NYT Column: Killing My Baby At 22 Weeks Made Me ‘A Better Mother’

Ben Shapiro,

On Friday, Meredith Isaksen, a poet and English teacher at Berkeley City College, wrote a column in The New York Times about why she had her unborn child killed at 22 weeks – nearly six months.

This is a picture of an infant born prematurely at 22 weeks, just so we’re clear what we’re talking about here.

This is not a fetus or a ball of tissue. It is a fully formed human being.

According to Isaksen, she and her husband found out that “our second little boy was missing half his heart. It had stopped growing correctly around five weeks gestation, but the abnormality was not detectable until the 20-week anatomy scan.” What did this mean for chances of survival? “It was very unlikely that our baby would survive delivery, and if he did, he would ultimately need a heart transplant.”

So instead, Isaksen decided to have the baby aborted.

abortions_small NYT Column: Killing My Baby At 22 Weeks Made Me 'A Better Mother' Liberals

Typically, there are two procedures used in late-term abortions: dilation and evacuation, or dilation and extraction.

In a dilation and evacuation, the baby may be given a lethal injection to kill it; sometimes, such injections are not used. Then the doctor uses a curette or forceps to carve up the child’s body and remove it from the womb, piece by piece. Then there’s dilation and extraction. Here’s how AmericanPregnancy.org describes the procedure:

The fetus is rotated and forceps are used to grasp and pull the legs, shoulders, and arms through the birth canal. A small incision is made at the base of the skull to allow a suction catheter inside. The catheter removes the cerebral material until the skull collapses. The fetus is then completely removed.

Now, here’s how Isaksen describes the abortion:

As the day of my termination approached and I felt my baby’s kicks and wiggles, I simultaneously wanted to crawl out of my skin and suspend us together in time. I wanted him to know how important he was to me, that the well of my grief and love for him would stretch deeper and deeper into the vastness of our family’s small yet limitless life. He may have moved inside me for only five months, but he had touched and shaped me in ways I could never have imagined.

Euphemisms. Always euphemisms. If the child was that important to her, perhaps she should have given him the chance to live – yes, even handicapped people and people with severe birth defects deserve the chance to live, in a non-eugenic society. Love for a child should not express itself as having a doctor cut apart that child in the womb over real worries about future health problems. 

Making the death of her child about her – “he had touched and shaped me in ways I could never have imagined” – is the height of selfishness. Only one person lost his life in that abortion clinic, and it wasn’t Ms. Isaksen.

But Isaksen has justifications. Lots of them:

Such politicians would have you believe that women like me shouldn’t get to make the choice I made. That our baby, despite his tiny misshapen heart and nonexistent aorta, should have a chance “to live,” even though that life might have lasted mere minutes. Even though that life would have been excruciatingly painful. These politicians are ignorant of the sacrifices and blessings that come with carrying a pregnancy (let alone a nonviable pregnancy). They do not understand that a majority of women who have late-term abortions are terminating desperately wanted pregnancies.

First, yes – the child should have had the chance to live, even for mere minutes. Life is precious, and forsaking minutes of it is an easy call to make on behalf of an innocent incapable of speaking in his own defense. Once we begin stating that pain and suffering justify the killing of the innocent, we’re in dark moral territority. 

Second, she doesn’t know that her child might not have lived.

Third, women all over America – and their husbands – understand that carrying a child is difficult. Being chopped up in the womb is somewhat more difficult, as it turns out.

Finally, it’s simply a lie that most women who have late-term abortions are ending “desperately wanted pregnancies.” The Guttmacher Institute has found precisely the opposite: women who kill their babies in the womb do so for the same reasons, regardless of the timing of the abortion. In other words, most women engage in elective abortion, even in the late-term situation.

Isaksen says her killing of her baby made her a better person: “Saying goodbye to our boy was the single most difficult and profound experience of my life, and the truth is, it has come to define me. Today I am a better mother because of him. I am a better wife, daughter and friend.”

Presumably, all people who justify their sins believe the same about the cruelties in which they participate.

Isaksen deserves nothing but sympathy for the tragedy of carrying a child with a birth defect. She deserves nothing but horror for championing herself as a moral paragon for pre-emptively destroying that life. And The New York Times and the political left deserve nothing but scorn for taking advantage of this horror story to make the case for the mass killing of thousands of unborn children.

|
  • DrArtaud

    Ben Who?

    After Shapiro’s comments about Trump, I’ve disowned Ben. A man with a squeaky girlish voice (I’m not the pillar of looks, believe me, but I have a deep voice, people often ask if I’m on radio).

    I can’t even bring myself to read the article. Ben, Constitutional Ben, that refuses to vote for or support Trump because Ben thinks that the purity of the Conservative party would survive 4 or 8 years of hillary better than 4 or 8 years of Trump.

    Of course Constitutional Ben doesn’t care about the Supreme Court appointments over 4 to 8 years of a hillary administration, and the expansion of abortion, homosexual marriage, imposition of social trends on religions, restrictions on firearm selections and outright bans (commonly known as “Infringements” otherwise forbidden by the 2nd Amendment), open door immigration and refugee access, etc.

    Yeah Ben, I flushed you as a serious Conservative spokesperson, your attempts to destroy Trump with Michelle Fields sickened me from the start. How’d that work out? You’re no better than hillary, I guess that’s why you see her as the appropriate leader for the uniparty.

    Ben Shapiro Explains Why He’ll ‘Never’ Vote for Trump

    In Ben’s own words:

    Am I willing to risk a Hillary presidency not to vote for Trump? The answer is yes. The reason the answer is yes is because I am not going to watch the only party that has a possibility of reflecting conservatism descend into this. I’m just not going to do it. I’m not going to be complicit in the death of the conservative movement at the hands of Donald Trump.

    Ben cares more about the “Conservative party” than he does America or Americans. And we thought he was smart?

    The following short video (Entitled: 300: Making America Great Again), not the best technically, but great for the story, reveals much, and Ben is featured at the beginning and end. I’m not advocating the harm that comes to the Ben near the end of this video, but see it figuratively, as a youngish Conservative formerly with fertile ideas that has become a male Megyn Kelly with fetid ones, that has become a “has been” by a series of unmasculine decisions. Maybe that’s why he can’t understand why Trump is immensely popular.

    300: Making America Great Again

    Learn to Love TRUMP in 12 Minutes or Less

    Donald Trump Ad – It’s time to Make America Great Again!

    Get out to Vote for Trump in November, and urge family, friends, and anyone else to do the same. From my workplace with well over 1000 union workers and adding to that union contractors, comes this. Never before in 24+ years have I seen a Republican the choice of the membership or such bumper stickers supporting the Republican go un-vandalized.

    Steel Workers for Trump