(This article was originally written in 2000)
Apprehensive about the potentially nettlesome consequences of the issue, Al Gore and George W. Bush haven’t often chosen to raise the subject of abortion during their presidential campaigns. But the recent decision of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to approve the use of the so-called abortion pill, RU-486, has put the issue on the front burner as the drive for the White House enters the final stretch.
In France, where RU-486 was developed in the 1980s, about 44 per cent of abortions are medical rather than surgical. When a woman uses the so-called abortion pill, she first takes mifepristone, a drug that stops a fertilized egg from attaching itself to the lining of the uterus. Two days later, she takes misoprostol, which triggers contractions of the uterus.
Fearing that the drug will make abortions more accessible and private, opponents of abortion rights in the United States have fought a long battle to prevent the marketing of RU-486. Until now, pharmaceutical companies have been unwilling to undertake the production of the drug because of their concern that the anti-abortion movement will mount a boycott of their other products. To circumvent this problem, a new company, Danco Laboratories, has been formed to market the drug, which will be available to U.S. doctors in a few weeks.
While both major presidential candidates have striven to present themselves as centrists on most issues, on the emotional subject of abortion they are far apart, with Gore pro choice and Bush pro life. Given the fact that the next president will likely nominate between two and four Supreme Court judges, the election on November 7 is shaping up as the most important electoral show down ever on the abortion issue.
If Gore wins, the slender pro choice majority on the Supreme Court will likely be strengthened, while if Bush wins the Court will likely be altered so that it will overturn the historic Roe v. Wade decision of 1972. That decision guarantees the right of American women to have abortions.
The abortion struggle has grown ever more bitter in the United States, giving it the character of a societal war. During the 1990s, seven abortion providers were murdered in the U.S., two of them in 1998. Over the course of the decade, fifteen abortion clinics were bombed and hundreds were subjected to acts of arson and vandalism. Abortion providers were the victims of numerous acts of assault and battery against their persons and their lives have frequently been threatened. In the United States, the life of an abortion doctor makes being a cop look safe.
I visited an abortion clinic in Seattle that is run by Dr. Suzanne Poppema, one of the small number of doctors in the United States who has already been experimenting in the trial use of RU-486. Dr. Poppema, whose clinic averages sixty surgical abortions a week, told me that she believes "medical abortion is the answer" and that when it is widely available the situation of those seeking abortions in the U.S. will be transformed.
Dr. Poppema, who served a term as president of the board of directors of the National Abortion Federation, has experienced the harassment and the anxiety that is the lot of the abortion provider. You can find her name on the notorious Web site know as the Nuremberg File, which lists the names of America’s abortion doctors and targets them for death. Those who are alive and well are listed in black, those who have been wounded are marked in grey and those who have been killed have a line drawn through their names. The Nuremberg Web lists Suzanne T. Poppema and her fellow practitioners as "baby butchers." Above their names is a graphic that simulates dripping blood.
Since a federal jury in Oregon concluded last year that the site was a provocation to commit murder and ordered those responsible for it to pay damages of $107 million to four abortion doctors and Planned Parenthood, the site has been maintained on the Internet by other extreme anti-abortion groups.
The windows at Dr. Poppema’s clinic are bulletproof and she wears a bullet proof vest to work. Security advisers have recommended that she drive to work by a different route each day. A lone abortion opponent shows up several days a week and prays in front of the clinic as patients and the clinic’s staff members pass him on their way in. Once, a couple of years ago, he came inside the clinic, but he has been ordered by a court to stay outside. Not long ago, a raucous group of anti-abortion demonstrators showed up in front of Dr. Poppema’s house.
In the weeks before the U.S. election on November 7, it’s not clear which side will gain the most as a consequence of the heightened prominence of the abortion issue. While public opinion polls show that more Americans are pro choice than pro life, they also reveal that most Americans want to ban so-called "partial birth abortions". The term, which is not a technical medical one, describes abortion techniques that some people see as interruptions of live births occurring late in a pregnancy when a fetus might be viable. Even though over 98 per cent of U.S. abortions occur before the end of the second trimester of pregnancy, the partial birth abortion issue has been a highly effective talking point for the anti-abortion forces.
Betsy Cavendish, legal director of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, believes the FDA’s decision on RU-486 is a "huge victory" that will inspire abortion activists to campaign for Gore. But Ralph Reed, a Bush strategist and former head of the Christian Coalition, thinks the decision could be unpopular with Catholics who make up twenty to thirty per cent of the voters in key battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan, and thus could help Bush.
What further confounds the politics of the issue is that polls show that the higher the income and educational level attained by Americans, the more likely they are to be pro-choice. So-called "country club" Republicans are often pro choice, while their party is pro life. On the other hand, many lower income voters who support the pro choice Democrats, have serious reservations about abortion.
RU-486, which is just going into formal testing in Canada, will not be available to Canadian women for at least two years. In Canada, where there is no law regulating abortion, the issue has acquired new salience since the selection of Stockwell Day, a strong opponent of abortion, as leader of the Canadian Alliance. The outcome of the U.S. presidential election is certain to influence the abortion debate on this side of the border.
