led to a pro-abortion discourse that she says “contradicts an enormous part of” the abortionist’s experience. While pro-abortion activists may claim abortions “don’t really look like” the graphic images often displayed by pro-life protesters, Harris notes, “to a doctor and clinic team involved in second trimester abortion, they very well may.”
“Of course, acknowledging the violence of abortion risks admitting that the stereotypes that anti-abortion forces hold of us are true – that we are butchers, etc.,” she adds.
Replies
November 21, 2012, 1:41 p.m.
The rate of abortions in the United States fell by 5%, the largest single-year decrease in a decade, researchers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported.
The decline is outlined in the annual abortion surveillance data for the year 2009, the latest available. It was published on Wednesday in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
About 18% of all pregnancies in the United States end in abortion, the CDC noted. Factors from the availability of abortion providers, state laws, the general economy and access to health services including contraception, can all influence the abortion rate, according to the CDC. An important way to reduce abortions is to eliminate unwanted pregnancies.
“Despite these multiple influences, given that unintended pregnancy precedes nearly all abortions, efforts to reduce the incidence of abortion need to focus on helping women avoid pregnancies that they do not desire,” the survey states. “Providing women and men with the knowledge and resources necessary to make decisions about their sexual behavior and use of contraception can help them avoid unintended pregnancies.”
The CDC has been reporting annually on the number and rate of abortions since 1969. The annual numbers are based on voluntary reports from states and some other municipalities. A few states, such as California, which is the most populous, do not report. That explains why the CDC said there were about 785,000 abortions in 2009, while other estimates put the number at more than 1 million.
To make comparisons possible, the CDC said it used the data from 43 states and two cities that have been reporting the numbers each year for 10 years. Those areas account for 772,630 abortions in 2009, or about 98.5% of the total reported to the federal agency.
The abortion rate for 2009 was 15.1 abortions per 1,000 women of child-bearing years, defined as 15 to 44 years old. The abortion ratio was 227 abortions per 1,000 live births. Those numbers represent a 5% decrease in the total number and rate of abortions from 2008 and the largest single-year drop during the decade that began in 2000. There was a 2% drop in one year in the abortion ratio, the CDC said.
From 2000 to 2009, the total number, rate, and ratio of reported abortions decreased 6%, 7%, and 8%, respectively, to the lowest levels at the end of the decade, it said.
Mississippi had the lowest abortion rate, at 4 per 1,000 women of child-bearing age. The state also had only a couple of abortion providers and has the nation's highest teen birthrate. New York, second to California in number of abortion providers, had the highest abortion rate, about eight times that of Mississippi.
White women had the lowest abortion rate, at about 8.5 per 1,000 women of child-bearing age, while the rate for African American women was four times larger. Latinas’ abortion rate was about 19 per 1,000 women of child-bearing years.
I was at this group, and noticed you had replied, then thought, My god, he comes from a christian cultural background, he must be quite freaked by this article! and sure enough! Hare Krsna. What can be said, this is creepier than creepy, this story.