One Woman Army

Choice and loss

Just as I would always support a woman in her choice to not have a child, I support those who choose to have children.

And so for them, I am saddened beyond words when their choice does not work out.

Tonight I am mourning for a family member and his wife, who had made the decision to have children, were pregnant, and today found out they had lost their baby 3 months into the pregnancy.

This was a child that was bringing so much joy into my family, I cannot express... The first of a new generation, I myself had already bought a little "Free Newfoundland" onesie to send along with little gifts for the mother-to-be. I am grateful only that I had not yet sent them in the mail, for that extra reminder of a person who was not meant to be.

I am without any more words now as I try to distract myself and think of my family in their pain, so very far away on the other side of the country.

- Artemis.

Feminist Flickr

Given my little rant earlier on, this just makes me happy.

I wish I could see signs like this all day long while walking around the city.

Thanks to Incurable Hippie for the pic.

Way to celebrate an anniversary...

and that's with just a hint of sarcasm.

The sarcasm comes with disdain as I read yesterday with disgust and annoyance at a local pro-life group holding a rally and lecture protesting abortion in Canada on the anniversary of the day that abortion became decriminalized in Canada.

Great way to celebrate an anniversary.

Not only did I NOT see any mention of this very significant landmark anniversary in any Canadian media until then; the only mention I've seen was about a protest rally lamenting that it ever happened.

What's so hard to understand about human rights?
About women's rights?
About the right of choice?
Why do people think it is okay to tell someone what to do with their body?

Argh.
-Artemis.

Where lies the child?

For some reason this has been swirling around in my head as of late, and it keeps rising in my life as a symbol in various places.

I know how adoption is a wonderful thing for many people - I am absolutely fully pro-choice, and that for me means supporting women in whatever she chooses to do - whether it be giving up a child for adoption, having an abortion (clinical or self-medicated), or keeping a baby. It is HER CHOICE, whatever it may be.

Yet for myself, I can’t imagine that I might ever adopt a child as I have such mixed feelings surrounding it. It stems from my mother’s own adoption, and her sisters as well. My grandparents are the most amazing people I know. Summers at their home in rural British Columbia are filled with memories of my grandfather strumming his guitar in the twilight while singing in his lovely mumble and whisper. Or my grandmother, gone now, buying me Harlequin romance novels, playing puzzles and solitaire with me, and teaching me about how to treat yeast infections.

My mother’s multiple issues with adoption had so much more to do with her birth parents than with her adoptive parents - but it was something that caused her turmoil her whole life and so that is why my mixed feelings.

The other day I read a lovely novel by Joanna Trollope talking about adoption issues; then tonight finally watched Grey’s Anatomy where Izzie encountered her own given-away child. I found myself sitting there with tears streaming down my face uncontrollably and I wondered if her reaction was ever mirrored in my mother’s own birth mother.

So many mixed feelings and thoughts.

Breaking news: breaking hearts for our sisters

Why I am glad I don’t live in the U.S.:

 

Supreme Court Upholds Abortion Procedure Ban
“Most Political Decision Since Bush v. Gore”

Statement of NOW President Kim Gandy

April 18, 2007

Today the Supreme Court upheld this nation’s first abortion procedure ban—a ban enacted by George W. Bush and conservatives in Congress. Five justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito—both installed by Bush and a Republican-majority Senate—ruled that the law does not violate a woman’s constitutional right to abortion.

Not since Bush v. Gore has the Supreme Court made such a political decision, or one that so completely distorts the law and disregards the U.S. Constitution.

The law is so vaguely written that it may ban the most common abortion procedure used after 12 weeks of pregnancy, and there is no exception to allow its use if the woman’s health is in serious danger. The joint ruling in Gonzales v. Carhart and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood is a major step in the campaign to outlaw all abortions, first by chipping away at and then by fully overturning Roe v. Wade.

Bush used his allies’ control in Congress to push through anti-abortion legislation, and he used their power to confirm anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court—justices who have now upheld that same legislation.

The National Organization for Women and other advocates predicted as much, and fought tooth and nail against the confirmation of Roberts, and even more passionately against Alito, who replaced Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Now we see that apparently, everything Roberts and Alito said at their confirmation hearings about respecting precedent was a pack of lies.

