Maybe Pre-abortion Ultrasounds are Emotionally Torturous for a Reason

[Geee]

Newsrealblog:

Maybe Pre-abortion Ultrasounds Are Emotionally Torturous For A Reason
2010 MAY 30
BY CASSY FIANO

This weekend is the one-year anniversary of George Tiller’s horrible murder, and of course, this means that the pro-abortion fanatics are out in force. This time, they’re complaining about states that require women to view ultrasounds before having an abortion. That complaint isn’t particularly new, but now, it’s being called emotional torture.

Staff members interviewed at three of the seven abortion clinics in the state estimated that 30 percent to 70 percent of women chose to see ultrasound images. But they said it was uncommon for women to be dissuaded.

It had happened occasionally, they said, when a sonogram revealed a multiple pregnancy or when a woman was already deeply unsure about her choice.

But a number of women at the Birmingham clinic, which was the site of a fatal bombing in 1998, said they simply did not want to subject themselves to images that might haunt them. “You almost have to think of it as an alien,” said Carmen, 28, who was there for her second abortion in three years.

Like other patients, Laura, who has a 17-year-old son, said she took offense at the state’s implicit suggestion that she had not fully considered her choice.

“You don’t just walk into one of these places like you’re getting your nails done,” she said. “I think we’re armed with enough information to make adult decisions without being emotionally tortured.”

This makes the assumption that all women take the time to think an abortion through, that they all know week-by-week how the baby is growing in their uterus, that they have received medically accurate information. This is suspect at best.

Take Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the United States. Approximately one third of Planned Parenthood’s clients are girls under the age of 18. Just how informed are they expected to be? Not only do these girls usually have no clue whatsoever about what they are about to go through, they don’t usually have medically accurate information. Pro-life activist group Live Action gained fame from investigating Planned Parenthood’s willingness to cover up the sexual abuse of minors with their Mona Lisa Project. They’ve now started a new undercover investigation, The Rosa Acuna Project, to find out if Planned Parenthood is giving medically accurate information to their clients.

They have not done so.

The counselors give manipulative information filled with lies to clients who are scared or confused or unsure. Why? Because they don’t want women choosing to not have an abortion. Abortions are lucrative. Planned Parenthood doesn’t benefit if a woman decides to keep her baby.

And why would seeing an ultrasound before an abortion be emotional torture to a woman? Well, because most women aren’t prepared for the emotional roller coaster ride they’re about to go through with an abortion, for the anguish, regret, and guilt that many women feel. Many women aren’t prepared to confront the life they’ve just destroyed. An ultrasound forces them to confront that reality. Is it perhaps emotional torture because women are killing their children? Because women cannot bear to look at an ultrasound and see the life they are about to take away?

Bernard Nathanson is a prime example of this. Nathanson was once a pro-abortion activist who helped to found the National Abortion Rights Action League. NARAL was originally created to repeal abortion laws, and succeeded with the Roe v. Wade decision. Nathanson says he has performed over 75,000 abortions in his lifetime. However, with the advent of the ultrasound, he found that he couldn’t ignore the barbarity of abortions anymore, and became a staunch pro-life activist.

Ultrasound images are so powerful that Nathanson made two documentaries, The Silent Scream and Eclipse of Reason. The Silent Scream shows an ultrasound of an abortion being performed on a baby eleven weeks after conception. Eclipse of Reason shows a late-term abortion being performed, and is even more horrifying. These ultrasound images were strong enough to convert Dr. Nathanson, the father of the pro-abortion movement still in action today. How would viewing an ultrasound be to an expectant mother who is confused, scared, and probably already feeling slightly guilty? Of course it would be emotional torture. She would look at that ultrasound and it would be like a knife going through her heart. It’s emotional torture because deep down, they know that they’re killing their child, and it’s heartbreaking.

Why would abortion advocates have such a problem with women being forced to view the ultrasound? Apparently, during first trimester abortions, women weren’t much dissuaded from the abortion because an unborn baby at, say, five weeks kind of looks like a little tadpole or something, and not like a baby. Once you start looking at second and third trimester abortions, however, the images are much harder for women to see. And regardless of when in the pregnancy the abortion takes place, women who are unsure about their choice are definitely swayed by viewing the ultrasound. The abortion lobby doesn’t want fewer women to have abortions, so making women view the child they’re about to kill doesn’t sit well with them — not because they care about the welfare of women, but because they don’t want to lose a potential sale. A woman who is already confused and scared and unsure about the choice to have an abortion who views the ultrasound is much more likely to change her mind than the woman who doesn’t see her baby first.

Deep down, their conscience will tell them that this is wrong, but they don’t want to admit that to themselves. That is what brings on the feelings of emotional torture. And it’s what pro-abortion activists don’t want women to know. The abortion lobby does not want women to be fully informed about the realities of abortion, because if women were, a much greater number of them would walk away. So pro-abortion activists try to keep women in the dark, while screeching that they’re only fighting for women’s rights.

But is it really pro-woman to keep women in the dark?