Posted on 07/21/2004 3:35:25 PM PDT by rhema
Ever since studying philosophy in college, very few ethical choices related to children shock me. How could they with Princeton University Prof. Peter Singer’s advocacy of post-birth infanticide gaining a stronghold in many university philosophy departments? Today, the previously unthinkable is humdrum.
But not always.
In Sunday’s New York Times, 34-year-old mother Amy Barrett published an article that truly is shocking, "When One is Enough." As she tells the story, when faced with an unexpected pregnancy, Barrett and her boyfriend were terrified to find out she had conceived triplets—identical twins and a stand-alone. The solution? Nuke the twins and keep the other.
Singer or not, I was shocked. Should I have been?
Barrett grew up without a father, therefore believing dads to be little more than “economic” and “societal” insurance. As she put it, “I have never missed not having him.” Always figuring she’d get knocked-up at 16 in the back of a pick-up, she apparently had a low view of fatherhood. More of a donor role, I’d say. So naturally, her boyfriend Peter got little say in the silly little matter of “choice.” When she shouted for “selective reduction” he asked if they should consider going ahead and having triplets. Her shrewd reply was, "This is why they say it’s the woman’s choice. … That’s easy for you to say, but I’d have to give up my life.” Peter even had to leave the abortion room during the procedure.
Barrett was pretty ticked about the inconveniences of a quiver of three. She loved her East Village home, her ability to travel, and her time to lecture and work freelance. Not to mention she’d have to go on bed rest during an inconvenient time in her life. The worst part for Barrett? She might have to move to Staten Island. Role-playing the triplet-worst she said, “I’ll never leave my house because I’ll have to care for these children. I’ll have to start shopping only at Costco and buying big jars of mayonnaise.” (I hate big jars of mayo, too.) After all, homemaking is so Leave it to Beaver and Talibanish. If she stayed at home, who would hear her roar?
Barrett asked the obstetrician, “Is it possible to get rid of one of them? Or two of them?” According to Early Pregnancy.org, yes. They call it “multifetal pregnancy reduction,” which is a fairly simple procedure with several possible options for “elimination” during the pregnancy. EP says, “The most common method of reduction is the transabdominal injection of potassium chloride into the fetal cardiac region, usually performed at or after the ninth week of gestation.” In other words, stick a needle full of chemicals into the heart of an unborn child, pump it full of potassium, and watch that baby quit ticking.
I guess the bumper stickers aren’t all sloganeering: Abortions do stop a beating heart.
And that is exactly what Barrett did to her twins. Since it was “psychologically comforting” to have the stand-alone baby because she “wanted to have just one,” she simply eliminated the twins. There were three heartbeats, she said, and they made two disappear with the help of a needle and a little potassium chloride.
The end result? “I had a boy and everything is fine.”
One daily radio talk show host insightfully wondered if Barrett would someday tell her son that she killed his siblings. How could he respond to that? And what if he grows up to be a father someday? Will she tell him he’ll be little more than economic and societal “security”? An optional add-on to the family structure?
“I would do the same thing if I had triplets again,” Barrett boasts, “but if I had twins, I would probably have twins. Then again, I don’t know.”
Too bad gestating children can't pick their wombs—Barrett's isn't a very safe place.
A man has no reproductive rights that a woman is bound to respect, in or out of marriage, for wanting the baby or not wanting the baby. (babies)
That's sad but it's essentially true.
I don't see these two having a long term relationship.
There are two threads which began over the weekend on this article. If you haven't read the origianl, it's in the first link. For pro-lifers, you may be disgusted by the callousness of this woman, Amy Richards. Plus, at some point in both threads, there is a link where she can be e-mailed.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1173730/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1173854/posts
Any man who doesn't protect himself is an absolute fool; one positive result of the AIDS situation is that even the fools don't trust the girls anymore (to be clean, that is).
Have you looked around lately? There ain't a lot of choice.
It hasn't been easy, and there isn't a lot of money in the bank book. But we are making it work out and enjoying it. My wife and I think a lot about which one would've been the one to kill and it is not a choice that can be made easily if at all. The kid who was small in the womb is a stud. The biggest fetus is now an A student in science class, and his sister kicks everybody's butts. But the flip side is that spousal abuse and divorce rates skyrocket after a multiple birth. And I've always felt that the fertility doctors consider it a real gymnastic accomplishment when they load you up with kids for the rest of your life, but it is the deal you make when you roll the dice.
Since then we had another kid naturally and she is the stick that stirs the drink. I think about the "selective reduction" question a lot and I thank God every time that my kids are with me. And maybe one of them will have a great vertical leap or a great golf swing to be able to take care of their P's later when we'll be coasting in. But right now it's a fight every day, and it's great.
Was that intended to be a pun?
This "selective reduction" is remarkably routine following infertility treatment, which often results in multiple pregnancies. The prospective parents are often encouraged to "reduce" the number of fertilized eggs to give one strong baby a better chance. A good clinician can make the whole procedure sound like you're just giving your baby vitamins or something.
Amen, brother! Thank you for sharing that with us; you've britghtened my day.
May God abundantly bless you and your family.
I don't know; there are men who seem more than willing to put up with garbage like this, just to show everyone how "advanced" they are on issues of women's "rights". There are also men who (like some women in abusive realtionships) just don't think they can do any better.
In the original story, I didn't get that impression about this boyfriend. I hope he doesn't think he can't do better than a selfish feminist snot.
Although, I'm trying to remember if he was still in the picture at the end of the story...
He seemed a bit whipped to me. After this situation, I hope he comes to his senses.
This story really should not come as a surprise to any one of us who is pro-life. Once you've got legalized abortion, which requires the belief that the "fetus" isn't human, alive, viable, whatever, these situations are just a different configuration of the same evil. No better, no worse.
Amen - here's hoping.
You asked, "Is she that greedy than she doesn't want to be "inconvenienced" ...?" Actually, she thinks she's god. She believes, as she has been taught, that SHE has the right to decide who lives and who dies for her convenience. THAT is the true legacy of the liberals and especially the democrat party which stands up to defend the abortion slaughter at every opportunity, and proud of it!
God bless you and your family, dog! I can relate to a point-I have twins and a singleton. Had I been given a sneak peek at the serial puking, the 3 months of bedrest while caring for a 3 yr old, the giant financial hole we've dug---had someone told me that certain necessary body parts would never work quite the same again, that my stretch marks would have stretch marks, I'd do it anyway - in a heartbeat. Make that TWO heartbeats!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.