When the time came for women’s rights supporters in the Senate to prevent confirmation of Sam Alito, the “fifth vote” against abortion rights, only 25 senators stood up for women. And indeed he was the fifth vote for the majority in today’s decision. The senators who voted to end the Democratic filibuster, thus allowing Alito to join the court, must be reminded that their failure led to this day. We must stop the stacking of the federal courts and work toward a congressional majority that supports women’s rights.

Tellingly, seven years ago in Stenberg v. Carhart, the Supreme Court ruled against an almost identical ban enacted in Nebraska. The clear precedent set by Stenberg in 2000 was the reason three U.S. Courts of Appeal declared the federal ban unconstitutional. But last year the Bush administration pressed on with appeals to the Supreme Court by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

So why did Gonzales forge ahead when a clear precedent had been set only six years earlier? And why did the court uphold this ban, effectively undoing that precedent? In the dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg explains it quite clearly:

Though today’s opinion does not go so far as to disregard Roe or Casey, the Court, differently composed that it was when we last considered a restrictive abortion regulation, is hardly faithful to our earlier invocations of the ‘rule of law’ and the ‘principles of stare decisis.’

In other words: The Supreme Court changed, stupid!

This is a clarion call for feminists, progressives and everyone who cares about justice, equality and democracy. We must link arms and say “No more.”

We must elect a Congress that will repeal this ban and a president who will sign the repeal.

November 2008 can’t come soon enough.

###

For Immediate Release
Contact: Mai Shiozaki, 202-628-8669, ext. 116; cell 202-641-1906

DIY and the right to choose

All right, its abortion discusssion week here at One Woman Army (judging from the topics of the past week).

As I mentioned previously, in Canada abortion is decriminalized - not legal - decriminalized. I can’t help but wonder what this would mean in the case of Amber Abreu in Lawrence, Massechussetts who is now possibly facing charges of manslaughter for a DIY abortion.

Are women’s rights under attack still - 34 years after Roe vs. Wade? Just look at Amber’s case:

“Prosecutors in Lawrence, Massachusetts could charge this 18-year-old woman, Amber Abreu, with manslaughter because she took an ulcer medication containing Misoprostol, a drug that is legal in the U.S., in an attempt to terminate a pregnancy.    She has already been charged with ”procuring an improper miscarriage” and faces a possible seven years in state prison.  She is being held on $15,000 bail.   Even though abortion is legal in Massachusetts until the 24th week of pregnancy, she could face manslaughter charges depending on the results of the autopsy.   

Scared that she was pregnant, not sure, but believing she had felt movement in her abdomen, she obtained the ulcer medication from a friend.  She took three doses, began to develop stomach cramps and went to the hospital, where she gave birth to a 1-1/4 pound  girl estimated to be at 23-25 weeks gestation who survived for four days.   While in the hospital, the baby’s urine was tested and the drug was discovered. “Social workers” (snort) alerted police when Abreu checked herself out of the hospital.” - from Women’s Space/The Margins

Wow, talk about a violation of women’s rights. The sneakiness of the “social workers” and physicians to test the baby’s urine to use against this poor girl.

What I want to know is, why is it illegal or criminal to have a diy abortion not in the santions of a legal abortion clinic? For thousands and thousands of years women have been self-administering abortions or treating their sisters with abortions thanks to abortifacients and herbal remedies. This is absolutely nothing new at all, and that it should now be made out to be criminal and “homicidal” is absurd. This is the result of a medicalized society that obeys the laws of non-feminist medicine.

What would this mean in Canada, however, where there are no laws regarding abortion? Would anything even be done? I can’t help but wonder, and I have no answers. What do you think? Discuss in comments.

For those wanting to explore more:

Bitch PhD has a fabulous post that outlines various links on diy abortions and abortifacients, as well as histories of illegal abortions.

- Artemis

Pro-Woman, Pro-Equality... Pro-Choice!

Today is the 34th Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade.

The U.S. has been fighting for abortion rights hot and heavy this year - 34 years after they became legal.

But in Canada they are not legal.

They are not illegal.

They are just - not.

Legally, women have no abortion rights in Canada. Abortion is decriminalized - very very different, but there are no laws surrounding them. As such, there are still protests, there is lack of services, there is lack of medical coverage in a country where medicine is supposed to be covered. There are provinces with one government-supported abortion clinic, leaving women in remote rural areas to fend for themselves, to cover expensive travel costs - or just to not get one at all.

