Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Reproductive Justice and Gender

An Open Letter to Gov. Sarah Palin on Women's Rights

By Lynn Paltrow, National Advocates for Pregnant Women. Posted September 4, 2008.


The freedom of all women relies on the legal principles that guarantee the right to choose.
Advertisement

Dear Governor Sarah Palin:

Many Americans agree with your position regarding abortion -- they do this as a matter of faith, ethics, personal experience and sometimes politics. I am just wondering though, if you have thought about what would happen if you succeeded in getting your position -- that fetuses have a right to life -- established as the law of the land? Did you know that it not only threatens the lives, health and freedom of women who might want or need someday to end their pregnancies, it would also give the government the power to control the lives of women -- like you who -- go to term?

Your last pregnancy, the one that has become the topic of widespread discussion and speculation provides an important opportunity to demonstrate how this could be true.

According to press reports your water broke while you were giving a keynote speech in Texas at the Republican Governors' Energy Conference. You did not immediately go to the hospital -- instead you gave your speech and then waited at least 11 hours to get to a hospital. You evaluated the risks, made a choice, and were able to carry on your life without state interference. Texas Governor Rick Perry worried about your pregnancy but didn't stop you from speaking or take you into custody to protect the rights of the fetus.

After Ayesha Madyun's water broke, she went to the hospital where she hoped and planned to have a vaginal birth. When she didn't give birth in a time-frame comfortable to her doctors, they argued that she should have a C-section. The doctors asserted that the fetus faced a 50-75 percent chance of infection if not delivered surgically. (Risks of infection are believed by some health care providers to increase with each hour after a woman's water has broken and she hasn't delivered).

The court, believing like you that fetuses have a right to life, said, "[a]ll that stood between the Madyun fetus and its independent existence, separate from its mother, was put simply, a doctor's scalpel." With that, the court granted the order and the scalpel sliced through Ms. Madyun's flesh, the muscles of her abdominal wall, and her uterus. The core principle justifying an end to legal abortion in the U.S. provided the same grounds used to deprive this pregnant and laboring woman of her rights to due process, bodily integrity, and physical liberty. When the procedure was done, there was no evidence of infection.

According to the press reports, instead of going straight to a hospital you chose to get on a long airplane flight back to Alaska.

When Pamela Rae Stewart, allegedly, didn't get to the hospital quickly enough on the day of her delivery, she was arrested in California on the theory that she had violated the rights of her fetus.

When Laura Pemberton chose to give birth at home in Florida, a Sheriff came to her house. Doctors believed that she was posing a risk to the life of her unborn child by having a vaginal birth after having had a previous c-section and were in the process of getting a court order to force her to have a c-section. The sheriff took her into custody during active labor, strapped her legs together and forced her to go to a hospital where an emergency hearing was taking place to determine the rights of her fetus. She was "allowed" to represent herself. A lawyer was appointed for the fetus. This woman, who vehemently opposes abortion, nevertheless believed in her right to evaluate medical risks and benefits to herself and her unborn child. She was forced to have the unnecessary surgery and when she later sued for violations of her civil rights, was told fetal rights outweighed hers.

You chose to continue working throughout your pregnancy -- even during your labor. Until 1991 women who worked in high paying blue color jobs that provided health benefits were being fired based on "fetal rights" policies that claimed if the woman became pregnant she would expose the unborn child to workplace health risks. Eventually, the Supreme Court said employers covered by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (the PDA) could not do this. But, millions of American women work part time or for small employers who are not covered by the PDA. If your political position on abortion is accepted -- all of these women could be forced to give up their jobs because an employer, family member, or state agent believed it necessary to ensure the health and rights of their unborn child.

Governor Palin, you have led an extraordinary life, balancing work and family, public service and private family obligations. We hope you know though that your freedom relies on exactly the same legal principles that guarantee that American women can choose to have an abortion when they need and want one.

Sixty one percent of women who have abortions are already mothers. Eighty-four percent of these women will be mothers by the time they are in their forties. As a proud mother of five beautiful children, we hope you will recognize that the issue isn't abortion -- it is ensuring the lives, dignity and freedom of all pregnant women and their families.

