From what I know of China, it's not an equable situation. And even IN China (and all around the world), we wouldn't SEE abortion used as "Birth control" if people were properly educated and given access to contraceptives - but sex education is taboo to the religious right (we must'n't let children know they have penises and vaginas), and contraceptives are met with superstition and fear in many parts of the world, often due to religious underpinnings that frown upon masturbation, condoms, and premarital sex, but don't give people the tools to deal. In Africa, people still believe they can cure their AIDS by raping children, and because of the very strong Catholic influence, combined with a lack of funding and lack of outreach, there's nothing much to counteract this behavior and rampant spread of a preventable disease... but I digress.
If you find it morally repugnant to perform an abortion, as a gynecologist, then yes, you should choose another field. Even if abortion were -outlawed-, it would still come up as a medical procedure that's occasionally necessary to save the life of the mother. It's like any other job, really. If you don't want to wash dishes, don't be a waitress.
The problem, however, with this pending regulation, is that it affects primarily people in lower-income areas who don't HAVE access to many doctors, and it gravely affects preventative methods (as much, if not moreso than abortion - most people will go to specific abortion clinics, not general doctors). The doctor refusing the procedure doesn't even have to provide a referral (and it's not limited to abortion - a doctor could refuse treatment to a Muslim individual based on morality, a doctor could decide not to treat a kid who's a recognized gang member, and theoretically be within his rights). This violates the very oath taken when one becomes a doctor.
I must note I have also seen no statistics, for that matter (at least from an unbiased source) that shows abortion being used as birth control. Only anecdote.
But you know, none of that matters. What matters is that abortions will continue to happen whether legal or not - the difference is the level of care and guidance that can be offered, and the level of danger the mother is potentially in. I, as a woman, have absolute domain over MY body. It is MY choice, not the government's, and the government has no right to place directives on my body, whether by writ of majority or not. Of course I dearly wish to see abortion rates drop and dwindle. I would love if it weren't needed at all, and were a rare medical procedure. But until people step up and begin actually educating people on proper prevention methods (aside from abstinence), I would rather see women able to get it in a safe environment.
(Ellen, I'm sorry for polluting your journal with all this rhetoric, and I'll bow out now.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2008-08-31 06:33 am (UTC)If you find it morally repugnant to perform an abortion, as a gynecologist, then yes, you should choose another field. Even if abortion were -outlawed-, it would still come up as a medical procedure that's occasionally necessary to save the life of the mother. It's like any other job, really. If you don't want to wash dishes, don't be a waitress.
The problem, however, with this pending regulation, is that it affects primarily people in lower-income areas who don't HAVE access to many doctors, and it gravely affects preventative methods (as much, if not moreso than abortion - most people will go to specific abortion clinics, not general doctors). The doctor refusing the procedure doesn't even have to provide a referral (and it's not limited to abortion - a doctor could refuse treatment to a Muslim individual based on morality, a doctor could decide not to treat a kid who's a recognized gang member, and theoretically be within his rights). This violates the very oath taken when one becomes a doctor.
I must note I have also seen no statistics, for that matter (at least from an unbiased source) that shows abortion being used as birth control. Only anecdote.
But you know, none of that matters. What matters is that abortions will continue to happen whether legal or not - the difference is the level of care and guidance that can be offered, and the level of danger the mother is potentially in. I, as a woman, have absolute domain over MY body. It is MY choice, not the government's, and the government has no right to place directives on my body, whether by writ of majority or not. Of course I dearly wish to see abortion rates drop and dwindle. I would love if it weren't needed at all, and were a rare medical procedure. But until people step up and begin actually educating people on proper prevention methods (aside from abstinence), I would rather see women able to get it in a safe environment.
(Ellen, I'm sorry for polluting your journal with all this rhetoric, and I'll bow out now.)