Logic Fail: Kill the baby to “save” it from abuse

In countless cases where children are born with disabilities or into impoverished or unhealthy families, the go-to solution for liberal-minded individuals is abortion.

Is your baby suffering from Trisomy 18? Abortion will take care of that. Are you a woman living in the hood with four baby-daddies and a bun in the oven? Take the bus down to Planned Parenthood, and be sure to ask for assistance. Are you prone to angry outbursts which could escalate if you suffered from having an “unwanted” child? Be sure to abort your baby before you could potentially do it any future harm.

In a recent opinion piece on the Duluth News Tribune, a writer remarked that aborting children who could potentially suffer abuse is an act of kindness. This type of deluded thinking is common in our society today. The “abort to save the child pain” philosophy masquerades as compassion, when it’s truly rooted in selfishness.

We all know that our world is full of sick, abused, and unloved children. The question for us as caring individuals is not “how can we get rid of them?,” but rather “How can we help them survive?” There are no easy answers, and there never will be. This is why it will take everyone from psychologists and social workers to concerned teachers and ministers getting involved.

Presenting abortion as a quick fix for sick and suffering children is dangerous. The pro-choice community throws out vague words like “abused” and “unwanted” children. They warn us of the horrors these children will face if they live. They stress the need for them to be put out of their misery before they’re born. Yet in a twisted world like ours, I wonder how many children could fit into such broad categories.

When it comes to being “unwanted,” a baby can be placed in that category for simply being an undesirable gender. If a woman wants a boy and has a girl, would that child be an unwanted baby who should be aborted?

How can we identify children who will be abused? I know there are stats and figures, but even those are subject to individual behavior. I once read a story about a young girl who faced sexual abuse and rape at 9 years old. Should she have been aborted to save herself from that trauma? Some would argue yes. If so, the world would have lost the voice of Oprah Winfrey. Oprah’s mentor and world-famous author Maya Angelou is another survivor of childhood sexual abuse. Maya’s abuse led her to go mute for a season. She refused to speak with anyone but her brother. Maya’s praying grandmother told her she would speak when she was ready and that one day her voice would be heard all over the world.

Well-known actress Drew Barrymore suffered drug and alcohol addictions as a pre-teen because of negligent parents. Former President Bill Clinton suffered emotional abuse, as he lived in a household with an abusive stepfather who beat his mother. Would it have been a compassionate choice for their parents to have aborted them to save them from the misery they endured?

I’m in no way making light of emotional or physical abuse. Irresponsible parents who can’t raise their children in a healthy home should allow them to be adopted by people who will love them. However, we must know that abortion is not a solution for children who may suffer abuse.

We need answers that will help protect children and allow them to survive. Does it make sense to rip apart a fetus in the womb to save him or her from potential physical harm down the road? Isn’t abortion a legitimate form of child abuse? If you want to act in true kindness, display it by caring for children inside and outside the womb.