LA Times writer, Stephanie Simon, has an interesting article today about how some men experience negative reactions to a wife or girlfriend’s abortion. The article begins:
SAN FRANCISCO — Jason Baier talks often to the little boy he calls Jamie. He imagines this boy — his son — with blond hair and green eyes, chubby cheeks, a sweet smile.
But he’ll never know for sure.
His fiancee’s sister told him about the abortion after it was over. Baier remembers that he cried. The next weeks and months go black. He knows he drank far too much. He and his fiancee fought until they broke up. “I hated the world,” he said.
Baier, 36, still longs for the child who might have been, with an intensity that bewilders him: “How can I miss something I never even held?”
These days, he channels the grief into activism in a burgeoning movement of “post-abortive men.” Abortion is usually portrayed as a woman’s issue: her body, her choice, her relief or her regret. This new movement — both political and deeply personal in nature — contends that the pronoun is all wrong.
“We had abortions,” said Mark B. Morrow, a Christian counselor. “I’ve had abortions.”
Morrow spoke to more than 150 antiabortion activists gathered recently in San Francisco for what was billed as the first national conference on men and abortion. Participants — mostly counselors and clergy — heard two days of lectures on topics such as “Medicating the Pain of Lost Fatherhood” and “Forgiveness Therapy With Post-Abortion Men.”
Simon then interviews some in the mental health community who are skeptical but the article mostly allows the men at the conference to describe their experiences. It is impossible to judge how prevalent such reactions are; however, I can say that I experienced grief over my wife’s miscarriage some years ago. I have worked with a few men who describe this grief over abortion. As with other issues we have dealth with here, I hope counselors do not impose their views of how an event should or should not impact a person, but at the same time, counselors should not discount those who want to explore their reactions to an abortion.
Hi my name is Erika. I am doing research on abortion for a class to complete my undergraduate degree. I am studying the emotional effects if any of Abortion for Men and Women. If you have had a past abortion please take this survey. I need MALES and FEMALES. If you would like the results of this study, or have any questions please feel free to e-mail me at [email protected]. I truly thank you for your time. This will be very helpful to me. Just copy and past the link below into your URL. Thanks!
http://ku.qualtrics.com/SE?SID=SV_73OU0hpj9KsO0iE&SVID=Prod
Marty –
I think you misread me if you state:
“Does anyone here really consider having an abortion to be “taking responsibility”?
I consider all parties responsible for a resultant pregnancy…which includes the man who should have used protection if they had not previously discussed conceiving a child, and the woman who should be taking precautions as well.
That the woman then decides to have an abortion is a decision that no one can then control…but you can control what you do beforehand – if you have sex, if you use protection, if you decide to date or sleep with someone who believes in abortion, etc…
I am advocating responsibility…if everyone took it, abortion would be a lot more rare. No one can control rape, or if a “wanted” pregnancy is threatening the life of the mother….but we can control the vast majority of circumstances that lead to the abortion.
Men, if you don’t want women to even have the possibility of aborting your child – wear protection, or don’t date/marry that woman who believes in it.
Does anyone here really consider having an abortion to be “taking responsibility”?
Men and women both have equal access to birth control, and equal opportunity to abstain from sex — those are the responsible choices.
Having an abortion is avoiding responsiblity, not taking it.
So far, Jag, no one seems to want to take responsibility. They want others to do what they want others to do and still have commplete non-responsibility clauses when it comes to them.
Is this really a new concept that OTHERS are affected by the decisions that INDIVIDUALS make? I don’t think so.
Truth is, as much as many might not like the decisions that their spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend make under the law….(substance abuse, abortion, etc..)…they still have the right to make it.
If your partner drinks too much, it can wreck your marriage/relationship…and ultimately lead to their own death. But you know what? they have a right to make that decision – but you don’t have to be with someone who participates in that behavior. You can only control yourself.
If you want to prevent your partner from having an abortion you have many options…a few? Wear protection. Discuss your views on abortion before having sex. Only date people who share your perspective on this issue.