Apprehensive about the potentially nettlesome consequences of the issue, Al Gore and George W. Bush haven’t often chosen to raise the subject of abortion during their presidential campaigns. But the recent decision of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to approve the use of the so-called abortion pill, RU-486, has put the issue on the front burner as the drive for the White House enters the final stretch.
In France, where RU-486 was developed in the 1980s, about 44 per cent of abortions are medical rather than surgical. When a woman uses the so-called abortion pill, she first takes mifepristone, a drug that stops a fertilized egg from attaching itself to the lining of the uterus. Two days later, she takes misoprostol, which triggers contractions of the uterus.
Fearing that the drug will make abortions more accessible and private, opponents of abortion rights in the United States have fought a long battle to prevent the marketing of RU-486. Until now, pharmaceutical companies have been unwilling to undertake the production of the drug because of their concern that the anti-abortion movement will mount a boycott of their other products. To circumvent this problem, a new company, Danco Laboratories, has been formed to market the drug, which will be available to U.S. doctors in a few weeks.
While both major presidential candidates have striven to present themselves as centrists on most issues, on the emotional subject of abortion they are far apart, with Gore pro choice and Bush pro life. Given the fact that the next president will likely nominate between two and four Supreme Court judges, the election on November 7 is shaping up as the most important electoral show down ever on the abortion issue.
If Gore wins, the slender pro choice majority on the Supreme Court will likely be strengthened, while if Bush wins the Court will likely be altered so that it will overturn the historic Roe v. Wade decision of 1972. That decision guarantees the right of American women to have abortions.
The abortion struggle has grown ever more bitter in the United States, giving it the character of a societal war. During the 1990s, seven abortion providers were murdered in the U.S., two of them in 1998. Over the course of the decade, fifteen abortion clinics were bombed and hundreds were subjected to acts of arson and vandalism. Abortion providers were the victims of numerous acts of assault and battery against their persons and their lives have frequently been threatened. In the United States, the life of an abortion doctor makes being a cop look safe.
I visited an abortion clinic in Seattle that is run by Dr. Suzanne Poppema, one of the small number of doctors in the United States who has already been experimenting in the trial use of RU-486. Dr. Poppema, whose clinic averages sixty surgical abortions a week, told me that she believes "medical abortion is the answer" and that when it is widely available the situation of those seeking abortions in the U.S. will be transformed.
Dr. Poppema, who served a term as president of the board of directors of the National Abortion Federation, has experienced the harassment and the anxiety that is the lot of the abortion provider. You can find her name on the notorious Web site know as the Nuremberg File, which lists the names of America’s abortion doctors and targets them for death. Those who are alive and well are listed in black, those who have been wounded are marked in grey and those who have been killed have a line drawn through their names. The Nuremberg Web lists Suzanne T. Poppema and her fellow practitioners as "baby butchers." Above their names is a graphic that simulates dripping blood.
Since a federal jury in Oregon concluded last year that the site was a provocation to commit murder and ordered those responsible for it to pay damages of $107 million to four abortion doctors and Planned Parenthood, the site has been maintained on the Internet by other extreme anti-abortion groups.
The windows at Dr. Poppema’s clinic are bulletproof and she wears a bullet proof vest to work. Security advisers have recommended that she drive to work by a different route each day. A lone abortion opponent shows up several days a week and prays in front of the clinic as patients and the clinic’s staff members pass him on their way in. Once, a couple of years ago, he came inside the clinic, but he has been ordered by a court to stay outside. Not long ago, a raucous group of anti-abortion demonstrators showed up in front of Dr. Poppema’s house.
In the weeks before the U.S. election on November 7, it’s not clear which side will gain the most as a consequence of the heightened prominence of the abortion issue. While public opinion polls show that more Americans are pro choice than pro life, they also reveal that most Americans want to ban so-called "partial birth abortions". The term, which is not a technical medical one, describes abortion techniques that some people see as interruptions of live births occurring late in a pregnancy when a fetus might be viable. Even though over 98 per cent of U.S. abortions occur before the end of the second trimester of pregnancy, the partial birth abortion issue has been a highly effective talking point for the anti-abortion forces.
Betsy Cavendish, legal director of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, believes the FDA’s decision on RU-486 is a "huge victory" that will inspire abortion activists to campaign for Gore. But Ralph Reed, a Bush strategist and former head of the Christian Coalition, thinks the decision could be unpopular with Catholics who make up twenty to thirty per cent of the voters in key battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan, and thus could help Bush.
What further confounds the politics of the issue is that polls show that the higher the income and educational level attained by Americans, the more likely they are to be pro-choice. So-called "country club" Republicans are often pro choice, while their party is pro life. On the other hand, many lower income voters who support the pro choice Democrats, have serious reservations about abortion.
RU-486, which is just going into formal testing in Canada, will not be available to Canadian women for at least two years. In Canada, where there is no law regulating abortion, the issue has acquired new salience since the selection of Stockwell Day, a strong opponent of abortion, as leader of the Canadian Alliance. The outcome of the U.S. presidential election is certain to influence the abortion debate on this side of the border.
No comments:
Post a Comment