"CITIZEN RUTH" (THE PRO'S AND CONS OF ABORTION)

Victor Bloom MD

I caught a very interesting film on cable the other day, one that got me to thinking. "Citizen Ruth" is about a young woman, a down-and-out glue-sniffer (huffer), who is in constant struggle with the law. She has had her babies taken away by the state, been arrested numerous times, and this time the judge wants to throw the book at her. However, he tells her she can forgo jail time if she "takes care of" the pregnancy--- in other words, get an abortion, with the understanding that she is an unfit mother and the state does not want another damaged, unwanted kid.

The judge seems to make some sense, but then we are thrown into the abortion controversy. The secular state (separation of church and state) allows and in some cases encourages abortion. On the other hand, many with strong religious beliefs feel that every life is sacred, and every fetus a divine miracle. They quote the commandment not to kill. They would rather have the pregnant woman carry her child to term and adopt it out, if necessary, than undo it. The fetus is not simply a bit of tissue, it is another God-given human life.

Alternatively, the pro-choicers, holding to Roe v Wade, insist that it is entirely up to the woman and her doctor whether the pregnancy should be continued or terminated. In fact, the hullaballoo about Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas had everything to do with the possibility that with another conservative member of the Supreme Court, Roe v Wade might be overturned, which is the agenda of the Christian Right. A few years ago there was a test of Roe v Wade and not even the conservative majority would vote to rescind it. Roe v Wade seems to be here to stay, but the pro-lifers say it is a license to commit genocide. The death of millions of unborn fetuses is compared to the Holocaust.

Legally, the fetus has no official standing. Apparently our (secular) laws determine that an unborn child is not a person until it is born and has a birth certificate. The pro-lifers retort this legalism and use their knowledge of embryonic development to claim (correctly) that at the instant of conception, the zygote (the fertilized egg) is already unique, a combination of genetic factors from both parents, the beginning of a separate human life.. So the pro-lifers fight for the right of a potential human being to become viable and be born, entitled to live like anyone else. They state with assurance that the fetus is a potential person inside the mother's body, and that she has no right to kill it. The pro-choice argument is that the woman should and must have control over her own body, that her life is more important. The mother has a birth certificate; so far the child has not. The fetus is expendable, depending on the complexities of the woman's life. She doesn't want to have to take care of a child for 18 years just because she made a mistake of a few minutes. She doesn't want to carry a child within her, give birth, and then endure the pain of separation and loss. She may want to keep the pregnancy secret.

The pro-lifers say, in effect, "you have made your bed.... now you must lie in it." The answer is, "no, I don't" (And don't impose your morals on me!") And so it goes, back and forth. I have been observing the abortion debate now for most of my adult life, and at first I thought it might be resolved somehow. I thought that thinking people of good intent would have something in common and agree to some sort of compromise. But that has not been the case.

What keeps the controversy going, at least in part, probably a great part, is the tendency for each side to see the other side as enemy, and caricature. These caricatures were brought out in the film, "Citizen Ruth." The pro-lifers were depicted as smarmy and hypocritical, their national (TV evangelist) leader a clever psychopath and pervert as well. The pro-choicers were depicted as loony lesbians, extolling sexual freedom and encouraging abortion as the ultimate means of birth control.

Citizen Ruth (Laura Dern) shows us a complex, troubled human being, in which the generalizations of both sides do not apply to her. No one takes her unique and complex situation into consideration. She is used as a tool for both sides. She realizes they don't really care about her. No one wants to be subverted to the role of simply carrying a message, being a symbol or maintaining an image. Each person is unique and each pregnancy carries its own complexity. Human lives are at stake, an unborn child and a pregnant mother. In addition, many other people are involved.

People argue this way and that, but they should be cautioned about over-generalizations and stereotyping. It is one thing to argue and persuade--- another to murder abortion doctors and harrass visitors to abortion clinics. And another to simply recommend an uncritical knee-jerk generalization--- "abortion-on-demand."

Dr Bloom is Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Wayne State University School of Medicine. He is a member of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and on the editorial board of the Wayne County Medical Society. He welcomes comments at his email address--- vbloom@comcast.net.