Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts

what's possible



Manuscript of Emily Dickinson's poem 466:

I dwell in Possibility –
A fairer House than Prose –
More numerous of Windows –
Superior – for Doors –

*

“This woman who wanted me always to feel possible.”—Jasmine Mans, describing her mother in Broccoli, Issue 11.

*

I have been pregnant three times. My first pregnancy ended in abortion at 11 weeks, my second pregnancy resulted in a child, and my third pregnancy miscarried. Each time, I willingly chose to enter that space of uncertain possibilities that surrounds pregnancy. Each time, I did not know what to expect, though after that first time, I knew something more about how little anyone can actually know about what to expect when you are expecting. After the second, I was somewhat wiser about how vast and ongoing the commitment to another life is. And the third revealed just how callous practices of care directed toward pregnant people can be. I will not forget walking past all the cozy delivery rooms to access the grubby little curtained alcove where I got a D & C.

To take away what choice a person can have in such an uncertain undertaking as pregnancy, to say to someone, no, you must do this thing, this thing that will radically reshape your life and body and future, is cruel. I do not understand a “love” that looks past the person in front of you, the person who knows their own life, the person who has made a decision, the person asking for help, to prioritize protecting a pulsing clump of cells. Alive, true. But not a life, not yet. Just a possibility.

I wonder about these people, so enamored of blastocysts, of embryos—“a thing at a rudimentary stage that shows potential for development”—that they will demand its potential take precedence over the actualities of the living person sitting in front of them. Is it easier for them to love something abstract and unknown, something that can still be whatever they imagine it to be? Easier than loving actual humans, who can only be what they are? Such hubris, to know better what someone’s options should be. Of course, the fact of being the sort of human who can get pregnant continues to preclude full personhood in our culture, though a few of us may become CEOs and billionaires and whatever else. Better protect the flickering cells, the ones that could actually become a real person, provided it has the correct chromosomes.

Criminalization does increase the risk of physical harm. But that is basically a consumer protection argument: It’s not safe enough. The fact is that whether anyone ever climbed on an abortion table or not, the message of criminalization to all people who can get pregnant is: You don’t have dominion over your own body, you are always vulnerable, always in danger of being surveilled.

Historian Ricki Solinger, from "You Are Endangered as a Citizen." N+1, 5/5/2022


This is a reality like a massive mountain, maybe too massive to see the scope of until the light hits right, and it’s illuminated in its awful vastness. And whenever that happens, when some of us realize yet again that we still are not really seen as actual people, we start sharing our very real stories to assert our full personhood, something only white men and fetuses are granted here in the United States. My feeds this week are full of people sharing their abortion experiences. There are people who didn’t think twice about having an abortion; others, like me, who grieved but felt relieved; still others who later regretted it. And after these outpourings, the certain circle these stories like vultures, picking for narrative morsels that feed their arguments. It’s exhausting.

No single story ever encapsulates any human experience. And I am increasingly wary of stories, anyway. The ugly power of narrative is evident everywhere in this country. Maybe what we need is to step away from storytelling—the repeated tales of what a mother is, of what a person should be—to dwell in possibility. Why is what we do with our bodies endlessly up for debate, whether that is choosing not to be pregnant or getting the care needed to align an inner and outer self? Why are people so afraid of making space for choice? Of accepting that people do, in fact, know what is best for them, in a way others can’t?

What a tragedy to spend fifty years trying to shut a door rather than change the path that leads to it. (See here: the evident hypocrisies in the anti-child policies of so-called pro-life states). What a tragedy that so many people still feel that what they most want is others to have less, not more. What a tragedy that we still have yet to embrace the full bewildering glory of actual human potential.

What I want most for my child is that whoever he is or wants to be feels possible. But I also want him to realize, in such a foundational way that it shapes everything he understands, is that radical possibility extends to everyone around him—that no one is a story set in stone, that everyone is always changing, always becoming. That choice is freedom, and everyone deserves to be free.

*

Other thoughts on choosing motherhood.

ohio, georgia, alabama

After the passage of draconian abortion laws in OhioGeorgia, and Alabama, I thought it might be useful to look at child poverty to see how these allegedly "pro-life" states are doing at creating a "pro-life" culture.

So, let's talk about the children. Per the Children's Defense Fund, in the United States:

Nearly 1 in 5 children—12.8 million in total—were poor in 2017. Over 45 percent of these children lived in extreme poverty at less than half the poverty level. Nearly 70 percent of poor children were children of color. About 1 in 3 American Indian/Alaska Native children and more than 1 in 4 Black and Hispanic children were poor, compared with 1 in 9 White children. The youngest children are most likely to be poor, with 1 in 5 children under 5 living in poverty during the years of rapid brain development.

All three states have the dubious distinction of being leaders in the number of children under six living in extreme poverty—defined as "an annual income of less than half of the poverty level or $12,642 a year, $1,053 a month, $243 a week or $35 a day for the average family of four."


That same report also offers a ranking by state for how many children live in just regular old poverty—defined as an annual income below $25,283 for the average family of four—$2,107 a month, $486 a week or $69 a day—as of 2017:
  • Alabama: 265,078 children living in poverty (Alabama ranks 46th out of 50 states, 50 being the worst.)
  • Georgia: 519,099 children living in poverty (Georgia ranks 39th.)
  • Ohio: 513,231 children living in poverty (Ohio ranks 35th.)
These states are also among the worst when it comes to infant mortality, per the CDC.



Alabama, Georgia, and Ohio also have terrible maternal mortality rates. Alabama averages 18.7 maternal deaths per live births, Ohio 19.2, and Georgia a staggering 48.4.

It's hard to square these statistics with a so-called "culture of life." I live in Ohio and I can tell you that it is not a "pro-life" state, and it is certainly not pro-child. Beyond the 500,000 children living in poverty, the public schools are poorly funded (the public school funding system has been unconstitutional for 22 years). In Cleveland, thousands of children are suffering from lead poisoning while lawmakers in Columbus offer zero help or support (they have found the time to pass anti-woman legislation and fund all the legal challenges that will follow). Guns are everywhere. Ohioans are dying of opiods and social services are struggling to support the children left behind. I could go on; the examples are many.

As someone who actually cares about supporting human lives, the hypocrisy is appalling. But that's because these laws have nothing to do with a "culture of life" and everything to do with "imposing a moral judgment on women for having sex." 

It's horrible that so many people are having to share traumatic personal stories and open themselves up to harassment to try and reach the hard hearts and thick heads of abortion opponents. But lives are at stake. In The New Yorker, Kate Doloz wrote about explaining her grandmother's death after an illegal abortion to her daughter:
To understand Win’s story—what had happened to her, what she had done, and why—my daughter would need a number of moral and biological concepts that were not yet in place in her young mind. Still, I wanted to offer her a simplified version of the truth that could remain stable for her as she got older. I wanted to assure her that, even though this was a story she needed to grow into, she should always feel free to ask questions, and that I would answer as honestly as I could. And I wanted to break my family’s long-standing silence surrounding Win’s death, because silence only helps to perpetuate the fallacy that outlawing abortion has ever stopped women from attempting it.
If I couldn’t immediately explain to my daughter how Win died, I decided, I could at least explain why. “She needed help really badly and no one would help her so she died,” I told her. Then I added a reassurance that I’m not sure I’d feel confident offering today. “It’s not a thing that would happen to us now,” I said. “If we ever needed that kind of help, we would get it and we would be safe.”
*