In 1977, I was 2nd Lieutenant in the Army assigned to Medical Company C, which we called “Charlie Med” at Fort Richardson, Alaska. Sergeant Parenza (name changed), knocked on my door one afternoon and asked if she could talk to me about one of her Soldiers, who was pregnant out of wedlock and had three previous abortions. The young lady, visibly distressed, came in with SGT Parenza to explain her situation. She told me about having three previous abortions, saying she didn’t want to have another one but didn’t know what else she could do.
Without much hesitation, I asked why she didn’t want to have another abortion. She described the distress and deep depression she felt after each abortion and said she didn’t know of any other choice at those times or now. She was clearly showing her stage of pregnancy at that time so I figured she had been struggling with this decision for some time. Her income level was very low as a young Private in the Army and she was required to live in the barracks where only single Soldiers could live. She couldn’t afford to live in an apartment and didn’t have anyone to help her. She was clearly in a deep personal and professional crisis.
I wasn’t an advocate for or against abortion at that time but I was taught and believed that all human life is sacred. I also knew that there were organizations that were set up to help women with crisis pregnancies. I told her that SGT Parenza and I would look into some possibilities and would let her know what we found out.
A few days later, we met again and gave her the information about organizations who could help her keep the baby or give it up for adoption, if she so chose. The look on her face was disbelief and she immediately asked me,“Sir, you mean I don’t have to have an abortion again?” I told her, “No, Sophia, you do not have to have an abortion, if you don’t want to." I could sense deep relief, if not hope, as she left my office, elated and with a huge smile on her face.
A number of months passed and I had a knock on my office door at “Charlie Med” one morning. In walked the young Private (Sophia) holding a beautiful little baby girl. She said to me: “Sir, remember when we talked last and you said I didn’t have to have an abortion because there were people who would help me? Look at my baby! They helped me. I can’t believe I am holding her right now!”
It was an absolutely priceless moment and it was one of those “signature experiences” in my life that solidified me in my beliefs. I may have been nothing more than an instrument of hope in a crisis moment for this young Soldier, but the experience has affected me for life, as it did herholding that beautiful precious baby girl.
Seared into my mind, from that experience, was the desire to give hope for life-affirming alternatives to women caught in such crises, especially in today’s society where the right to choose almost anything — “for me” — is the dominant determinant over an issue so important as:choosing life for a defenseless child in the womb. This young Private stepped beyond her immediate needs and decided, over all other frightening issues, to give that baby the chance for a full life. After seeing her beautiful baby girl, I was reminded graphically, that the voiceless, defenseless person in a difficult pregnancy — the unborn child — must be considered and valued – in itself - if we are to remain a just society.
This is controversial in today’s society, but we must ask ourselves a central question: Is the emphasis almost exclusively on the woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy, therefore compelling some to make that selection because they don’t see alternatives? Could we not reduce the urgency to terminate a pregnancy and rather increase and promote life-giving, healthy opportunities for women's access to life-affirming alternatives? Too often, perhaps because the unborn child cannot speak, possibly to dull the potential guilt of terminating the child’s life, or perhaps because we cannot be assured of the future; we reduce choice to what it does for the distressed mother and we therefore fail to weigh-in the “life cost” to a defenseless, silent, invisible son or daughter. That is, in fact, what they are — a son or daughter.
The “Value Them Both” amendment to our Kansas Constitution on the ballot on Aug. 2. isn’t something earthshaking, but it does bring the issues of life, death, quality of care, support for women, and a potential voice for the most defenseless, to the vote of the people through the officials they elect. It then rests upon us to exercise our own vote to elect responsible and accountable legislators.
I will support the Value Them Both amendment. May we always champion to support life of both the mother and the child and assist them throughout their lives for their good and the good of all!
Allen Schmidt, Hays