Abortion Mifeprex

Archived Posts from this Category

June 21, 2010

Men and Abortion

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rights, Abortion RU486 | Tags: , |
[15] Comments 

Well, I guess the day after Father’s Day is as good as any to talk about men and abortion.

It goes without saying that most men are affected when their partner becomes pregnant.  I say “most” because we know there are jerks out there who are just into the wham-bam-thank you m’am mode of relationships.  Let’s put them aside for the moment.  No, on second thought, let’s cut their ____ off.

But I digress.

When a woman becomes pregnant and is not sure what to do, she will generally talk to the man who was involved.  But the fact that there are two people involved means that there could be a difference of opinion on what to do.  The bottom line, of course, is that if there is a conflict, then the woman’s opinion must prevail.  After all, it is her body, right?  Indeed, a number of years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that laws requiring the spouse’s consent to an abortion were unconstitutional.

I’ll say right up front that I can’t prove this, but I have to believe that when faced with this difficult decision both parties usually arrive at the same conclusion.  I’m thinking particularly of more established couples (versus one night stands), where they’ve been either dating for a long time, have been living together or are married.  You gotta assume that if they’ve been together for a while then they are generally pretty simpatico (although my parents were an exception to that rule).  So, the vast majority of couples don’t face any problems.

And while the decision to have an abortion is ultimately the woman’s, we all want to be sensitive to the man’s situation.   That’s why it is important for the man to convey all of his feelings to his partner.  He may be feeling guilty about “getting a woman pregnant.”  He may be concerned that the woman might want to discontinue the relationship.  He may be thinking about that son that he could have had.  If the man is invested in the relationship, then his feelings are just as complex and need to be recognized.

But, again, at some point the woman may decide to have the abortion and the man may feel a little lost in the process.  He may not know what to do, what to say.  But there are a number of things the man can do during the abortion process.

Tell your partner that you’re sorry she is the one who has to go through this physically;

I know this is hard for some men but, yes, ask her how she’s feeling and give her some kind of gift;

Don’t even think about sex for a while because she may not be ready.  After all, it was sex that put her in that predicament, right?

Talk, talk, talk.  You know how women are – they love to process while men prefer one word answers so they can get back to the ball game.  So, suck it up, dudes, and talk to her.

 

June 16, 2010

Common Ground on Abortion

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Abortion RU486, Abortion Violence | Tags: , , , , , |
[47] Comments 

In my last blog, I wrote about my relationship with Mr. Guy Condon, an anti-abortion activist who ran a number of crisis pregnancy centers across the country.  I noted that we had been brought together by an organization called “Common Ground,” which has since closed its doors.

The folks at Common Ground had a very ambitious and, yes, “sexy” agenda.  Their goal was to bring together parties on both sides of controversial issues in an effort to find areas of possible agreement.  So, for example, with the abortion issue, they tried to craft an agreement on how to reduce the number of abortions.   I don’t think they ever succeeded in that particular quest but for a while, this group was much in vogue, they got tons of publicity and lots of money from certain foundations.  Ultimately, however, they were forced to shut their doors.  Honestly, I don’t know what happened and I don’t have the energy to try to research the rise and fall of Common Ground.  Suffice it to say that they are gone.

What many people never realized, however, was that every day there were similar efforts taking place on a smaller scale at the abortion clinics.  No, anti-abortion and pro-choice folks were not sitting down and hashing out peace agreements or crafting joint legislation.   But activists on both sides of the abortion issue were talking and have been talking for years.

The dynamic at an abortion clinic is fascinating.   Generally speaking, the clinic staff people will arrive at the same time and they always know when their local protestors will be out there.  Saturday is usually the biggest day as more women are able to get away from work to have an abortion.  Normally, you would think that the staffers would just walk in and exchange harsh glances or even harsh words with the protestors.   And, yes, in some cases the two sides just didn’t talk and, indeed, there was great animosity.  But there were so many other instances where the clinic staff developed some kind of relationship with their protestors.

Over the years, clinic staffers would tell me how they would bring coffee out to their protestors on cold, winter days or ice tea in the middle of the summer.  Others would actually invite their protestors into the clinic for a tour of the facility.  Several clinic administrators told me that on occasion they would have lunch with the lead protestor in an effort to develop a mutual understanding of their work.  Some clinic staff told me that they would have conversations with the director of the local anti-abortion crisis pregnancy center and even refer women to them if they felt it would be helpful.   It was as if there was a general truce at these clinics and even a curiosity about that person on the other side of the fence.

