By Lois Anderson
Politicians and their allies learned long ago that fear is a great way to manipulate people. In recent commentaries by abortion proponents, the specter of women losing rights and healthcare has been thrown around as if women are in imminent danger of being turned away for a flu shot. This is simply not the case. I believe in a greater power than fear: truth.
As we spend the summer debating the confirmation of a new justice to the Supreme Court there are some basic truths that should inform our dialogue. In 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. The combined effect of the two decisions legalized abortion for any reason throughout America until the point of birth.
As Oregon has never passed any law restricting abortion, it remains legal to obtain an abortion throughout all nine months of abortion in this state. (Even though 70 percent of Oregonians oppose third-trimester abortions, according to an Oregon Right to Life poll.)
Abortion rights supporters have made it clear that they will accept no limits on abortion. In 1983, Senate Bill 397 was passed, overturning our original abortion law (SB 193, 1969) that placed restrictions on abortion. SB 397 also made abortion a state constitutional right, in case Roe/Doe were overturned or significantly altered.
With Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination, people from both sides on this hotly divided issue believe this is a very real possibility in the not-too-distant future. NARAL and Planned Parenthood speak as if this would be akin to returning to the Dark Ages.
That's an interesting train of thought given that it may as well have been the Dark Ages - scientifically -- based on the knowledge we had of fetal development when abortion was legalized, compared to today. Given the scientific advances of the last 50 years, I believe it is far past time that Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton were thoroughly reexamined.
In 1973, science was surprisingly undeveloped surrounding fetal development. Fetal age had to be estimated by the size of the uterus, menstrual cycles and "quickening" (when a baby can be felt in the womb). Although the ultrasound was invented by this time, it was not widely used in America until the late 1970s. To this day, science is still discovering new things about human development. For example, a recent study showed that the earliest electrical contractions of the heart muscles occur less than three weeks after conception.
Another significant change since 1973 is our ability to keep premature infants alive. Before 1970, more than 90 percent of babies under one kilo died, whereas today almost 90 percent survive, according to Hugo Lagercrantz, professor of pediatrics at Karolinska Institute and former head of neonatal care at the Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital in Stockholm. The earliest age that a premature baby has survived in the U.S. is now 21 weeks and 5 days. That would have been unthinkable in 1973.
Even if it had been more informed, the Court in 1973 did not spend time considering what was available to them. They did not consider what the unborn were. Throughout the Court's majority opinion, they called the unborn "potential human life." Even then a review of an embryology textbook or the April 30, 1965 issue of Life magazine would have illustrated that there is nothing potential about an embryo and a fetus. Each one is fully human and is developing and growing just like every other human does at that age and stage of development.
Just as we are re-examining old convictions with the advance of DNA testing, we should re-examine the decisions that led to more than 60 million death sentences since 1973 in this country. The Roe and Doe decisions were an egregious failing of our government to protect our most vulnerable citizens. Rather than be fearful that a new SCOTUS justice would bring the end of the world, we should embrace the idea that a new SCOTUS justice could bring modern science, balance and truth to the debate.
-- Lois Anderson is the executive director of Oregon Right to Life. She lives in Keizer.
Share your opinion
Submit your essay of 800 words or less on a highly topical issue or a theme of particular relevance to the Pacific Northwest, Oregon and the Portland area to commentary@oregonian.com. Please include your email and phone number for verification.