Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Behind the Curtain

The main focal point in discussions over abortions should be moved to the mother, the one who is alive and the one whose choice it is to do what she wants with her body. Regardless to this sentiment, the law and medical field have a lot more control over what the mother does with her body, stripping the mother of her autonomy. Because the mother is mostly stripped of autonomy, the “baby” or “person” growing inside of her begins to supersede her importance, kicking the woman out of the picture and focusing on someone who is living inside of her.
            This picture that was just painted doesn’t seem fair, in different terms, the focus is taken off the person who is actually alive and has potential to do more with her life (the woman) and put on someone who isn’t alive yet at all. Going back to the unfair pull that the law and medical field have on would-be mothers, there is also a racial aspect to this as well. Haiselden, a eugenicist, basically murdered babies he saw as “unfit” to live a non-defective life. Haiselden’s theory was to stop “defective” babies from living an unsatisfactory life. So he basically killed babies (by not helping them survive). Each time he killed a baby it got positive attention from the press, meaning it got positive attention from the masses as well. Haiselden’s theory got even more out of hand when it became clear that one of his criteria for being ”unfit” was skin color. Making this obvious in a movie he starred in called The Black Stork, in which he played the “good” guy and saved babies that were going to live lives as defective. So I hope it comes as no surprise that he is often compared to the infamous Dr. Kevorkian. Each killing off a group of people that were either too old or too young
 
(Dr. Kevorkian, Giving a face to the name in this TIME article)
            This however was not the first incident of a negative racial spin on the matter. There have been many accounts, some recent, of sterilizations happening all over the place in the U.S. the worst part being that they do not tell the patients of their sterilization. Linking back to my point of the medical and law field taking the autonomy of the woman out of the situation; the woman is now just a carcass, as society has treated her.
(This link leads to an article about a sterilized rape victim, who didn’t know she was sterilized, a wonderful read and suggested)
There have been many social constructions made to keep women of color down from getting pregnant in the first place. The image of the “crack baby” a baby born addicted to crack; this is a social construction, babies cannot be born addicted to crack. But this social construction and many others is there to deter and give reason to the terrible things that go on behind the curtain.

2 comments:

  1. I agree with your points on putting the mother first when it comes to issues with abortions. The mother is the person who is already living and already has a life. She may not be ready financially, medically, mentally, or any other number of things to bring a child into the world, thus the choice should be hers. With the amount of controversy about when the creature inside her actually is considered a human, why don't we already consider that the woman is already ALIVE and should have control over her body.

    Your topic on eugenics just creeps me out. I see it so wrong that one man was deciding if a child was worth being let to live or not. This is just so wrong on so many levels that it is difficult to get into it now.

    I like the way you went about this topic while you were voicing your opinion, you made sure that you did not offend anyone who made have had a different thought.

    ReplyDelete