Geez folks, take personal responsibility, and allow others theirs.
Jayhuck said in post 79712:
I agree that they both should have to support the kid financially and both, if they are fit, should get some visitation.
What if the father doesn’t want the baby, and wants to give it up for adoption, but the mother wants to keep it? Should the father still have to pay child support?
Marty,
Thanks for sharing that – I believe more women think that way than not – it is one of the loneliest feelings one can have, whether someone is sitting with you or you are physically by yourself – sometimes, like other things in life, one has to experience the consequences of a decision or the angst that goes into the thought process to realize it fully and completely. Anyone can make comments, and they do, but they can never fully realize the impact of this process or this decision unless they were directly involved. While some men do not support a woman in her desire to carry the child to term, and profess no emotional upset of losing his or a child this way, I also feel many men think differently and that is starting to surface as it has in this article.
Ann, I don’t watch Sex in the City, but your comment reminded me of this haunting quote from the linked article:
After they parted, she spilled her anger in a letter: “That long day we sat in that God-forsaken clinic, I hoped every moment that you would stand up and say, ‘We can’t do this’. . . but you didn’t.”
Yet Tim and Eddy want the process to be “emotionally unbiased”… as if we were talking about an apendectomy.
Anyone remember the happy outcome for Miranda and Steve and their baby boy, Brady, on Sex and the City? Remember how it started, the process, the struggle, and then how it turned out? She had complete support with either decision she would have made, and somehow, I think, that might be the a solution to making the right one for each individual. Unfortunately, not everyone can have that privilege – some young girls want to keep their baby and are forced into having an abortion by their parents, some women want to keep their baby but are forced into abortions by either the father or the fear of losing a job and feel they have no support or options, others feel coercion not to have the procedure and are not comfortable with that. Somehow God does not give us the privilege of time to figure it all out and realize that the current set of circumstances does not always indicate how the rest of our life will be.
Timothy–
I agree. I dream of a handout that contains the statement I mentioned rather than a spoken statement. Maybe we could add a paragraph that says, “we’d like to know if you feel that your practicioner attempted to persuade your decision in any way, if you feel that they did, please contact….”
Mary,
thanks for the comment 79601. Yes, we do have a way to go don’t we.
Ann,
“One of the things I really like are the hospitals and fire stations who accept unwanted babies without questioning who is dropping them off and then they can be adopted.”
I quite agree.
Marty,
You answered my question. Not the way you intended, I’m sure, but you did confirm my opinion.
Eddy,
I wish there were a way to provide information that was factual and not emotionally biased. Unfortunately, the trenches in this culture war are so deep that I doubt anything would be acceptable at this point to either side that wasn’t cartoonishly inaccurate.
Marty,
I’m not assuming the worst of people, and I agree that they both should have to support the kid financially and both, if they are fit, should get some visitation.
Jayhuck
Why do you assume that just because he “doesn’t love her” then they “dislike each other and will create a dysfunctional or even abusive home”?
And yeah, I think they have a duty to the kids they create. At the very least, they both have to support the kid financially, and both get some visitation.
But you seem to want to assume the worst of people. Why is that?
Marty,
he will do the right thing and marry his child’s mother.
I would hope he would marry the child’s mother only if he loved her, NOT because they got pregnant – surely we’ve evolved past this notion. Do you really think its best to have a mother and father “at all costs”, even if the two people dislike each other and create a dysfunctional or even abusive home environment?
Timothy: Yet now that we are talking about heterosexuals that are pregnant with an unwanted child, all of that has disappeared.
Why do you assume we’re talking about heterosexuals? Don’t lesbians sometimes have abortions too?
Are marriage and parenting only intertwined when we are talking about gay people? Is creating a child without either their natural father or their natural monther perfectly acceptable in heterosexuals but not homosexuals
Straw-man. If the child is not aborted then the father can and will be held responsible for his child. At the very least, he will pay child support and have visitation rights, while at best he will do the right thing and marry his child’s mother. And somewhere in between is the very strong possibility that the mother will marry another man, who will adopt her child.
