Why I love my gynecologist
Sure, it’s nice to have sheepskin booties covering the metal stirrups. And I appreciate the fact that she comes in while I’m still dressed to review any issues or concerns I might have. But today, we had more to say about politics, the upcoming measures on the ballot, and her righteous op-ed piece in The Oregonian on September 13th (no longer available online, although you can see some of the responses she provoked here) than my own personal issues.
Yep, my gynecologist is Elizabeth Newhall, who talked animatedly (once I provoked her into it by praising the op ed) about the prep work she’s been doing to get ready for Friday’s City Club debate. She’ll be arguing against the passage of Measure 43, which would require parental notification for minors seeking an abortion. She’s smart, passionate, wickedly irreverent at times, and seriously knows her stuff. She’s also one of the best doctors I’ve ever had, and well worth listening to - about medicine, politics, you name it!
I’d go if I could - but I’ll have to settle for the OPB replay on the radio instead.
Updated to include a direct link to Newhall’s OpEd in The O.
Related posts:
She is so warped and WRONG. I am not a ‘ban all abortions no matter what’ type, but for God’s sake we need parental consent for such an invasive, surgical procedure.
Does anyone else thinks it wrong that my 15 y/o can’t get a tatoo, but should be able tp wander down to a clinic and get a friggin’ abortion without her parents’ knowledge?! What a sick society we’ve developed into.
Hey, Butch:
First: A tattoo and a child may both be a lifetime decision, but the tattoo only costs you once.
Second: Why do you think most 15 year olds are pregnant, anyway? If you’ve got a good relationship with yours, then great, she’d probably include you in the discussion and decision if she’s ever faced with such a situation. But, I work among those who deal with youth at risk, and based on my indirect experience I can almost guarantee you that most of the other teens that end up preggers are that way because of a poor relationship with their parents. Including the parents would not be a kindness.
Of course, as a man, it’s easy for me to be flip about the topic. It’s the women who are faced with it, and it’s the women who bear the burden of making that choice.
Brian’s got it. Most teens are going to tell their parent(s). But some can’t - whether it’s due to abuse in the home, a dysfunctional relationship, or (god forbid) a pregnancy that’s a direct result of incest.
What neither of you are taking into account is that having an abortion is not always the right choice, and perhaps a 15 y/o girl is not emotionally developed or rational enough to make the right decision on her own. A 15 y/o is still a CHILD. Having an abortion might seem like the proper ‘quick fix’ at the time, but could wind up haunting the girl for the rest of her life.
I wouldn’t let my 15 y/o daughter get a teeth cleaning without my knowledge much less something as physically and emotionally life-altering as an abortion. Like I said, that two people that seem as rational as you guys in other areas see nothing wrong with this is, in my view, a disturbing sign of the times.
I too am against this, for reasons outlined above. I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice. For those kids who have good relationships in their family, it won’t be a big deal. But I would rather make sure girls who need it without parental consent can get it safely and legally, rather than kill themselves with a coathanger in an alley. (I know I’m being a bit dramatic, but there it is.)
Not that advance polls are always accurate, and of course they can change - but I heard this morning that right now the measure is more likely to pass than fail. And that is scary.
As in all the arguments mentioned above - the girls who this really applies to are most likely not able to go to their parents. Oregon’s teen pregnancy rate has declined by 39% over the past ten years as a result of strong prevention and education programs - 75% of teens voluntarily consult a parent when faced with an unwanted pregnancy.
This just proves that education to help prevent pregnancy in the first place - not restrictions that could hurt a child - is the answer.
Butch: Since you and I agree that a 15-year-old without a loving and supportive family and adequate education on the risks and consequences of all her actions would be overwhelmed by the possibility of making the decision, I’m not sure why you’re resorting to making ad hominem attacks, here.
Nobody is suggesting that this isn’t a huge decision to have to make. Nobody on any side of the issue is making light of it at all, that I’m aware of.
But since a 15-year-old is biologically capable of having sex and getting pregnant, wouldn’t it be better to make sure she has the knowledge and understanding to be capable of making that decision? As opposed to automatically assuming that she’s incapable, and taking complete freakin’ control over every aspect of her life, shielding her from any possible consequence she may have to face and thereby insuring that she will never have to learn to take responsibility?
Rather than infantilizing adults, wouldn’t it be smarter to make sure that biologically-adult bodies are accompanied by adult minds, preferably in the same body, prior to having to face that decision?
I didn’t mean to attack anybody - sorry if you interpreted it that way. My only comment is this is indicative to what our society has evolved into. Didn’t mean anything personal.
I agree that a 15-year-old is biologically capable of having sex and getting pregnant and that it would be better to make sure she has the knowledge and understanding to be capable of making that decision. That is precisely why I think she should have to sit down and discuss this with her parents. For crying out loud, its not a haircut, it is an invasive, sometimes dangerous, emotionally damaging surgical procedure. You say I assume she is automatically incapable of making that decision. No, I don’t. But you are assume she is automatically CAPABLE of making it.