I’ve already talked about how my relationship with Paul Hill might have saved the lives of a number of abortion providers in Pensacola in 1994.   Of course, no one can prove that talking to the other side might prevented some kind of tragedy but many of the clinic administrators (or doctors) who regularly engaged with “the enemy” told me that the conversations resulted in a less tense environment outside the clinic.  They said that after the protestors got to understand a little more about what motivated the clinic workers and the mindset of the women, the protestors were inclined to be less “angry.”

The fact is that activists on this controversial issue, and that includes abortion clinic staff, are usually pretty myopic when it comes to listening to arguments from the other side.   They usually just listen to their leaders of their own movements, cite their studies, and regurgitate their talking points.  They think that the other side could not possibly have anything meaningful to say, that they are all just out to lunch.  So, both sides stick their heads in the sand, become intractable and, as a consequence, the tensions increase.

But because of the bravery of some people on both sides of the issue, peace broke out years ago at some of the clinics that slowed abortion providers and protestors to continue their work in a less-than-hostile environment.

In that regard, I think “Common Ground” worked.

 

June 14, 2010

Abortion and My Friend, the Enemy

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill | Tags: , , |
[34] Comments 

In the mid-1990’s, as a staff person for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I met a young, affable man named Guy Condon.  Guy was the Executive Director of Care Net, a chain of anti-abortion “crisis pregnancy centers” that were located in all parts of the country.

Yes, Guy was the enemy.

And, about a year later, his wife reserved for me a space in the front pew at their church for his funeral service.

Guy and I met as part of a national effort called “Common Ground,” a well-funded organization that brought together adversaries on controversial topics in the hopes of reaching a mutual understanding or, in rare cases, agreement, on certain issues.   In my case, I was asked to join a group of three pro-choicers and three pro-lifers around a table to talk once a month.   As you can imagine, the meetings were very tense at first, as the years and years of hatred made it difficult to trust the process or to not think you were being set up.  Still, I basically trust people so I jumped right in.  From the beginning, I shocked everyone (including my “side”) by candidly addressing the tough issues on abortion (as I do in this blog on a regular basis).  Guy reacted well to my approach and he followed suit.

We continued our conversations over the phone, on line, in separately arranged lunches.  He admitted to me that he was very concerned that some of the other crisis pregnancy centers were luring women into their facilities under false pretenses or giving them incorrect information.  He invited me to visit his centers, which I did, and, unless they were very clever, I got the clear sense that these folks really just wanted to help women in their time of need.  And the help that they offered extended after the women decided to have a child in the form of job counseling, computer training, day care at reduced fees, etc.  Sure, they couldn’t take care of the kid from cradle to grave, but at least they were trying to help.

Meanwhile, I talked to Guy about our clinics, about why women came to us, their decision making process, what motivated our doctors to provide abortions.  Eventually, after months of conversations, he told me that he wanted to write an article for “Christianity Today” about our relationship and asked my permission, which I readily gave.  I didn’t even ask him what he was going to write, I trusted him that much.  Still, he volunteered that he wanted to convey how I had made him understand more about the abortion process and the women who were in that difficult situation.

Two days later, Guy Condon was killed in a car accident, leaving behind three beautiful girls and his wife.

When I heard the news, I was stunned.  I was equally shocked when I got a call from Guy’s assistant  who invited me to his funeral.  I struggled for a day, knowing that if I went I would be surely going into some kind of “lion’s den” of pro-life leaders.  And what would my pro-choice colleagues think when they heard I had attended the funeral?   Surely, I could not explain to all of them that we had been friends.  Ultimately, however, I decided our friendship came first, not the politics of abortion, so that Saturday morning, I drove out to Manassas to the funeral.

As I entered the church and looked around, it felt like I had entered the National Right to Life Annual Meeting.  I quickly noticed Joe Scheidler, one of the founders of the protest movement, and Father Frank Pavone, the head of Priests for Life.  I didn’t know what to do or where to go, how to act, whether or not to make eye contact.   Ultimately, however, someone rescued me and escorted me through the crowd to the front pew.  I was dizzy, I felt all of those eyes on me and I started to wonder if I had done the right thing.

After the ceremony, a reception line formed and I got in line, trying to think of what I would say to his wife.  When I got up to her and extended my hand, I stumbled.   “Hi, my name is Pat Richards and I knew Guy…”   Before I could explain my relationship with Guy, his wife hugged me and said “Oh, Pat, he talked about you all the time!”   I started to cry.   I am almost in tears at this very moment thinking of her gracious welcome.  Then, I shook the hands of his three children and one of them said “My Daddy said you were very funny.”   I totally lost it.