In neither case does the child grow up “fatherless”.
Ken and Eddy,
Thank you for the responses – I remember when things used to be just the opposite and free clinics were encouraging abortions. If what you are saying is true, and I have no doubt to think otherwise, and there is coercion with an unsolicited agenda then I am against that completely. I haven’t seen it to that extreme inside an organization, rather I’ve seen organizations who are providing information for those who seek information and options. The picture of the pre-born child in various stages of life is available on the internet, magazines, and museums that I have seen. Anyone can have access to this information if they want it so perhaps it is better if an organization does not present it unless it is asked for. I think, along with other things, that there are so many dimensions to this issue and everyone comes with their own story and all that should be considered. One of the things I really like are the hospitals and fire stations who accept unwanted babies without questioning who is dropping them off and then they can be adopted. Even though there are three people involved, ultimately only the woman will make the decision and I just felt it important for her to have ALL the information available, just like anyone else who is making such a profound decision, so it can be the right one.
Ann–
I support advising the woman of the potential emotional issues and potential future side effects. But this should not be done out of bias and the method of delivery ought not to be badgering. Maybe a statement along the lines of “While for some women, abortion is nothing more than a clinical procedure, some women do experience emotional side-effects months or years following the procedure. If you’d like to know more about these side-effects, please ask. (Pause.) Here are some phone numbers that may be of help if you should experience any emotional reactions.”
Ann asked in post 79612:
Do you think providing people all the information regarding an abortion is propaganda and should it just be limited to their request to have the procedure and then have the service provided? Or do you think the information should be limited to only medical issues and just leave the emotional issues or possible future side effects alone?
I think information provided by most pro-life orgs is propaganda. Carefully selected facts (and sometimes even false information) designed to mislead women into not having abortions. Facts that don’t come close to providing ALL the information about abortion.
As far as what the woman should be told, whatever she wants to know. Certainly she needs to understand what the procedure is and how it can effect her. Including the importance of follow-up visits. Beyond that, any questions she has should be answered.
Ken,
I didn’t misunderstand you – just wanted clarification and I appreciate you giving it. Do you think providing people all the information regarding an abortion is propaganda and should it just be limited to their request to have the procedure and then have the service provided? Or do you think the information should be limited to only medical issues and just leave the emotional issues or possible future side effects alone?
Ann,
I think you misunderstood me. I’m not claiming the men didn’t have the feelings, I’m saying I think the same propaganda designed to cause women to feel bad about having abortions is also effecting some men as well.
unfortunately, timothy, the answer is (by the majority) yes. not from me. sorry. we have a long way to go towards understanding human nature, social nature, and what it takes to thrive.
What I find interesting is that when the thread was about gay people getting married, the converstation was all about how same-sex couples needed to be denied marriage rights because children need both their natural father and their natural mother.
Yet now that we are talking about heterosexuals that are pregnant with an unwanted child, all of that has disappeared.
Are marriage and parenting only intertwined when we are talking about gay people? Is creating a child without either their natural father or their natural monther perfectly acceptable in heterosexuals but not homosexuals?
You’ll have to forgive me if I give little credence to arguments that depend on the persons one is applying them to. Such arguments seem to me to be less based on principle and more based on bigotry.
Well, the 1st problem with this question is I don’t see 3 people as being involved.
Ken,
Thanks – I respectfully disagree though – it took two people (unless one did not consent which is a whole other issue) to create the third person. 1+1+1=3. In cases where the pregnancy is causing emotional or physical trauma then I agree with you, the woman’s decision is sufficient.
Personally, I see this problem as a result of extreme pro-life propaganda.
If you ever talk with a man regarding his feelings, like the one in the above article, I would be interested if you would still feel it was propaganda. Are you discounting a man’s ability to have these feelings or would you prefer they just don’t talk about them?
The last sentence of my last post should have read:
Personally, I see this problem as a result of extreme pro-life propaganda. However, it also seems like an argument for not telling the man his gf/wife/casual acquaintance is even pregnant.
Ann asked in post 79572:
“how do you suggest they are counseled for the overall well-being of the three people involved?”
