This is an article on the issue of abortion which has become heavily politicized in our culture. This article is divided into two parts. I will first examine the legal and technical issues behind abortion, including providing analysis of several court cases. In this discussion, I will raise the issue of late-term abortion and why it is so highly controversial (this includes botched abortions that result in live births). Maybe I am alone, however, late-term abortions is not something I clearly understood before preparing for this article. At the conclusion of the court case discussion, I will transition into the real issue behind abortion, which is the decision that is made by women to have an abortion.
In the second half of the article, I will discuss the role we as Christians, the collective body of Christ, can play in informing the decision-making process of women contemplating abortions (and the men and families who encourage them) and provide concrete ways to get involved and make a difference. It is my concern that opposition to abortion has turned into such a thirst for legislation that transformation of hearts and advancing the gospel through relationships has been overlooked.
Let me first begin by saying that, although this article discusses court cases and some legal issues, I am not an attorney and do not profess to be any kind of an expert in the law. None of the information in this article should be perceived as legal advice, and interpreting legal issues is not the point of the article.
There was a recent court case in Florida where I live involving a young girl who petitioned the court to permit her to have an abortion without parental consent. The girl’s name was omitted from the court’s opinion for privacy and other obvious reasons. The court denied her request, and she appealed (Fifth District Court of Appeal, Case No. 5D13-1804, May 28, 2013), where her appeal was also denied. This case raises a number of issues and prompted me to write this article in an effort to provoke discussion on the real issues behind abortion.
1. The court’s opinion has no discussion of the facts of the case, however, one judge dissented and in his dissent states, “She wished to terminate the pregnancy without telling her mother (the only parent she lived with) because her mother is very religious, considers abortion to be murder and would oppose the procedure. If her mother found out, Appellant would be ‘disowned,’ meaning that she would no longer have her mother’s help and support, and Appellant might have to leave the home.” In the judge’s dissent, he referred to a Florida Supreme Court case which I also looked up and found it to be very revealing of the issues involved. In that case (In re T.W., 551 So.2d 1186, Fla 1989), the girl also believed “she had a justified fear of physical or emotional abuse if her parents were requested to consent.”
This is issue number one. Let me first say that I think we humans are prone to spending too much time thinking about the worst case scenarios and being driven by fear. Someone once defined fear as “False Evidence Appearing Real.” This can be so true.
But notice especially what this girl said. Her mother is “very religious.” Not just religious, but very religious. And she apparently had reason to believe “very religious” meant “wrath.” To be sure, in some cases I would say she is right.
This is issue number one because the home is to be the one safe place children can always return no matter what. The home should be an environment in which children can stub their proverbial toes and receive from their parents guidance, love and support to work through a difficult situation.
This is issue number one also because it highlights the disparity between one’s being “very religious” and the resulting transformation that the world expects to come from it. Granted, we are not told the particular set of beliefs the mother held (Buddhism, Muslim, Jewish, Christian, etc.), which could make a big difference in the discussion.
Please read this issue number one as being directed to the parent and not to the girl who is the subject of the case or any other young person who is facing major life decisions. Parents, please take this as an opportunity to have a glimpse into your young person’s mind. They can perceive that you create such an atmosphere of fear that they do not feel free to come to you for help. This girl apparently believed that a judge would be more reasonable than her own mother. In my opinion, this is very tragic.
2. The judge’s dissent also states, “When asked why Appellant thought her decision was responsible, she testified that she wanted to be fair to the child. She has no job and is in high school. ‘It would be significant for them [sic] to be brought up in this way.’ The trial court asked, ‘[W]hy would you not want to have the child born and adopted?’ She answered that she did not want to ‘hav[e] her child somewhere else’ and then, later on in life, have another child.”
Let me go a little deeper to get to the heart of the issue being raised here. In the T.W. Florida Supreme Court Case, the judges stated, “Under Roe [v. Wade], the potentiality of life in the fetus becomes compelling at the point in time when the fetus becomes viable, which the Court defined as the time at which the fetus becomes capable of meaningful life outside the womb, albeit with artificial aid. Roe, 410 U.S. at 160, 163, 93 S.Ct. at 730, 731. Under our Florida Constitution, the state’s interest becomes compelling upon viability, as defined below. Until this point, the fetus is a highly specialized set of cells that is entirely dependent upon the mother for sustenance. No other member of society can provide this nourishment. The mother and fetus are so inextricably intertwined that their interests can be said to coincide. Upon viability, however, society becomes capable of sustaining the fetus, and its interest in preserving its potential for life thus becomes compelling.” (Emphasis mine)
The state has an interest at a certain point in a woman’s pregnancy because once life can be sustained outside the womb the state can provide for the child (i.e., food, shelter, clothing, education, medical care, etc.). There are dedicated individuals and families out there who are waiting to welcome such a child into their homes who will properly love and care for the child.
However, the judges raise a very important point. Until a child is viable outside the womb, the state can do nothing to intervene. To impose a prohibition on abortion is violating the woman’s personal choice, which the federal government has said it will not do (at least not in the abortion debate; it is debatable whether the government always follows this rule, but that is not the subject of this article, thankfully). The real issue then becomes the personal choice by a woman, and this is issue number two.
3. The judge went on, “The trial court then asked if she believed there were no inherent risks with terminating the pregnancy that would outweigh the risk of going to full term. She said no. When asked if she had consulted with a medical professional, she said that she had not, but that she had found the information she needed on clinic websites.”
I ask, where is the education? This judge actually said it has been judicially determined that there is no more risk to abortion than carrying a baby to full term. This may be a legal opinion, and medical science may confirm it, however, there are plenty of women who, if they agree to come forward in the first place, will admit to psychological torment over aborting their pregnancy. Lysa Terkuerst is an example, and I have read and heard many more women talk about this same issue. Abortion as a medical procedure is not without its risks to physical harm or irreversible damage – although I must concede that the same is true with a full-term birth, having witnessed the birth of each of my four children.
My questions to the church and to you as the reader are these: What message are we sending to girls and women contemplating abortion when we as the collective body of Christ categorically oppose abortion particularly during election season or picket outside an abortion clinic? How is this helping to inform women in making a decision? Is this a message originating out of love? Is this a message originating out of political bias and support for a political candidate? Is this a message originating out of a general opposition to sin? Is it helping?
Like this post? Subscribe to stay up to date on new posts.