Editor’s Note: This letter was written in response to Lindsay McMurtray’s article about the Amendment 26 protest in the Oct. 14 issue of The Reflector.
In the recent article about the student protest against Initiative 26, protesters said they sought to inform voters about how I-26 would supposedly have far-reaching effects on women’s healthcare. The arguments put forth against I-26 at the student protest are common among the pro-choice side. Pro-choicers claim they oppose I-26 not simply because it will prevent a woman from having an abortion, but also because the amendment will endanger women by compromising their healthcare. However, this argument mischaracterizes I-26 and is not supported by the facts.
For example, the pro-choice side claims many women will probably now be faced with death if they have unhealthy pregnancies because they will no longer be able to abort the babies endangering their lives. But, isn’t it highly unlikely the pro-life side concerned with saving lives would author an amendment that would endanger even more lives? Furthermore, this is not the Dark Ages, where women had a high likelihood of dying in childbirth. This is the 21st century, where medicine is so advanced babies can be delivered almost two and a half months before they are due and have a 96 percent survival rate, according to the National Center for Health Statistics (2004, Period Linked Birth/Infant Death Data).
Also, abnormal pregnancies, such as ectopic pregnancies, are rare events only seen at a rate of two percent in all pregnancies, according to the most recent study conducted by the CDC (Current Trends Ectopic Pregnancy-United States, 1990-1992). Although the pro-choice side cites women’s health as the necessity for choice, however, a major study entitled “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspective” indicates otherwise. According to this journal article (Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 37(3):110–118), in 2004, four percent of abortions were performed because of women’s health issues, three percent because of fetal health issues, and less than 0.5 percent were because of rape. That means 92 percent of abortions were performed as a means of birth control and not because of health concerns.   
The pro-choice side claims that, besides jeopardizing women’s lives, I-26 will potentially treat miscarriage as a crime and will lead to governmental interference in doctor-patient relationships. Yet, were women’s lives imperiled before Roe v. Wade? Were women who miscarried charged with murder before Roe v. Wade? Did the government make health decisions for pregnant women before Roe v. Wade? If anything, I-26 should improve the way in which women are medically treated because pregnant women will no longer be viewed as carrying a “fetus,” but instead a human being.
Furthermore, the pro-choice side claims I-26 will outlaw birth control pills. But, I-26 will only make abortifacient birth control pills illegal. For the analysis of this issue by an authority in the field of gynecology, watch “Will Personhood Ban Contraceptives?” on YouTube.
Also, in a recent article in the Clarion-Ledger, Freda M. Bush MD, FACOG, who is an OB/GYN, argued abortion itself creates problems in women’s healthcare. According to Bush, a major study published in The British Journal of Psychiatry “reviewed the mental health experience of 877,000 women and found that those who aborted an unplanned pregnancy were 55 percent more likely to have mental health problems than similar women who delivered their unplanned pregnancy.” Also, Bush claims the abortion procedure can result in physical injury, which can lead to a number of health-related issues, including infertility and death.
Finally, for an interesting and relevant video regarding the issue of abortion, visit www.180movie.com. Regardless of the debate surrounding I-26, this is a profound issue that should demand everyone’s attention since about 2,300 abortions occur annually in Mississippi.
Voters should investigate the facts for themselves, go to primary sources and should not rely upon others for information. In fact, do not even rely upon a “Letter to the Editor” in The Reflector.