Lynn Paltrow

Executive Director

National Advocates for Pregnant Women

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: abortion, palin

Lynn Paltrow is Executive Director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Brilliantly stated, but...
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Sep 4, 2008 10:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sahra proly kant rede itt.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you for saying what had to be said
Posted by: tamiofbrooksgroth on Sep 4, 2008 7:37 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Lynn for all of your hard work, and for saying in this letter something that had to be said. It doesn't matter if Sarah Palin reads it or not, it is now part of the conversation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Important points lost in the rhetoric
Posted by: itwieg on Sep 5, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, delivering vaginally after having a Cesarean section on a previous pregnancy can result in a prolapsed uterus which is a serious risk to the mother as well as the child.

Second, it's a good point that certain principles can limit the medical choices of women, but why can't legal distinctions be made to balance a fetuses "rights" against a potential mother's? This is just to say that Palin's position could be made legally coherent.

Finally, if pro-choice advocates were so concerned about the reproductive health and well-being of potential mothers, you'd think they'd try to increase awareness about how abortion increases the risk of breast cancer (and yes there is a plausible biological mechanism for this).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Um... actually... Posted by: vickums
Questionable Morality
Posted by: mj213 on Sep 5, 2008 9:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really hate to say this, but after reading this open letter I couldn't help but think that Sarah Palin (an experienced mother of 4 at the time of giving birth to her last baby) would have known the detrimental consequences listed above in your open letter. Her outright unacceptable behavior and lack of some serious concern about her unborn child made me think that knowing she was going to have a child that was going to be born with Down Syndrome, did she not care about the risks she was taking that were going to maybe have potential harm to her unborn child? Her water breaking and not going to the hospital in a timely manner, flying on an airplane?!!!, last I heard, it wasn't recommended for pregnant women to fly, especially so late in the pregnancy. She says she's an advocate for special needs but from this open letter above, facts I wasn't aware of, it made me incredible sick to my stomach to think that well...she just didn't care about her unborn child because he wasn't going to be perfect anyway.

It's terrible to think this, and I certainly hope this is not the case, but just reading about how she handled her last hours of pregnancy, it raised some great concern and humongous red flags for me and probably many others.

Also, as a survivor of rape, I was fortunate enough to have tested negative for pregnancy and negative for HIV after my attack. Had I been pregnant, and forced to carry an unwanted child that I would associate with the worst and most horrific experience in my life, if I did not have personal choice to have an abortion, I would have killed myself. There was no doubt in my head that that was what I would have done. How dare she want to take our freedom of choice as women away from us, especially in the most horrific of circumstances. Shame Shame Shame on Sarah Palin!!!!

MJ

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Questionable Morality Posted by: VZEQICVA
Great way of showing the width of what reproductive choice really means
Posted by: CA NOW on Sep 5, 2008 9:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We'll be posting on this and linking to your letter from the CA NOW blog. Check out our civics lesson on community organizing for Sarah Palin

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Slight Correction...
Posted by: Lily H. on Sep 6, 2008 3:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I reside in the same area where the infamous Pamela
Rae Stewart case occurred. Pamela Rae was a known
meth-using mom who was ordered by her doctors to
avoid having sex during the waning weeks of her preg-
nancy, but apparently her husband didn't bother
listening to the warning and had his way with her
anyway. She was already being monitored for her ongoing meth use, and was a trainwreck waiting to
happen. She avoided seeing doctors because she
was trying to cover up her drug use.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Slight Correction... Posted by: VZEQICVA
So true!
Posted by: broussca on Sep 7, 2008 6:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sarah Palin DOES need to read this. However, her elitist attitudes will not enable her to see how her treatment and outcome differs from women with less money that she has.

