In the meantime, I've been wanting to share this horrific piece that has been making the rounds since last week:
As Jenny lay on the obstetrician’s examination table, she was grateful that the ultrasound tech had turned off the overhead screen. She didn’t want to see the two shadows floating inside her. Since making her decision, she had tried hard not to think about them, though she could often think of little else. She was 45 and pregnant after six years of fertility bills, ovulation injections, donor eggs and disappointment — and yet here she was, 14 weeks into her pregnancy, choosing to extinguish one of two healthy fetuses, almost as if having half an abortion. As the doctor inserted the needle into Jenny’s abdomen, aiming at one of the fetuses, Jenny tried not to flinch, caught between intense relief and intense guilt.
“Things would have been different if we were 15 years younger or if we hadn’t had children already or if we were more financially secure,” she said later. “If I had conceived these twins naturally, I wouldn’t have reduced this pregnancy, because you feel like if there’s a natural order, then you don’t want to disturb it. But we created this child in such an artificial manner — in a test tube, choosing an egg donor, having the embryo placed in me — and somehow, making a decision about how many to carry seemed to be just another choice. The pregnancy was all so consumerish to begin with, and this became yet another thing we could control.” [...]
Jenny’s decision to reduce twins to a single fetus was never really in doubt. The idea of managing two infants at this point in her life terrified her. She and her husband already had grade-school-age children, and she took pride in being a good mother. She felt that twins would soak up everything she had to give, leaving nothing for her older children. Even the twins would be robbed, because, at best, she could give each one only half of her attention and, she feared, only half of her love. Jenny desperately wanted another child, but not at the risk of becoming a second-rate parent. “This is bad, but it’s not anywhere as bad as neglecting your child or not giving everything you can to the children you have,” she told me, referring to the reduction. She and her husband worked out this moral calculation on their own, and they intend to never tell anyone about it. Jenny is certain that no one, not even her closest friends, would understand, and she doesn’t want to be the object of their curiosity or feel the sting of their judgment.The wise blogger Sister Toldjah weighs in here:
The indifference to human life in this piece is staggering – almost literally – to me,and I say that as someone who, again, has read/heard/watched a lot of information on this topic. Thank God none of our parents viewed us – twins or not – with the same cold, clinical detachment as these “mothers” (and most pro-aborts in general) viewed the pregnancy process. Once again, the “pro-choice” culture of death is exposed for what it is: bloodless, soulless – and most of all, heartless. Think about these vain, selfish people next time you read about a mother and father who eagerly wanted to carry a twin pregnancy to term but lost one at birth due to delivery issues or unexpected health complications. My heart goes out to them. To pro-twin reduction types, I have nothing but contempt. [Link in original--E.M.]Of course, "Jenny" in the NYT Magazine piece--and the other pseudonymous twin-killing "moms"--can look to this woman as their patron saint in the art of soul-killing selfishness; nothing sends shivers down an actual human being's spine like the idea of slaughtering your two healthy twins in utero (and allowing the singleton to live--the triumph of 'choice,' ladies!) because otherwise you might have to live on Staten Island and shop for big jars of mayonnaise at Costco (horrors!).
But this is what happens when you stop viewing children as God's gifts sent to bless a man and a woman united in marriage, and start viewing them as the ultimate consumer accessory, the Prada shoes or Birken bag of pets, the best possible toy for the adult who already has everything--which is how our selfish, consumerist, post-Western Christendom sinkhole of a culture sees the little tykes.
Think I'm exaggerating? Take a look at this story from Australia:
A MAN who donated sperm to a lesbian couple will have his name stripped from their child's birth certificate after a successful legal bid by the birth mother's ex-partner.
The woman took the NSW Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages, and biological father, to court in May to have his name replaced with her name in the document.
The female child was born in 2001 and the women split in 2006, although they continued to share parental responsibility.
The man also played a role in the child's life. [...]
Outside court the man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said he was devastated and labelled the outcome an injustice.
"She's not my daughter as far as the law is concerned," he said.