On criminal abortion in AmericaStorer, Horatio Robinson
Philosophy
On criminal abortion in America
Storer, Horatio Robinson
Abortion -- United States
“If the opinion were once generally established among the laboring
class, that their welfare required a due regulation of the numbers of
their families, only those would exempt themselves from it who were in
the habit of making light of social obligations generally.”[89] “The
principles contended for include not only the laboring classes, but all
persons, except the few who being able to give their offspring the means
of independent support during the whole of life, do not leave them to
swell the competition for employment.”[90]
“When persons are once married, the idea never seems to enter any one’s
mind, that having or not having a family, or the number of which it shall
consist, is at all amenable to their own control. One would imagine that
it was really, as the common phrases have it, God’s will and not their
own, which decided the number of their offspring.”[91]
“In a place where there is no room left for new establishments,” says
Sismondi, entirely ignoring the escapes offered by emigration and the
increased importation of food, “if a man has eight children, he should
believe that unless six of them die in infancy, these, and three of
his own contemporaries of each sex, will be compelled to abstain from
marriage in consequence of his own imprudence.”[92]
The direct result of remarks like these last, so pointed and plainly to
be understood, is seen in the statistics I have so largely given. Would
mankind, in following such advice, merely resort to greater abstinence
before their means allow the expense of children, and to greater prudence
after that period, no fault could be found; but when we discover criminal
abortion thus justified and almost legitimated, we may well oppose to
such doctrine the words of the indeed admirable Percival, “To extinguish
the first spark of life is a crime of the same nature, both against our
Maker and society, as to destroy an infant, a child, or a man.”[93]
Fear of child-bed, in patients pregnant for the first time, or who
had suffered or risked much in previous labors, might formerly have
been allowed some weight in excuse, but none at all in these days of
anæsthesia. It has been urged, and not so absurdly as would at first
sight appear, that the present possibilities of painless and so much
safer delivery, by changing thus completely the primal curse, from
anguish to a state frequently of positive pleasure, remove a drawback of
actual advantage, and by offering too many inducements for pregnancy,
tend to keep women in that state the greater part of their menstrual
lives.
* * * * *
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account