Who is choosing?
Elliot
Institute; September 11, 2002
Who's Making the
Choice?
Women's
Heightened Vulnerability During a Crisis Pregnancy
by Amy R. Sobie and David C. Reardon
Abortion
advocates speak proudly of "freedom to choose," conjuring up images of
women freely and autonomously making decisions that are "right" for
them. But research into
abortion decision making presents a far different picture.
Polls
show that most women choosing abortion at least 70 percent say they believe
abortion is immoral.(1) In most cases, women who abort are violating their consciences because of pressure from other people or
their own circumstances. More than 80 percent of women who report post-abortion problems say they would have
completed their pregnancies under
better circumstances or with more support from the people they love.(2)
The
sad truth is that hundreds of thousands of women undergo unwanted abortions
every year to please someone else or because of pressure or coercion
by their sexual partners, parents, social workers, counselors, employers or
school administrators. In a WEBA survey
of 252 post-abortive women, more than half said they felt "forced" into
the abortion by others.(3) How is such widespread coercion possible?
CRISIS
INDUCED VULNERABILITY
Experts
on crisis counseling have found that people are more vulnerable to outside
influences whenever they are faced with a crisis situation.
The more overwhelming the
crisis appears to be, the less they trust their own opinions and abilities to
make the right decision.
As a result, a person in crisis is more likely to feel dependent on
the opinions and direction of others.
People
in crisis "are often less in touch with reality and more vulnerable to change
than they are in non-crisis situations."(4) They often experience feelings
of tiredness, lethargy, hopelessness, inadequacy, confusion, anxiety and disorganization. Thus, they are more likely to stand back
and let other people make their
decisions for them, instead of protecting themselves from decisions that may not be in their best interests.
Fundamentally,
a person who is upset and trapped in a crisis wants to reestablish
stability in his or her life. This
desire to be free of the crisis
leaves the individual more susceptible than normal to any influence from
others who claim to be able to solve the crisis, especially to the influence
of those who appear to have status or authority.(5)
In
such periods of heightened psychological accessibility, "a relatively minor
force, acting for a relatively short time, can switch the whole balance from one side or to the other to the side of mental health or
to the side of ill health."(6)
An
understanding of this basic crisis theory helps to explain why pregnant women,
especially if they are unwed, adolescent, or poor, are so vulnerable to undergoing abortions in violation of their own consciences.
Women who would normally be very much in control of their
own lives may suddenly feel dependant on the guidance of others when faced
with a crisis pregnancy. In such
cases, even minimal efforts by family members, their male partners, or medical authorities to encourage abortion may be experienced
as the decisive factor.
What
women experience as "pressure" to abort may be very subtle, such as withholding
love or approval from the woman unless she agrees to an abortion. Or
it may be overt, as in an outright threat to abandon or expel the woman from her
home if she does not abort her child.
In
many cases, the pressure is applied intentionally by others. In other cases,
the "pressure" is not intended, but simply perceived by the woman.
For instance, if her boyfriend exhibits an unenthusiastic response
to the news that she is pregnant, she may see this as
his way of telling her that he will not help to support her or their child.
No
matter what form the pressure or manipulation of her situation takes, any attempt
to influence a woman toward abortion during this time of crisis when she is most vulnerable can be almost impossible to resist.
For example, one WEBA member wrote:
"My
family would not support my decision to keep my baby. My boyfriend said he
would give me no emotional or financial help whatsoever.
All the people that mattered
told me to abort. When I said I didn't want to, they started listing
reasons why I should . . . I started feeling like maybe I was crazy to
want to keep it . . .
"I
finally told everyone I would have the abortion just to get them off my back. But inside I still didn't want to have the abortion.
Unfortunately, when the abortion day came I shut off my feelings.
I was scared to not do it because
of how my family and boyfriend felt. I'm
so angry at myself for giving in to
the pressure of others. I just felt
so alone in my feelings to have my
baby."(7)
In
cases like this, an abortion is likely to be especially traumatic.
(In the above example, the
young woman attempted suicide shortly after her abortion.)
In such cases, women are violating their consciences, and often their
strong maternal desires, only because they are in crisis and are therefore
more vulnerable to the influence of those who insist that abortion is
the "best" solution. This
is especially true when pregnant women cannot immediately
see where they can find the financial resources and social support they will need to care for their children.
This
conflict between the heart saying, "don't do it," and the mind saying,
"it's the only thing I can
do," is at the heart of the deep ambivalence that is
felt by most women having an abortion. Indeed,
many women describe going into the
clinic and waiting for someone their boyfriend or husband, a parent, even the counselor to burst into the room and stop the
abortion from happening.
When no one attempts to prevent the abortion, this reaffirms in women's
minds that abortion is the only choice that their loved ones will support.
One woman described her feelings of powerlessness
this way:
"I
didn't want to kill my child; I just made the decision to be weak and not care
about any of it. I made a decision
not to make a conscious choice at all.
In fact, Planned Parenthood and all the abortion mills tell you that you
have NO CHOICE but to get an abortion. This
is the irony of the 'pro-choice'
rhetoric. "(8)
CONCLUSION
There
is no disputing the fact that many, perhaps most, women who have abortions
feel pressured into choosing abortion against their conscience.
In many cases it is clear
that coercion by others is deliberate and blatant.
In other cases, the pressure to abort is more
subtle, or even unintended.
This
is why it is vitally important to develop safeguards that will, at the very
least, protect women from unwanted abortions. Unfortunately, abortion clinics generally make no attempt help women resist the
pressures they face to undergo an
unwanted abortion.
Indeed,
more than 80 percent of women with post-abortion problems report that their
abortion clinic counselors showed no interest in helping them explore other options, and two-thirds of the women said the counselors
were strongly biased toward
encouraging abortion.9
Simply
put, abortion counseling is usually designed to "sell" a woman an abortion,
not to help her escape the pressure of others who may be pushing her into an unwanted abortion.
In essence, rather than taking the side of the woman, abortion counselors
often take the side of those
pushing for the abortion.
The
only solution to this problem is to hold abortion clinics more fully liable
for protecting women from coerced abortions. Proper screening for the known risk factors that predict post- abortion psychological
problems would necessarily include
screening for any evidence that the woman feels pressured or
manipulated by others to consent to the abortion.
In this case, the clinic
should be held liable for failing to refer the woman to resources that can
help her resolve her situation without undergoing an unwanted abortion.
In
cases where the abortion clinic knew or should have known through proper screening
that a woman was being pressured into an unwanted abortion, the abortionist should be held liable not only for her
psychological pain and suffering,
but also for the wrongful death of her child.
Such liability is the only
way to ensure that abortion clinics are properly motivated to screen for
coercion and to act in the best interests of these women.
NOTES
1.
Los Angeles Times Poll, March 19, 1989.
See also Zimmerman Mary K., Passage
Through Abortion (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1977) and Reardon, David
C., Aborted Women: Silent No More (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1987).
2. Reardon, Aborted Women,
12. 3. Reardon, 10-11. 4.
Stone, Howard W., Crisis Counseling (Fortress Press, 1976). 5.
Morely, Wilbur E., "Theory of Crisis Intervention," Pastoral
Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 203, April 1970, p. 16. 6. Caplan, Gerald, Principals of Preventive Psychiatry
(New York: Basic Books, 1964). 7.
Reardon, 31. 8. Reardon, 143. 9.
Reardon, 16.
Originally
printed in The Post-Abortion Review, Vol. 8(1), Jan.-March 2000.