Is it just my ‘foetus’ or my baby
A word on abortion
Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want’, advised an old lady from Calcutta famed as Mother Theresa.
Perhaps that was the reckoning of the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) when they included a clause in the revised harmonized draft constitution stating that life begins at conception. Should this clause pass and the draft constitution becomes law, abortion shall remain illegal and possibly equated to the offence of murder.
Women rights activists, medical practitioners and other lobby groups have vehemently protested its inclusion terming the clause as a violation of reproductive and privacy rights. They term it as imposing a discriminating, religious opinion that violates democracy, threatening to separate the church and state. Furthermore, they have asked parliamentarians to stop burying their heads in the sand and responsibly face the ‘appalling maternal deaths from unsafe abortions.
In Kenya, the Penal Code generally prohibits the termination of pregnancy (Sections 158-160) except under Section 240, where a certified physician is allowed to terminate the pregnancy to save the life of the pregnant woman. Such a medical operation must be done in a hospital, with the woman’s consent and her spouse (if married). In addition, it should be supported by two medical opinions, one of which must be from the physician who has treated the woman and the other from a psychiatrist.
However, recent research by ‘Planned Parenthood indicates that more than 700 illegal abortions are done in Kenya every day and 30 to 50 per cent of all maternal deaths are directly attributed to unsafe abortion.
The longest debate on abortion is the question of when life begins: at conception or birth. Anti abortion crusaders, popularly known as the ‘pro-life’ activists argue that life begins at conception-when the father’s sperm and the mother’s egg fuse. The argument is mainly about a child with a heartbeat being killed.
For the pro-life, abortion is a black and white affair – a question of life and death. It is beyond morality; it offends the very divine will of the creator (God) and interferes with the sacred beauty of life’s sanctity.
The pro-life’s take is that all human beings have rights, which must be protected. Therefore, while a woman has a right to protect her own body, the child has rights as well-beginning with the right to continued life. They have it that the pre-born child is separate and distinct from the mother genetically, and has her/his own blood type, heart, brain, other organs, and may have different features too. Pro-life says being dependent on others should not deprive a helpless human being of her/his fundamental rights.
While pro-life agree that women need control over their reproductive life, they beg to say that a control that allows for violence against another human being is a macho, oppressive kind of control.
On the other hand, those who are for abortion are of the opinion that the abortion debate is a complex issue revolving around important issues, such as, the reproductive health of the mother, women reproductive rights and removing stigma associated with undesired pregnancies. Branded as ‘pro-choice’, they have it that life begins at birth. They consider the foetus as just a part of the pregnant woman’s body. The unborn being an embryo or a foetus – just a simple blob of tissue, a product of conception-not a baby. Consequently, abortion is terminating a pregnancy, not killing a child. According to the pro-choice, a foetus isn’t a person until it first breathes.
From a ‘rights’ approach, compulsory pregnancy laws are for the pro- life, abortion is a black and white affair – a question of life and death, incompatible with a free society. Pregnancy is a privacy matter and requiring a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term violates individual rights and the freedoms to privacy and choice.
Further, placing a foetus’ right to life at par with the pregnant woman’s right to life is conflicting. They say it stigmatizes an unmarried woman, making her to have to face in the dock the embarrassment of an unwanted pregnancy or the pain of giving up a child for adoption. The pro-choice also think it’s equally unfair to bring children into a world where they’re not wanted, subjecting them to abuse. What about a woman whose unborn baby is diagnosed as deformed or handicapped or a woman who is pregnant due to rape or incest? These are some of the questions that beg.
In reality, although abortion is illegal, tens of thousands of women are dying from back-alley and clothes hanger abortions. That is not helping us achieve the Fifth Millennium Development Goal concerning reducing maternal deaths. A majority of these being the poor since the rich fly out to countries where abortions are legal.
The debate is long and varied with each side bearing subtle points worth careful regard. There is compelling scientific evidence that indeed life begins at conception. Abortion is indeed a symptom of a larger disease in our society; ill-equipped health care and low awareness levels on sexuality and contraception.
Should you be a pro-life activist, you must then be willing to open up your home and offer an orphanage, adoption or foster care or other positive economic and health support to the mothers. Should you be a pro-choice, employ your efforts to curing the real problems surrounding abortion in our society; educate on choices over sexuality and contraceptives and seek out other side-effects free options for the pregnant women.
With our differing religious, moral, scientific and intellectual perspectives, let us find reason in the old adage, ‘If you must err, err on the side of life’. In addition, that no adverse circumstance for one human being changes the nature and worth of another human being,
‘The Kenyan Law seems to be pegged on the mentioned adages as well as agreeing with the Late Pope John Paul II who said, ‘ .. We will stand up and insist that every child is a unique and unrepeatable gift.’
The writer is a lawyer with CREW (Centre for Rights Education and Awareness)
END: BL 30 / 29