And just because one is “biologically capable” of having sex does not mean one has the emotional maturity and rationality to decide on the fly to abort a fetus. It seems to me I am the only one here recognizing the gravity and potential long-term consequences with such a decision.
If a 15 y/o is capable of making such a decision, then surely she is capable and mature enough to decide to have sex in the first place. So why not lower the age of consent to 15? And surely the decision of whether to abort a fetus takes more rational reflective thought than whether to drink alcohol or smoke a cigarette, doesn’t it. Should we take away those age barriers as well? There is a reason our society puts the age of consent at 18, and not 10, 12, or 15.
I haven’t read the bill and I’m not an Oregon voter. But just on the principle: Isn’t there some sort of middle ground?
Why is it all or nothing? Why not a law that requires parents to be notified but makes allowances for girls who have special circumstances to get third party counseling/help?
Betsy, you make it primarily about the girls who might have abusive parents or the like. Okay. Fine. But aren’t these going to be a pretty limited set of the parents? In truth, aren’t most girls going to just want to be quiet about it because they’re ashamed? Shouldn’t parents be in the business of trying to limit their kids sexuality? In all honesty, won’t the parents who are most concerned about this and who the kids will most be ashamed in front of be the parents most likely to be caring parents who set standards for their kids?
Few people care as much about the well-being of a child as the parents, though admittedly there are exceptions. So make allowances for the exceptions.
(btw, I’m a little worried by the comments that suggest this should be a financial/quality of life question. That’s a path to eugenics I think would should try hard to avoid.)
Butch: First with the ad hominem attacks (you claimed that Betsy and I “seem rational” which implies that we are not because we disagree with you) and now with the reductio ad absurdum argument, to wit:
You make a wrong assumption based on wrongly interpreting what I said, take it to an absurd extreme, and conclude that the original assumption you made must be wrong.
I am assuming that she’s capable of making that assumption, because in the end it is her decision. It’s not one I can make for her, and, frankly, it’s not one you can make for her, either. If she is not, that’s her parents (first) and society’s (second) failure. Why does the idea that a teenager be required to think for herself frighten you so much that all you can attempt to do is retard her social and ethical development to match your view of her as an infant… or worse yet, some thoughtless creature incapable of “rational” thought?
And do not make any assumptions about my views on the age of consent for voting or alcohol or getting a tattoo simply because I disagree with you on the topic of whether parental consent should be required for a teenager in the case of abortion.
I prefer to deal with the reality of biology, rather than keep tight-fisted “control” (which is an illusion, frankly) on all teenagers to the point of stunting their education and assumption of personal responsibility and entrance into adulthood.
Let me repeat: if any woman has to face this decision without being fully aware of the consequences of the choices before her, that is not her failure, even though, regardless of whether her parents are notified or not, she is the one that will carry the largest burden no matter the outcome.
I think the choices a pregnant 15 year old has to make (in concert with loving adults, one hopes) are all life-altering decisions, frankly, and I’m not at all suggesting that they be undertaken lightly.
I come at this from a different, personal perspective - as the mother of a daughter who I hope will never have to face this issue, and as the friend of a girl (now woman) who did.
My friend was adamant that having an abortion was the only option she was willing to consider. She also believed that her parents wouldn’t support that decision (and wouldn’t support her), so was prepared to do what she could (by legal means or not) to make it happen. She didn’t take this decision lightly - I know this for a fact.
Luckily, we were able to talk her into talking to her father. Thankfully, both parents put aside their normal dysfunctionality and ongoing rancor to come together in support of her, and her decision.
And if they hadn’t? I’d have done whatever was necessary to support her decision - even looking back in hindsight 20 years later, even while having a daughter of my own.
I’m taking the libertarian stand on the matter - my family, your family and everyone else’s family business is absolutely *none* of the government’s business. That’s why I’m voting no.
Brian, I didn’t mean to attack you or insinuate you or Betsy are “irrational”. I meant to illustrate that in my view society has become irrational on this particular issue because RATIONAL people like yourself and Betsy are - in MY opinion - so off base on this issue.
I think we are just coming from a different point of view as to who is a child, and who is a woman. I your last comment, you repeatedly refer to a 15 y/o girl as a “woman”. I would refer to her as a “child”, and our society - through its established laws - does as well. You wish to empower a legal child with the power to make life and death decisions because a select few instances might be to their detriment. That is not how a healthy society operates.
I think this is a ‘hot-button’ issue that inspires drastic and irrational positions on both sides. I happen to think this is one of them. I’m not here to alienate anyone on such an inflamatory topic so I’ll move on from here. See you on the next microbrew thread.
Ok, I see the argument that a 15 year old is/could be a child. So how about instead of strictly getting parental consent, that perhaps a consent of any family member or a counsler. Both these people would be adult and could help a child think about their decision.