Most recently abortion rights in Canada came under attack when women’s rights in New Brunswick were rolled back this year.

In Canada, the government is supposed to pay for abortions in both hospitals and abortion clinics. However, many provinces do not pay for abortions in clinics, or pay only part of the costs.

This year in New Brunswick, the medicare system was changed to only pay for abortions if it takes place by a gynecologist in a  recognized hospital and only if 2 doctors deem it medically necessary for the woman.

Women who have no medically necessary reason for an abortion can go to Fredericton, New Brunswick to pay $750 for an abortion - plus travel costs and expenses and lost work wages - if they can get to Fredericton in the first place.

In Prince Edward Island, the government will not pay for abortions at all. Women must travel out of province to the abortion clinic in New Brunswick. If they can.

So why am I pro-choice?

Because it is my body.

Because someday, I might need the option of having an abortion. Of not being a single mother, of having choice in my life to move my life forward.

Several years ago, I learned that my mother had had an abortion as a teenager. As I was born in 1978 when my mother was 21, I cannot imagine the circumstances  that my  mother might have gone through to have to have an abortion as a teenager in rural British Columbia in the 1970s. But I am thankful that she had the option, had the choice - because without that, her life would’ve been entirely different. So would my life, and my brother’s if that existed at all.

Why am I pro-choice?

Because there truly is no other choice when you believe in women’s lives, in women’s equality, in women’s rights to freedom and respect and choice and equality and justice.

Today is the 34th Anniversary of Roe vs Wade and I’m blogging for choice.

A woman's right to choose

"I don't think women in this country or people who love women in this country should trust the Conservatives on abortion." - Dr. Henry Morgentaler

I’m scared.

Tomorrow is Election Day in Canada. And if the polls are “right”, it could mean a Conservative government.

If the polls are right, and voters choose Stephen Harper tomorrow, I’m scared of what that will mean for women.

Today is the 33rd anniversary of Roe vs. Wade in the U.S.  In Canada abortion is decriminalized - ie. not legal but not illegal.

As a woman, I walk around every day of my life knowing that I am a second-class citizen. I feel it when my brother talks to me, when I go to work, when I go to school. I feel it when my opportunities are limited because of my sex. I feel it when my right to choice may be limited.

Right now it’s not. In Canada there is access to abortion (although sometimes limited). If you live in a rural area, your access to abortion might be limited. You might not have the money or transportation to drive eight hours to a clinic where a doctor will perform an abortion. In some provinces, healthcare will not cover abortion. Thanksfully, in Newfoundland and Labrador, the province covers all abortion costs, but if you live in a remote area of the province, such as Goosebay or Nain, you probably won’t be able to get an abortion.

On Prince Edward Island, there is neither abortion access. So if you have an unwanted pregnancy on PEI, you’ll have to leave the province to get an abortion. That means going to New Brunswick or Nova Scotia at personal expense. If you’re over 16 week pregnant, you’ll have to go to Montreal, Toronto or Boston.

My access to abortion depends on where I live in Canada - but despite that, I know that if I need or want one, I have the choice.

That choice is essential to my right as a woman, as a person - to making me more than just a second-class citizen. It’s essential to my equality in this world.

Tomorrow is Election Day. If the Conservative party forms government, I’m terrified of what will happen to that choice.

73% of the Conservative party have expressed anti-aborton sentiments. The other 27% have refused to comment on their choice agenda.

Stephen Harper has said repeatedly that were a private member introduce a motion on abortion, he would not force members to tow the party line, but rather to vote on their personal feelings:

“I would not force a vote on a moral question like abortion on my cabinet. …I always said, on these kinds of issues, Member of Parliament, including cabinet ministers, are going to be free to vote their conscience.” (Stephen Harper, Media Scrum, June 4, 2004)

So yes, I’m scared.

If you care at all about women - about your sisters, aunts, friends, cousins, mothers, grandmothers - for all the women in Canada - about women’s equality - then do not mark an x next to the Conservative party on Monday January 23rd.

Our rights depend on it.

- Artemis

It’s January 22nd, 2006 - the 33rd Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. I’m Blogging for Choice