Abortion Rights: In Dew vs.

Abortion rights: In Dew vs. Brownmiller, the debate rages on if every woman were to follow pro-life activist Diane Dew's logic in her essay "It's a child, not a choice," than she would be obligated to have as many children as possible -- every potential child could be the next Michelangelo or Edison, writes Dew. According to Dew's point-of-view, convenience -- including the ability or desire to have a child -- should play no role in determining whether a child should be brought to term. Quality of life is meaningless, both for the mother and for the child. What matters is life itself. Equally disturbing is Dew's line of argumentation based on a Christian perspective, which states that a convenience should have no role in determining whether a child should be brought into the world, as Christ's birth was not convenient for the Virgin Mary. This is despite the fact that the United States is not a Christian nation, merely a nation that tolerates the practice of Christianity -- and all religions -- within its borders.

Dew certainly had the right, under the laws of the land, to choose to have a child despite her husband's unemployment. But pro-choice activists would ask why should she have the right, based upon her fundamentalist Christian principles, to dictate other women's reproductive choices? Even with the legal prerogative to have an abortion, Dew did not choose to do so, undercutting her own logic that every woman with the option to choose abortion will invariable decide to terminate the pregnancy. Dew is proud of the fact that she risked giving birth to a child with severe deformities, after suffering the German measles during pregnancy. Her living quarters at the time exhibited conditions that might cause some social workers to intervene to protect the welfare of a child: "No running water. No heat. Canned goods froze in the cupboard. Water in the sink (from snow I had melted) became solid overnight. I was 1,000 miles from family and didn't have a friend in town…after one beating that put me in bed for weeks, I almost lost the baby. My husband left shortly after the baby was born." Dew argues that because she sees bringing a new life into the world under such conditions as noble, others should do the same. What if Dew had other children? Would it have been fair to them to add another mouth to feed to the family?

The feminist Susan Brownmiller points out that abortion has always been practiced in the United States and elsewhere. The question is if abortions shall be done safely or unsafely, legally or illegally. When women face dire and desperate circumstances, Brownmiller states that they should not be forced to risk their lives to exercise control over their reproductive health. While Dew condemns the amount of money abortion doctors make, Brownmiller points out that unscrupulous practitioners often made far more when abortion was illegal in the majority of states of the union, and they often harmed the women who sought their services. Other women used makeshift means, such as wire hangers or bleach, to have abortions. Brownmiller was forced to obtain an abortion in Cuba, and said she was astonished she was still alive after enduring the procedure. (Brownmiller 470) Hemorrhaging blood, Brownmiller was afraid -- but her fear did not make her question her choice.

Of course, pro-life activists like Dew would argue that no matter how desperately women might want abortions, they have no right to end another human being's life, regardless of their circumstances. But Dew's line of argumentation raises serious questions about the ethics of forcing another human being to subject their bodies to the rigors of pregnancy (which has far greater risks than a legal abortion) and to harbor another human being within their body against their will. Of course, a woman might choose to have sex -- but the ability of a young girl to fully understand the implications of her decision to have intercourse, and the fact that the male in question does not have to endure a pregnancy, suggests that the 'fairness' of outlawing abortion, regardless of the status of personhood of the fetus, is questionable at best. Also, one cannot ignore the social implications of outlawing abortion. Increased medical costs from botched illegal abortions, increased psychological trauma inflicted upon girls who are forced to carry pregnancies to term, and even overpopulation would be the result.