Letter: Balancing the costs

Walter Nicklin, in last week’s editorial, “Women are people, too,” would have us believe that those who seek to restrict access to contraception and abortion are taking “extreme positions on women’s rights.” The World Health Organization has found contraceptives to be a top carcinogen, along with asbestos and tobacco smoking (gerardnadal.com/2010/01/18oral.contraceptives-who-class).

Furthermore, women who have a history of abortion have higher rates of anxiety, depression, sleeplessness, substance abuse, eating disorders and suicidal behavior compared to those who have not had an abortion (psychologytoday.com and epige.org/pregnancy/psychological). These effects can be had immediately or several years after an abortion.

Is it “draconian” to allow a woman to view her unborn baby in her womb (ultrasound), and then to decide whether or not she will terminate that life? Balance the cost of an ultrasound with a much dearer cost that will be paid by a woman/man somewhere down the road when mental health problems set in as a result of killing their offspring. Those who advocate ultrasounds and restrict access to contraceptives/abortion are actually proponents of women’s good health, to say nothing of the saving of babies’ lives!

Joan Beattie
get town name from last letter

About Staff/Contributed 5503 Articles
The Rappahannock News welcomes contributions from any and all members of the community. Email news and photos to editor@rappnews.com or call us at 540-675-3338.