Let’s see more about abortion alternatives that offer life

This article by Judy Goad appeared in the Bakersfield Californian on Thursday, March 30, 2023.


The Sunday, March 26, edition of The Bakersfield Californian contained two articles regarding abortion concerns in other states: Wisconsin and Illinois. Wisconsin does have some restrictions against abortion, and that particular article (“Wisconsin Supreme Court race previews 2024 abortion fight,” Opinion) focuses on the political climate there, specifically the Wisconsin Supreme Court race and the amount of money being spent by two individual candidates, one pro-life and one pro-abortion.

The other article concerned Illinois, one of the country’s most abortion-friendly states. (Personally, I wouldn’t want to be known by that title.) That article (“As South bans abortion, thousands turn to Illinois clincis,” Nation & World) touched on how “overworked” the Planned Parenthood clinic in Fairview Heights, Ill., is as it struggles to keep up with abortion demand.

Many things about both of these articles troubled me, not least is the fact that neither of the articles mentions the true nature of what abortion is: the intentional killing of an innocent human life!

Featured in each of the articles are their concerns of money and inconvenience. But wait, isn’t that what pro-abortion supporters frequently talk about, money and inconvenience? In fact the writer of the Wisconsin article, Jennifer Rubin, jumps right into the spending of both candidates for the April 4 contest and states that more than $20 million is being spent on this contested campaign. I do appreciate that she shares the facts on the outrageous amount of money being spent on this campaign, however, I feel that this money could be better used to help families choose life while also offering them assistance in raising their child.

Further on, she writes that the abortion pill is safe and effective. This is one area I adamantly disagree with her on. The abortion pill is not safe. Women have died from complications of taking the abortion pill and it is never safe for the pre-born baby as they will die because of taking this pill. Is it effective? Unfortunately yes, as it intentionally ends in the termination of the pregnancy.

The second article, which speaks of inconvenience, is just as troubling, as there is no mention of any concern for the well-being or the rights of the preborn child. There is also no mention of the aftereffects to the mother. Yes, her pregnancy is terminated, but as many women have found, there will be regrets, there will be shame and grief because of her decision.

The Planned Parenthood clinic mentioned lists various concerns in treating women who come to it from other states as well as the inconvenience for these women. The concerns listed involve overtime for employees, opening the clinic on the weekends, and paying for out-of-state women to come to their clinics to abort their babies.

Instead of ramping up the pace and ways in which to increase the amount of abortions they perform each year, perhaps they should offer true “reproductive care” and help these families choose life.

I’d like to remind Dr. Colleen McNicholas, of the Illinois clinic, of the oath she took when she became a doctor, “to do NO harm.” Abortion causes the greatest harm there is, death to the baby, and oftentimes emotional and physical repercussions to the mother!

Abortion centers on money and inconvenience, when it should be centered on caring for the pre-born life and the well-being of the mother. There are options. Options that offer life, not end it. Let’s see more articles about those options instead of applauding abortion.

Life itself can sometimes be inconvenient, but pro-life advocates have found that when life is valued, it is priceless!