Women struggling to decide between Obama and Palin (that seems to be what it's going to boil down to) need to read this because many of them might see the hypocrisy and elitism behind many of Palin's "values." Is there a way to get this OUT THERE on the net where more people will see it?? I found it in a search but I'm worried that many people will miss it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My addendum to this letter:
Posted by: genegirl65 on Sep 7, 2008 6:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
p.s. If you are truly as Pro-Life as you claim, Ms. Palin, why did you bother to have any prenatal testing at all? The only diagnostic test for Down syndrome mid-pregnancy, which is when you supposedly found out that your baby had Down syndrome, is amniocentesis. (Maternal serum testing and ultrasonography are not diagnostic tests for Down syndrome, so you must have had amniocentesis.) The primary reason women even have the option for amniocentesis is to allow a diagnosis early enough to intervene, should there be a problem with the fetus. Intervention of course means abortion. Thus, you must have at least considered the option of abortion, or you would not have placed the baby at risk for miscarriage by having amniocentesis. A true, to-the-core Pro-Lifer would NEVER have even had the amniocentesis, because they would not have even CONSIDERED the option of abortion! I am a genetic counselor and I know this from 14 years of experience.
I wonder what choice you would have made if the fetus had trisomy 13 or trisomy 18 instead of trisomy 21? Both of these chromosomal abnormalities impart significantly more severe birth defects on the fetus than those associated with Down syndrome. One could argue that the risk of a 43-year-old woman giving birth to a child with severe abnormalities, which is certainly a high-risk situation, surely endangers the mother's life. Would you have sacrificed your own health, and along with it the future of your other four children and husband, to carry to term a fetus with a chromosome abnormality incompatible with life?
Oh wait, yes, you would have, because your record demonstrates that you are both selfish and ruthless. Any woman who willingly enters into a situation which demands her full time and attention when she has small children at home, especially a special-needs infant, is either incredibly selfish, or just plain stupid.
Also, I hope you discussed your decision to continue the pregnancy with your children, since they are the ones who will be caring for Trig when you and your husband are long gone. He will no longer be the sweet, adorable little infant he is now, but rather he will physically be an adult with the IQ of a 5-year-old, unable to live independently, and will likely be suffering from dementia as well, since virtually all adults with Down syndrome eventually develop Alzheimer's disease. I have first hand knowledge of the difficulties of caring for an adult with Down syndrome, not only professionally, but personally as well. Today many individuals with Down syndrome are living well into their 50's and even 60's. That last decade is the most challenging, and you will surely be dead by then, or at the very least far too frail to care for him. If you think this will not be a burden to your other children, you are sorely mistaken.
I also wonder how you can align yourself with a party that has such disregard for those with special needs?
As far as I'm concerned, you are a disgrace to womanhood. I won't even address the other sources of my contempt for you, other than to say that the way you are self-righteously flaunting certain aspects of your life in order to catapult your career onward is absolutely disgusting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» A disgrace to womanhood?! (oh dear) Posted by: MartianBachelor
I am amazed and proud
Posted by: paula.c on Sep 9, 2008 5:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to read some of the above letters. I hope that the facts noted will show any woman especially Democrats that a vote for McCain/Palin would be a waste and that if elected they would endanger our country in dozens of ways.

Keep on writing men and women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A dissenting opinion -- bear with me here
Posted by: donzerylight on Sep 11, 2008 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I support the aims of the National Association for Pregnant Women, but disagree with the focus and approach of your letter.

To focus on Mrs Palin's reproductive history, recount it here, and directly criticize her for her reproductive choices, violates the principle of privacy. Mrs. Palin is a person as well as a politician, and in reading your letter I felt that you were using her reproductive history to further a political agenda at her expense. This is much the same element of thinking which motivates the criminal scapegoating of pregnant women under the US justice system: the notion that a pregnant or reproductively active woman is less entitled to the right to determine, for herself, how to live her own life.

The methods of depriving a pregnant or reproductively active woman of her rights are often fostered through a process of public communication known as demonization.

While you may not have intended to, your letter and the comments printed here are politically opportunistic and some of them even verge on bigotry. They demonize Ms Palin. As a feminist and one of the medical professionals who signed the NAPW's 2005 public letter to the media on demonizing terminology related to the rights of pregnant women, I found the approach and tone of this letter to be uncharacteristic of your organization's mission.

Mrs. Palin is not the target. Please re-evaluate your focus. Irresponsible communication can harm the ethos of an organization and its mission over time. And many who are offended may not bother to say something about it.

I hope these comments are received in the spirit in which they were intended, which is that of support for the organization you represent and accountability for responsibly communicating and furthering its aims.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]