I made it to the punch and cookies table and was surrounded by the pro-life movement.  They were all thanking me for coming, but I didn’t know them and  couldn’t trust them.  But I trusted Guy and that’s why I was there.  I practically ran outside to my car and broke down.

 

June 7, 2010

Abortion Rights Groups Raising Money

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Abortion RU486, Methotrexate, RU486 | Tags: , , , , , |
[26] Comments 

Okay.  This one may piss off a bunch of my friends, but here it goes…

We recently commemorated the one year anniversary of the murder of Doctor George Tiller.  And I think it’s kind of sucky that a number of national pro-choice organizations used the occasion to try to raise money “in honor” of this wonderful man.  For example, just go to the NARAL Pro Choice America website and look at the first page.  In big bold letters, there it is for all to see:  “Donate in Memory of Doctor Tiller.”  Then, towards the top of the page in smaller letters is another fundraiser:  “Buy the ‘Trust Women’ wristband….”

In the early 1990’s, a handful of independent abortion providers got together in Washington, D.C. to form the National Coalition of Abortion Providers.  Doctor Tiller was not in the original group but he quickly joined the organization.  One of the main reasons why NCAP was formed was the concern that  the major pro-choice groups were not representing the unique interests of abortion providers and, worse, were reluctant to associate with the doctors and the staff who actually performed the abortions.  Oh, sure, they’d take their donations contributions but ask them to testify before Congress?  No way.  “They make their money off of abortions, so their testimony would be tainted,” one pro-choice leader told me years ago.

After NCAP was formed (to the chagrin of several pro-choice groups), abortion providers became much more vocal and aggressive.  They embarked on a campaign urging their colleagues to not shy away from the “A” word.  Doctor Tiller was part of that effort.   Still, over the years, the groups not only continued to avoid talking about abortion but they took steps to get as far away from the issue as possible.   For example, the organization that was formerly known as the National Abortion Rights Action League changed its name to the less strident “NARAL Pro Choice America.”   It was always my feeling that they did that in the hope that over time people will totally forget what “NARAL” stood for and so the word “abortion” would be totally obfuscated.

Meanwhile, George Tiller and his colleagues were out there on the front lines, being unapologetic about performing abortions, sending their message through NCAP and, to some extent, the National Abortion Federation.

And now that George is dead, they are using his memory to raise money.  It makes my stomach flip-flop a little, but it’s hard to articulate why.  After all, I am sure that George gave money to all the groups but…

I am reminded of an incident that occurred soon after the murder of Doctor David Gunn in Pensacola in 1993.  I was sitting in a restaurant in New York City with Doctor Gunn’s son, David Gunn, Jr., just before he was scheduled to do a major television interview.    It was about 6 days after his father’s murder.  Waiting for our coffee, I started skimming the New York Times and on the fifth or sixth page there was a full page advertisement sponsored by a major pro-choice group with a picture of Doctor Gunn and a headline that read something like “He Died to Protect Your Rights.”   And, of course, it was asking for contributions for some kind of abortion provider “protection fund.”  I folded the paper and handed it to David.

“Well, David, so it begins.”

David looked at the ad and started to choke up.  He then said, “Who said they could do this?   I didn’t give them permission.  Geez, my Dad didn’t even like __________ (the national organization).”

Of course, there was nothing David, Jr. could do about the ad and we ultimately heard it raised an incredible amount of money.  And it also inspired David, Jr. to do an ad for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, the association that his father was actually associated with.  Unfortunately, by the time that ad was done, other groups had jumped on the bandwagon and basically tapped out all the contributions.

Over the years, each time another doctor was killed, there were bets within the abortion provider community as to which pro-choice group would be the first to get an ad out asking for money.

And so, David, Jr., it continues.

 

June 4, 2010

Are They Really Pro-Choice?

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights | Tags: , , , |
[49] Comments 

The other day I wrote about how a reporter for Fox News let Governor Mitt Romney off the hook when Romney suggested that he is “pro-life.” I expressed my puzzlement that the reporter did not ask the obvious follow up question which would have flushed out exactly what “pro-life” meant. I argued that it was one thing to say you’re “pro-life,” but it’s another thing to say that, as President, you are going to fight to make abortion illegal in this country again.

Well, this duplicity works on the pro-choice side as well.

