COLUMN: "Sheila's Choice"

From Debra Pickett's "Studs In Strange Places," Spring '92. Meet Sheila. She is a 16-year-old Philadelphia high school student. Last week, she found out that she was pregnant. Today, she made two decisions. First, that she wants to carry the baby to term, and second, that she wants to complete her high school education. According to Ralph Smith, a University law professor, Sheila's decisions will require her to make 27 different contacts in 18 different agencies, all of which are located in different areas of the city. Transportation alone becomes a logistical nightmare. Add to this the limited hours of various assistance organizations -- for example, pre-natal check ups are available only from nine to ten in the morning Tuesday through Thursday, while she has school -- and it is nearly impossible for Sheila to accomplish both of her goals. A failure of bureaucracy? Perhaps. It's easy to shake our heads at Sheila's predicament. She's in a tight spot. Something ought to be done. But then we turn away. She is, after all, 16. If she has to drop out for a while, she'll have time to put her life back together. For all of our well-intentioned sympathy, Sheila is still very far removed from most of us. We'll never be in her position. Or will we? What if Sheila were a 19-year-old Penn student, a friend of yours? What could she do? What advice would you give her? In the bad old days, it was thought that if a woman used her brain too much, her uterus would shrivel up and become useless. Although no one says that anymore, using both one's brain and one's uterus is still a difficult task. The higher education system in the United States is structured so that young mothers simply cannot participate. When a young woman has a baby, her educational career -- at least for a while -- is functionally over. Just as Sheila has to face huge organizational and bureaucratic obstacles, so too does the pregnant Penn student. In order for her to be enrolled at the University, she must have health insurance. In order for her to receive public assistance for pre-natal care, she must lack health insurance. Which does she chose? Should she manage to get the health care she requires and deliver a healthy baby, what next? Should she choose to remain on campus, she may apply for "non-traditional" status to live in Grad Towers. Next, she'll have to find child care to cover the time she spends in class and doing homework. Hypothetically, it can be done. But hypothetical isn't good enough. The simple facts show us that it's virtually impossible. Abortion rates among college women are the highest of almost all groups. This is why. This is structural sexism, the institutional restriction of choice. As biology would have it, women get pregnant. Men don't. A man can father a child -- in the biological sense -- and continue his pursuit of education without a problem. Historically, this has clearly not been the case for women. It is illegal to discriminate against pregnant women, or women planning to be pregnant, in the employment market. Why is this not true in the world of education? Thousands of students rallied in Washington to support reproductive freedom for all women. But "choice" as it exists on college campuses is a lie. The only choice that exists is one between the use of brain and uterus. I'm not sure that that's what the pro-choice students had in mind. It's true that you can't change biology. Women, not men, have babies. But you can change the system. The system is based on biological determinism. It's true that, as a woman, I have the physical capacity to have babies. This has implications on my entire life. Because of this one biological fact, I can expect my educational career to end at any point and my career mobility to be affected. Whether I am in college or in the career world, I can expect that if I become pregnant and have my baby, I will be punished. That's not real choice in any sense. That's being a prisoner of biology. This can change. We can make pre-natal care and child care available to women in college and in the career world. Attitudes can change. Pregnant women and new mothers can participate in intellectual life. Their brains don't shrink. It's time that the University of Pennsylvania recognizes this. If University officials were restricting pregnant students' access to abortions, the pro-choice activists would be protesting. But they, along with the pro-life activists, seem to miss the fact that reproductive choice is restricted here and elsewhere by the structural sexism that makes motherhood virtually impossible for undergraduate students. College women -- even Penn women -- get pregnant. It happens. Perhaps this is a social problem, but it's still a fact. Acknowledging this fact is the first step in ending the institiutional restrictions on choice. We must move past the archaic notion that motherhood and scholarship are mutually exclusive. We must facilitate choice -- real choice -- for pregnant women at Penn by offering care both during and after pregnancy. This would benefit University women, and make the University a more receptive and just place. It seems to me that this is in the interest of pro-choice and pro-life thinkers alike. We could promote real and educated choice; at the same time, women morally opposed to abortion wouldn't be getting them out of necessity. The real point here, however, is larger than "pro-choice" or "pro-life." The point is that biological determinism -- discrimination against women based upon their ability to bear children -- must end. · Debra Pickett is a freshman English major from Franklin Township, New Jersey. Studs in Strange Places appeared alternate Mondays.