Debate Over Partial-Birth Abortions

Re “Partial Birth: Is a Fetus More Than a Tomato?” Column Right, May 18: In reading William F. Buckley’s column on the “partial-birth” Senate debates, I was distressed by his use of the expression “abortion enthusiasts” in reference to pro-choice individuals. It is a fact that no one is enthusiastic about abortion.

Pro-choice enthusiasts no doubt exist. But I have yet to meet a pro-choice woman, man, clergy member or health care provider who feels only good things about abortion. If Buckley would help stop the nasty abortion debate, we might begin talking about the hidden “reservations” which, as he rightly notes, are felt by many pro-choice women and men. What he doesn’t know is that rather than showing some buried dark truth, those feelings of reservation reveal the human side that we all bring to a very serious issue. And that’s the real common ground, Mr. Buckley.

DANA DOVITCH

Studio City

Dovitch is a psychotherapist and coauthor with Candace De Puy of “The Healing Choice: Your Guide to Emotional Recovery After an Abortion” (Simon & Schuster/Fireside Books, 1997).

* I am more than a little troubled by The Times’ coverage of the vote in the Senate to ban late-term abortions (May 16). Your articles have consistently described the procedure as “grisly.” It isn’t just that the use of the word grossly editorializes the story, but the description is offensive to me.

Whether you agree with abortion or not, the procedure in question is a medical procedure, developed to address a medical concern. To describe it as “grisly” demonizes doctors who use this procedure to terminate a pregnancy gone tragically awry and fuels the misconception that this procedure serves no legitimate medical purpose.

ALISON ERDE MD

Medical Director

Planned Parenthood, L.A.

* Regarding partial-birth abortions, it is my impression that viability and the process of being born define a human baby and not, as your May 15 article stated, a “fetus.” This type of disassociation, like derogatory slurs used to dehumanize our enemies in combat, is a useful way to soothe our wounded conscience but makes it no less degrading to the value of all human life. As a Catholic my views on abortion aren’t unique. I realize that pragmatically it is a convenience society is unwilling to abandon.

Perhaps the abortion rate would decrease if we came to terms with the fact that abortion is the termination of human life. When a couple has a planned pregnancy the clump of cells, regardless of the stage of its development, is their baby. When it is unplanned that baby becomes a useless clump of cells to be removed with the same disregard as a bunion.

We can’t have it both ways.

FREDERIC E. BLOOMQUIST

Venice