Sunday, August 24, 2008

Men show moral arrogance in wanting control of abortion

ABORTION is back in the news, with a bill now before the Victorian Parliament that, if it becomes law, will give women with problem pregnancies of less than 24 weeks the right to decide for themselves.

Whenever abortion is at issue, questions about the place of men in the debate loom large and unspoken. What role do men play in political and personal discussions about termination, and what role — morally speaking — should they play?

The facts are simple. Men dominate the politics of abortion in the same way they do all other issues. One source claims that 77% of anti-choice leaders are men. And male religious leaders such as the Pope (through the Vatican's membership of the United Nations) have significant influence on global reproductive health policy.

Even on the pro-choice side, where most leadership roles are held by women, men have been critical to the success of campaigns that give women the right to decide. ACT politician Wayne Berry and Canadian Henry Morgentaler have driven legal change that sees abortion treated like all other medical procedures.

Problem pregnancies require decisions that touch on our most intimate experiences and values concerning sex, fertility, love and relationships. Research shows that while the vast majority of women faced with an unplanned pregnancy don't want counselling, they do want information from the biological father. Indeed, he is the person they are most likely to consult. Does he want a child, now or ever? What role will he play in raising it? What support might he provide if she decides to go it alone? The willingness of a man to engage in such discussions, and the answers he gives, will critically affect the woman's decision.

Men's role in the decisions individual women make about problem pregnancies is a simple fact of life to which no concept of "ought" can or should apply. But before you can determine the proper role of men in the political debate, you must recognise that a decision about continuing or terminating a pregnancy is not open to compromise. You can't have half a baby or half an abortion. While most women do consult the biological father, ultimately one person's view must prevail. The law privileges the woman's decision because the bodily experience of pregnancy and birth invest her more heavily in the outcome.

It is also her call because there would be no way to enforce his right to decide other than giving him the power to wrestle her onto the surgical table (if she wants to continue and he wants to terminate) or snapping a collar on her and handing him the lead (if the situation were reversed).

Does men's disconnection from the risk and experience of pregnancy and birth disqualify them from political activism on the issue? Part of the answer turns on the weight you give to experience. Imagine a woman-led and dominated group that sought to deny men access to safe and legal vasectomies on the grounds that the procedure is dangerous, that men might come to regret their decision and that vasectomies reduce the number of babies being born that infertile couples would be more than happy to raise.

Would we think such a group legitimate? That its views should hold sway on the laws passed by parliament? Or would the demands of such an organisation on a procedure so intimately bound up with men's bodies and lives strike you as inappropriate, patronising and domineeringly presumptive?

For me, it's the latter. But I would feel differently if such a female-dominated group came into being in a world where men were struggling to achieve the legal right to choose safe vasectomy, and their aim was to help men gain control over an issue so critical to their bodies and lives.

What matters is not that men are involved but how they are involved. Men lack moral standing in the abortion debate — indeed are guilty of moral arrogance — when they push for control over a procedure they'll never have to have because they can't get pregnant.

But when men implicitly acknowledge their lesser standing by raising their voices in support of laws that take away power from their own sex to give it to women, they can feel confident they are doing the right thing.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer

No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.

The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.

Sacerdos