By William Ryan

Abortion has become both socially acceptable and readily available, but it remains one of the most divisive issues of our day. Contrary to the expectation of many, the matter was not “settled” by the 1973 Supreme Court decisions legalizing abortion on demand. And despite all the rhetoric, it is also a subject about which many people know little – about how it is accomplished, or about its effects on society.

“Abortion has become one of society’s best kept secrets,” writes Gail Quinn. “It is most often described by slogans that camouflage reality, and efforts to shed light on the subject have been rejected time and time again.”

Thus the Supreme Court in 1983 ruled unconstitutional an Akron, Ohio ordinance that required that women seeking abortions be told about physical and emotional complications, about the developmental status of the unborn child, and about alternatives to abortion. The Court worried that such information “is designed not to inform the woman’s consent, but rather to persuade her to withhold it.” But it is quite alright for medical personnel to tell patients, as they do, that an abortion will “remove tissue,” that it is “safer than childbirth,” or that it will be over in a “jiffy.”

“Hardly information upon which to base an informed consent,” writes Ms. Quinn, who is managing editor and coordinator of the annual NCCB Respect Life Program. Her article, ABORTION: THE HUMAN FACTOR, appears in the current manual.

“There is no question that the unborn child is the principal victim of abortion,” Ms. Quinn said. “But the child is not the only victim.”

“Undoubtedly some women undergo abortion without great emotional trauma, but as more and more women tell of their abortion experience it is becoming apparent that such women are far fewer than abortion advocates would lead us to believe.”

Nor is the abortion procedure without physical complications including the possibility of infections, perforations and lacerations, subsequent infertility and an inability to carry future pregnancies to term.

Men too suffer from the pain of abortion. Dr. Arthur Shostak of Drexel University, who conducted an extensive survey of men whose children were aborted, maintains that “abortion is a man’s issue too, and there is almost no one to help the million men who go through it every year.” And emotional trauma among medical personnel who perform abortions after the first trimester is well documented, Ms. Quinn wrote. Last February the New York Times carried a story about how doctors view later-term abortions. “It makes us all schizophrenic,” said one. “Nowadays we are asked to terminate a pregnancy that in two weeks doctors on the same floor are fighting to save.”

“Society itself has not been unscathed by more than a decade of freely-available abortion,” Ms. Quinn said. “The Court’s reasoning in 1973 has proven disastrous today as the arguments in Roe and Doe are used to justify suicide, euthanasia and infanticide.” She cited several recent examples:

• The Indiana baby born with Downs’ syndrome and an incomplete esophagus denied life-saving surgery solely because he was mentally retarded.
• A quadriplegic woman who demanded on the basis of her constitutional “right to privacy” as articulated in Roe that a hospital assist in her suicide.
• A woman who gave birth to a handicapped child and filed suit for a “wrongful birth” because her obstetrician had not warned her of this possibility thereby giving her the chance to abort.
• Although abortion is often depicted as part of the feminist agenda, Ms. Quinn noted that polls have repeatedly shown that men – especially well-educated white men – consistently favor abortion more than women do.

Why then do women obtain abortions? Although abortion advocates city poverty and health reasons, most often this is not the case, according to Ms. Quinn. “Perhaps part of the answer is social conditioning,” she said. “Society tells young girls that by having an abortion they are acting in a mature and responsible fashion.”

Many organizations such as Planned Parenthood are well-funded and have the means to reach women to tell them that abortion is not wrong and that they will help any woman who wants to obtain one.

There are also groups, generally staffed by dedicated volunteers, which exist solely to help women find alternatives to abortion. “No profits build up in their bank accounts,” Ms. Quinn wrote. “In fact the needs of those they help generally outstrip the group’s resources.”

Ms. Quinn said a growing recognition that unborn human life merits protection makes it impossible for the majority of Americans to accept the Supreme Court decisions. She predicted a long and sharpened political debate as those who believe abortion is morally wrong confront those in the Court and elsewhere who are determined that the “right” to abortion be expanded.

In their 1983 pastoral letter on peace, the bishops asked, “In a society where the innocent unborn are killed wantonly, how can we expect people to feel righteous revulsion at the act or threat of killing non-combatants in war?” The answer to that question, suggested Ms. Quinn, lies in a “renewal of commitment to the sacredness of life and a greater awareness of the effects of a public policy of permissive abortion.”