Well, the 1st problem with this question is I don’t see 3 people as being involved. I consider there to be one person involved, the pregnant woman. Potentially, the man who impregnated her may be involved, but not to the point where he should have any say in the decision. As far as counseling the pregnant woman, I think she receive basic medical information about pregnancy, childbirth and abortion. Additionally, information about adoptions (and trade-offs of adoption vs. keeping a baby vs. having an abortion). Most importantly, the information should be given by someone whose primary concern is for the well-being of the pregnant woman.
You also asked in post 79552:
Regarding how men are affected about women aborting their babies – any other thoughts on that?
Personally, I see this problem as a result of extreme pro-life propaganda. However, it also seems like an argument for not telling the man his gf/wife/casual acquaintance
Sometimes REALLY IS ALWAYS. We don’t know another person the way God knows us. In the end that’s all that matters – it’s between me and God and what others have to say or think is of no matter.
You do not know the whole story – nor would I reveal it in such a public forum.
Mary,
Nor should you have to ever reveal it to anyone unless you want to. Sometimes our stories, whatever they might be, will never be understood unless the person judging us has been in our shoes. God bless you.
Marty – Your comment was out of line. No more of that. Personal remarks or judgments about commenters are inappropriate.
Marty,
Shame on you. I have done what is needed. You do not know the whole story – nor would I reveal it in such a public forum. You are very judgemental of me (saying that I need to ask for forgiveness???)
Ken,
The question probably would sound better like this – “how do you suggest they are counseled for the overall well-being of the three people involved?” If that is dwindled down to only one parent participating, how should that parent and the pre-born baby be counseled?
Regardless of whether a pregnancy is terminated, meaning the termination of life rather than the removal of an already lifeless baby, I think the person making the decision should have all the facts and resources available to them in order to prevent any future regret about the decision they made. To see an ultra-sound or hear the heart beat of a 3 week old pre-born child years later, and then feel the undescribable pain of regret associated with it is not something that can be take lightly. In medicine, we are given all the side effects – in cases of abortion, full disclosure should also be available of the future side effects as well.
Ken,
For young girls and women who find themselves with an unexpected pregnancy where there was and is no trauma involved, and they are seeking options about what to do with themselves and their pre-born baby, how would you counsel them and the father involved?
Ann said in post 79552:
The ultrasound is shown before having an abortion.
Yes, I am aware of that. The article talked about some states passing legislation to make ultra-sounds mandatory before having an abortion. That was what I was addressing with my question.
In cases where a woman is seeking options and/or counseling, looking at the ultrasound might add a whole new dimension to her thought process in making a decision that could impact her emotional well being for a lifetime.
I’m skeptical of the worth of ultrasounds in making a decision about abortions. The ultrasound doesn’t accurately represent an embryo (or fetus). It doesn’t show actual size. A 1st trimester ultrasound will take an embryo that is about the size of your thumb and magnify the image. It makes it look like something you could hold in your arms.
While I’m all for women making informed decisions about abortion, I find that most of the people, pushing for giving women more information, are only interested in giving information designed to get the women to make the decision that the pro-lifers want them to make.
Ken: Again, if you were really concerned about the emotional effects of abortion…Do you even care?
It’s a valid question, and no — I do not care to make abortion any less traumatic and inhumane than it is. If you’re going to chop up yur baby then you should be required to pick up all the bloody little pieces yourself, with your bare hands.
how do you think forcing a woman to see the ultrasound will effect her emotional well being after having an abortion?
The ultrasound is shown before having an abortion. Many times her decision to have an abortion is changed when she can see what it is that she has felt growing inside of her and realize this isn’t just cells or tissue but a live baby with a beating heart. I am not sure if it is mandatory for a clinic to show a personal ultrasound or just a generic one or none at all. I am also not sure if it is required for the woman to view it even if it is mandatory for the clinic to offer it. In cases where the pregnancy has caused emotional or physical trauma, a woman’s decision is sufficient. In cases where a woman is seeking options and/or counseling, looking at the ultrasound might add a whole new dimension to her thought process in making a decision that could impact her emotional well being for a lifetime.
