I cannot remember the last time I heard of a wealthy celebrity dying from an abortion procedure. Can you? Yet illicit abortions and limited access to reproductive care put the lives of underprivileged women in jeopardy every day.
For more than thirty years, Kermit Gosnell allegedly performed illegal abortions in a poorly run clinic in West Philadelphia. On Jan. 19, he was formally charged with the murder of a woman and seven infants. The news media has called Gosnell a monster, his clinic has been termed a “house of horrors,” and both sides of the abortion debate — pro-life and pro-choice — have chimed in.
However, few have taken a hard look at Gosnell’s clients — who were predominantly poor and immigrant women — or how Pennsylvania’s lack of affordable providers played a part in making Gosnell a viable option for family planning services.
One of Gosnell’s alleged victims was Karnamaya Mongar, a 41-year-old mother of three. Five months prior to meeting Gosnell, Mongar moved to the United States with her family after spending almost twenty years in a Nepalese camp. She was therefore dealing with a new language, culture and way of life, while also attempting to be a self-sufficient member of society. Because refugee support services — including the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program — start terminating after six months, Mongar did not have much time to spare.
Regrettably, this is where doctors like Gosnell come in. They take advantage of women who have nowhere else to turn. Five months after moving to the U.S., Mongar died due to complications from the procedure.
Unfortunately, Pennsylvania does not provide much assistance for women seeking abortion services, especially those with low incomes.
First, according to 2008 statistics, 82 percent of Pennsylvania counties have no abortion providers — which means that women who cannot afford to travel across the state must save not only for services but also for transportation.
Second, physicians, nurses and other hospital staff can refuse to perform abortions for moral, religious and professional reasons. Therefore, extra research must be done to find a provider. This is not always an easy step for those who do not have access to a computer or may not speak English.
Third, women cannot get abortion care in a state-run healthcare facility unless the procedure is necessary to save their lives or they are victims of reported rape or incest. Again, women must have the resources to look for — and pay — private facilities.
Lastly, abortions are not covered in state-sponsored health insurance. Of course, this insurance is what low-income families receive through Medicaid.
Many have used this case to explain why abortion should be illegal. They see Gosnell as the figurehead for a procedure that should not be allowed to happen in the first place. Instead, pregnant women should simply raise the child or use adoption services.
Sadly, things are not always so black and white. We all know that raising children can be a huge financial burden on a family, especially those whose funds are already stretched thin.
Additionally, not every child put up for adoption finds a home. White children are five times more likely to be adopted than are children of color.
For these reasons, having access to all forms of family planning services are critical. These services ensure that women receive frequent gynecological exams, are educated on birth control and other contraceptives and — should an unplanned pregnancy occur — have a right to choose whether they wish to continue the pregnancy.
It is truly disturbing that Gosnell’s greed made him take advantage of women in desperate need of support. Under no circumstances should he have been performing abortions on women in a facility that was unsafe, unclean and had not seen a health inspection for 16 years.
At the same time, it is important to think about the women who frequented his clinic and why Gosnell became their only alternative to childbirth. For these women — for whom money was already limited — there were no other providers to talk with or perform legitimate procedures.
It is in times like these that we must re-examine policies that limit the rights of low-income families. Reworking Pennsylvania’s family planning policies would be a good place to start.
Anita Gooding is a 2012 Master of Social Work candidate at the Penn School of Social Policy & Practice. Her e-mail address is goodinga@sp2.upenn.edu.
