The Precoi

Slavery is slavery. How's that for tautology? But it helps if I describe what I view as slavery. And that is the condition when one individual is under the control of another. He has no free will. He makes no independent decisions. They're not his to make. Only his master decides what he is to do and what his fate is. In ancient Rome slavery was accompanied by the power of life and death, and in more recent examples it was sometimes accepted and sometimes rejected. But even when rejected it was often tolerated. The control was, for all intents and purposes, total.

Murder is murder. It doesn't matter if the victim is nine days old, nineteen years old, ninety-nine, or somewhere in between. Or beyond these numbers one way or another. Killing an innocent individual is considered murder in virtually all modern societies and it is banned – though, as with slavery, the ban is sometimes overlooked.

What about abortion? The Guttmacher Institute estimates that between 2011 and 2014 there were about 56 million abortions annually. That's a lot of humans who never experienced extrauterine life or any form of liberty. Until they were murdered, they were slaves. Of course such a formulation requires a better description of a human being. From my perspective, whatever is alive and has the potential for being a human being is a human being. Many will disagree with me, but that is my view and what I'll use for the remainder of this essay. I don't think there is much difference between a fetus that will be born later today and one born this morning. And if we go back days or weeks or months the same basic premise applies. “Jane Roe” (Norma McCorvey), the plaintiff in the Roe v Wade case (and its “poster child”) said later

I was sitting in O.R.'s offices when I noticed a fetal development poster. The progression was so obvious, the eyes were so sweet. It hurt my heart, just looking at them. I ran outside and finally, it dawned on me. 'Norma', I said to myself, 'They're right'. I had worked with pregnant women for years. I had been through three pregnancies and deliveries myself. I should have known. Yet something in that poster made me lose my breath. I kept seeing the picture of that tiny, 10-week-old embryo, and I said to myself, that's a baby! It's as if blinders just fell off my eyes and I suddenly understood the truth— that's a baby!

The Supreme Court may have decided one way, but Roe decided another. As did Mary Doe (Sandra Cano was “Doe” in Doe v Bolan, a case which also supported abortion, but was repudiated by Cano.)

Abortion is murder. However it's sanctioned by the courts. It's the law of the land. But perhaps the issue should rethought. There are approximately a million abortions in the United States each year. That's the official number. In all likelihood the count is much higher since some are reported as non-stigmatizing procedures such as diagnostic d and c, or given some other such non-political title. But that's not the issue. Each year we lose a million children who may have grown up to be scientists, musicians, writers, teachers, and all sorts of other things. With the aid of the medical profession, their parents murdered them.

Why do people choose to abort. Clearly the pregnancy is unwanted by at least one of the parents, almost invariably the mother. The pregnancy is usually unplanned, although there may after the fact consideration. And many occur among unmarried women.

The reasons patients gave for having an abortion underscored their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. The three most common reasons—each cited by three-fourths of patients—were concern for or responsibility to other individuals; the inability to afford raising a child; and the belief that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents. Half said they did not want to be a single parent or were having problems with their husband or partner. Also from Guttmacher)

They seem like good reasons, but murder is murder. They wouldn't kill their two-year-old so they could provide for the fetus, so what makes the reverse acceptable? If there is concern over other responsibilities, consideration should have been given to contraception or abstention. Most adults know “the facts of life” and the relationship of coitus to pregnancy, and should have factored in that possibility in their behavior. And intercourse may not be the best way to deal with problems – with your partner or anyone else.

Not all sexual relations are voluntary and there may be a desire to be rid of the evidence and burden if pregnancy results. The goal is understandable but not the means. Another concern, especially among the unmarried, is that the father will deny any responsibility or help in the support and raising of the child.

No. Those are excuses. Abortion is the best solution some people have for an unwanted pregnancy – usually an avoidable pregnancy. There are many contraceptive medicines and devices available that will avoid the issue. But coitus is pleasurable. And, sadly, it is often spontaneous with relatively little consideration of the consequences, among the married and the single. Which is the basis for my proposal. (And it is a serious proposal. Not a satire.)

The inspiration for the proposal is the already existing and popular prenuptial agreement (a “prenup”). That agreement spells out the circumstances to be covered and the penalties for failure to do so. My specific suggestion is a “precoi,” a precoital agreement. Details would be spelled out on numbered one-page clearly-worded, understandable sheets that would list the date, names of the participants, and the obligation of the male to provide DNA if paternity is questioned, and monetary and psychological support if is shown to be the case. The extent of the support could be left to a judge or a panel. The document would be signed by both parties, and they would agree that abortion, murder, is not an option. Both would agree to take responsibility for such an action. (And the abortionist is equally guilty and should share their fate.)

A variety of beneficial effects can be anticipated from such a procedure (although some would argue on that point). First of all it would slow down an affair or a connection that is proceeding too rapidly. It gives both parties a few moments to think. Indeed, it may result in the decision not go further – and that would certainly lessen the number of abortions. The document, if available at a legal proceeding, would establish consent. Absence of the document might suggest consent and spontaneity (and finessing the document), although the same result might follow rape (and the absence of the document) or a questionable accusation (and its destruction). The need for the justice system to make that determination remains, although the absence of the slip, if not reported immediately, would be a consideration for the adjudicator.

The agreement would be a starting point if there is any need to establish paternity. The willingness to provide DNA, and its availability would be of great value in such an endeavor. The results of such testing would help in the establishment of both monetary responsibility if the child is alive, and guilt if there has been an abortion. (Whether this agreement, which was obtained for an entirely different purpose – monetary responsibility – from the decision to “terminate the pregnancy,” constitutes inadmissible self-incrimination would be decided by the judiciary.) If a father is not identified, society should support the mother rather than allowing her to have an abortion.

But the most important result of such a document would often be the avoidance of a murder, and the continued life of a human being. It is the responsibility of society to make life worth living, but society has no right to sanction the murder of an innocent party.

The document would have its greatest application when the participants aren't married, but there are times when even married couples decide that an abortion is necessary. That's a legal issue. Monetary responsibility, which is the focus of the agreement, is usually not in question. Nonetheless, this, or a similar agreement, should be considered.

Bottom line: abortion is murder. I've said it several times both because I believe it and because society apparently does not. That's the first principle to be established. And the obligation to provide a good life for the survivor comes close behind.

September 25, 2017