Regarding how men are affected about women aborting their babies – any other thoughts on that?
Marty said in post 79413:
They oppose early-term ultra-sound images as well, calling them “emotional blackmail”. Anything to avoid addressing the imhumanity of the act…
Actually, they oppose forcing pregnant women to look at them. Again, if you were really concerned about the emotional effects of abortion, you’d be worried about that as well.
Tell me marty, how do you think forcing a woman to see the ultrasound will effect her emotional well being after having an abortion? Do you even care?
I personally am skittish of using murder in the context of abortion, unless the woman believes she is carrying a life and then with aggressive disregard for that life has the abortion. Manslaughter is a term that conveys taking of life without intent to kill. However, this would be cumbersome in speech. Law makes allowances for state of mind and I think our conversation about abortion should as well. For every woman who feels relief about the loss of life, there is a woman who does not and I know from counseling experience that the shrill tone of the some pro-life groups is a serious barrier to the latter group finding healing and hope.
Whether abortions are reduced by certain tactics over others, I have no idea. Long term, I think broader awareness of how human babies are pre-birth (awareness of pain, sound, etc.) may make more of a difference. But I suspect different approaches work differently with different people. I favor legislation which improves access to adoption, provides financial support for adoptees and pregnant women, and the like in addition to efforts to regulate abortion directly.
Hehehe nice try Mary.
It’s not “in the name of God” that I support this — but for the lives of children.
You know exactly what you need to do to recieve forgiveness for murder. But then hindsight is always 20/20 isn’t it…
Abortion rates rise and your evidence (without researching) is that they would have been higher if those pictures were not shown??? Come on. You are boxed in and this is your excuse? Notice I do not say reason.
And btw, when did causing trauma (more of the same) become a christian ethic?? And again are you aware that intimidation can cause stress abortions? So – you think stressing women out is the answer? Ah – so many things done in the name of God that lil’ ole me just can’t understand.
Let’s take a trip through history – The Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, Gentrification of Native Americans, The Church of England (for a son), just to name a few… oh and prolifers picketing with gore causing harm (while trying to avoid it), and last but not least let us not forget Fred Phelps and his protest designs (we are all too familiar with the stick man in sexual positions and the GOD HATES FAGS in bold lettering ) And all in in the name of GOD? to get people to change from their wicked ways?? These tactics have yet to work or be of any value to those so called lost souls.
Mary, as easy as it is for you to claim that the images have done nothing to decrease abortions, it is just as easy for me to claim that without them there would be even more abortions than there are.
Neither of us know for sure — I doubt any evidence even exists — but our speculations reveal our agendas.
I can certainly see why abortion supporters would not want to look at those images, and I can certainly see why they would be “traumatic” to any woman considering abortion.
That is the point of course, to cause her to think twice before committing an unspeakable act.
And I thank God that the fathers of these murdered children are finally starting to speak up.
Abortions rose during Reagan and Bush years, declined during Clinton years and has again risen. Sinve the burden of proof lies with those who claim that the gory pictures and picketing are effective – the research (that I can dig up easily) will be left in their hands. If they choose not to look at the stats. – that is there perogative. Burden of proof lies with their claim.
My 2 cents? The man who was the father of my aborted child was not pleased at all with my decision. I think it impacts men significantly and they are part of the equation, problem or solution – however one might turn it.
Sorry, all, I put on my analyst’s hat awhile ago and can’t seem to shake it. I was thinking that Warren presented an interesting topic that isn’t often discussed anywhere–what are the impacts of abortion on the biological father?
I note that after the first 3 comments it evolved into a discussion of abortion in general…which is a discussion that’s been going on for quite some time elsewhere on the blogsite. Do we feel that the original topic isn’t worth discussing or did we simply get sidetracked?