First of all, like Mitt Romney (who used to be pro-choice), there are many politicians who have flipped from the pro-life side to the pro-choice side. I’ll never forget years ago, when the Reverend Jesse Jackson indicated his interest in securing the Democratic Party’s nomination for President. Until that point, Jackson had been openly pro-life. But he could read the tea leaves and he knew that the Democratic Party activists, i.e., the ones who would name the nominee, were overwhelmingly pro-choice. So, Jackson simply switched his position. There are others who did the same. Congressman Edward Markey of Massachusetts once got the notion of being a U.S. Senator from that state. Markey, a strong Catholic, had voted pro-life for many years and it served him well in his heavily Catholic district. However, when he started to focus on a statewide seat and looked at the polls, he knew he had to switch to pro-choice. He did, but still didn’t get the nomination. Interestingly, he remained in Congress and voted pro-choice from then on with no damage to his office. Then, there was Senator Edward Kennedy who, in the early days, argued that “life begins at conception.” Ultimately, however, he made the slow switch over to the pro-choice position.

But what does it mean to be pro-choice? Here’s where you have to be careful. There are a number of politicians who say they are pro-choice, but that just means that they would not make abortion illegal in this country. Ultimately, however, his or her constituents might discover that their Member of Congress actually supports parental consent laws, 24 hour waiting periods, informed consent laws and other proposals that restrict access to abortion services. Sorry, folks, I forgot to tell you about that one!

So, when some politician gets up and says they are pro-life or pro-choice, don’t let them off the hook! Ask the follow up questions, just like the reporters do at the White House press conferences. Delve into their feelings about the issue. After all, chances are very high that that politician will never get a chance to vote on the legalization of abortion, but they will be voting on the ancillary issues, on proposals that practically make the right to abortion null and void.

 

May 26, 2010

Shut up, Doctor Carhart!

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Abortion RU486, Abortion Violence | Tags: , , , |
[15] Comments 

One of my dearest friends in the world is Doctor Leroy Carhart.  Doctor Carhart is a physician who performs abortions in the tiny hamlet of Bellevue, Nebraska.   He has been doing abortions for decades – and, I should add, he has been doing late term abortions over those years.  In the last ten years or so, he became an outspoken advocate for abortion rights and, in fact, years ago he challenged the “Partial Birth Abortion Act,” a case that ultimately made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In addition to working in Nebraska, for years Doctor Carhart had been traveling to Wichita, Kansas where he helped out Doctor George Tiller, a specialist in very late term abortions.  As we all know by now, Doctor Tiller was murdered almost one year ago and soon thereafter, his clinic – his beautiful clinic – was shut down.

But Lee Carhart came to the rescue.   Within hours of the murder, he was proudly announcing to the media that he would take over the late term abortion doctor mantle in order to help all of those women who normally would have gone to Doctor Tiller.  He was all over the media, he started giving more speeches, and he pumped up his website.  For good reason, he was applauded for his courage and his loyalty to his dear, departed friend.

A few weeks after Doctor Tiller’s murder, I caught up with Lee at a memorial service in Washington, D.C.  He shared some wonderful thoughts with the crowd and afterwards I was escorted to a private room to see him.  It had been years, so we had a good hug, a few tears were shed and then I looked him directly in the eye and said “Lee, shut the hell up.”

He was incredulous.  For years, working through the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I encouraged him (and his colleagues) to speak openly about what he did, to no longer hide in the shadows anymore.   My argument was that if abortion doctors were open about what they did and talked honestly about their work, then it would prevent the anti-abortion movement from filling in the information gap with their own distorted interpretation of things.  So, Lee started talking – and talking and talking.  Ultimately, he became one of our leading spokesmen.

But now I was telling him to shut up.

“Lee,” I said as I put my hands on his shoulders, “you now have a lot of patients that are relying on you.  You need to be here for them.  But when you go on television, you’re making yourself a target for some nut ball out there who might get the notion of taking out the next George Tiller.”

He was a little stunned at first and, as he often does, he started mumbling about how he understood what I was saying but….

“But what?” I screamed.  “You’ve got an obligation to thousands of women and to George Tiller.  You need to be there every day for your patients.   You cannot go around making speeches everywhere, walking through crowds.  You’re gonna get yourself shot, Lee, and I don’t want to have to come to another memorial service.”

He listened but I don’t think he heard me.

And yesterday I saw an announcement that he will be speaking at the national conference for the National Organization for Women in Boston in a few weeks.

Oh well…..Go get ’em, Lee.

 

« Previous Page