A mother never forgets the child she carried. Even if only for a few months. I work to create a safe place for women to come and educate themselves about abortion procedures and risks – physical and emotional. We also offer them help and resources so they CAN choose another way to deal with their pregnancy. I’ve seen women choose abortion for many reasons but the most common reason is because their partner is telling them to do it or they will end the relationship. Alan Guttmacher Institute (polling arm of Planned Parenthood) say around 30% of women choose abortion for that reason. I think it’s even higher. I’m glad to see the needs of men who are a part of this decision being addressed.
Of course, it’s not just those late-term “gory” images that abortion-rights activists oppose…
They oppose early-term ultra-sound images as well, calling them “emotional blackmail”. Anything to avoid addressing the imhumanity of the act…
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0515/p03s03-ussc.html
Mary,
Sadly, I think you are right. I suspect that those waving gorey pictures and screaming “baby-killer” do so more to make themselves feel righteous than they do out of a desire to change the world.
And I think as a consequence it makes it harder for others to make a persuasive and passionate case for reducing abortion. The minute that anyone begins to suggest that they might not think abortion is the best choice, all their audience can see in their mind are the protesters ranting and screaming.
Marty said in post 79257:
Yes Ken, we can easily eliminate the emotional trauma if we all just pretend that “it’s just a bit of extra tissue being removed from a woman’s body” instead of “it’s a tiny baby being dismembered”.
I didn’t say anything about eliminating the trauma. I was merely pointing out contributing factors. Jayhuck didn’t seem to have problem getting that, I wonder why you did.
Those gory images are an appeal to your humanity.
No they are an appeal to ignorance. Generally, those pictures are of 3rd trimester abortions, which represent less than 2% of all abortions (in the US.) However, the protesters try to present them as the common case. Deception has never been a good way to convince me an argument has merit.
in the past few decades that this gore approach has done nothing to decrease abortions
Any evidence for this claim Mary?
Scare tactics and aversion “therapy” has proven to not have life changing effects nor any long term change in behavior or attitudes. That’s why gory pictures of aborted children are not working.
What one group sees as putting it out there (as if people did not know) another group sees as being just as inhumane.
It seems the scare tactics only serve the purpose of the protestor and that is to make themselves look good in front of their friends – otherwise they might have learned in the past few decades that this gore approach has done nothing to decrease abortions and has raised only the profile of pro-lifers. That’s why I feel it is a self serving act and another approach seems obvious.
Marty,
Yes Ken, we can easily eliminate the emotional trauma if we all just pretend that “it’s just a bit of extra tissue being removed from a woman’s body” instead of “it’s a tiny baby being dismembered”.
I think what Ken was saying is, don’t go contributing to a woman’s emotional trauma and then lament that it is happening.
I’m pretty sure most of us on here are in agreement that abortion is not a good thing. Although some of us might disagree on whether or not it is a necessary “evil”.
Yes Ken, we can easily eliminate the emotional trauma if we all just pretend that “it’s just a bit of extra tissue being removed from a woman’s body” instead of “it’s a tiny baby being dismembered”.
Those gory images are an appeal to your humanity. Honestly, it really shouldn’t take something so utterly shocking to get your attention, should it?
Personally, I’ve always considered the Pro-life “concerns” about the emotional effect of abortion to be a bit self-serving. It seems to me if they were so worried about the emotional well-being of women (and now men apparently) who have abortions, they shouldn’t be outside the clinics shouting “Baby-killers”, waving gory images of late-term abortions and other activities clearly intended to cause emotional trauma.
Now, I realize those protesting outside the clinics don’t represent ALL pro-lifers (any more than the extremists who shoot abortion doctors or blow-up clinics do). However, I’ve never seen a pro-lifer chastise the protesters for their part in causing emotional problems for women who’ve had abortions.
Marty,
I understand how you feel. I think we are just touching on an issue that some men have hidden for years and the emotional impact it can have. I am glad it is being brought out in the open. Something has been taken away from the man, whether he finds out before or after, and it is a difficult feeling to grasp and reconcile.
I have a difficult time imagining the level of rage, and sorrow, and helplessness that I would feel if I found out that a woman I loved had destroyed my child.
God forbid I ever have to find out.