fb-pixel Skip to main content

Hypocrisy, contradiction, middle ground, battleground in Roe debate

The US Supreme Court in Washington.STEFANI REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images

Make way for the tragedy of unwanted children

Thank you to Yvonne Abraham for her column “GOP seeks to distract” (Metro, May 12). We should underline the glaring contradictions in the positions of the antiabortion movement.

Barney Frank, the longtime Massachusetts congressman, decades ago said, “The Moral Majority supports legislators who oppose abortions but also oppose child nutrition and day care. From their perspective, life begins at conception and ends at birth.”

As a forensic social worker many decades ago, I found that these “throwaway kids,” as the term was used then, who were neglected and abused in families who didn’t want them or who were ill-equipped to care for them, often ended up in the custody of the Department of Children and Families, by way of the juvenile and probate courts.


We need not look any further today than the presumed death of 7-year old-Harmony Montgomery, where both Massachusetts and New Hampshire were supposed to be protecting her.

In the topsy-turvy world of now, where lies become truths and truths become lies, without abortion rights, tragedies like this will become much more frequent.

Ruth T. Segaloff


Opposing forces need to find ways to reach, and hear, each other

While I am dismayed, if not entirely surprised, by Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, I believe that this is not a cause so much for panic as for an adjustment of strategy. Assuming that, indeed, abortion rights will be left to the states, I envision a two-pronged approach, with one prong focused on lobbying blue states to pass legislation legalizing abortion if they have not already done so.

As for the second prong, there has to be a new approach to the states outlawing abortion. Their electorate cannot be treated as hateful troglodytes incapable of compassion — that, I suspect, is how they see the abortion rights constituency. Instead, a starting point might be a respectful appeal using real-life cases of young teens and preteens who were impregnated through rape and for whom pregnancy and childbirth would be medically, physically, and emotionally unwise, and cases where the life of the mother is at risk. Limit the policy goal to the first trimester. Small steps. And always, listen.


Anger and despair are not our allies. Time and patience, patience and time. We will get there in the end.

Phyllis Schacht


Are these the anti-maskers revealing themselves?

I am disheartened to read about the draft opinion of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. I would hope that all of those anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers who were so vocal in their objection to those mandates would stand up now to protest with their slogan of “My body, my choice.”

Susan Probolus


Back in business of transporting women from one state to another

In 1971, I met a Cincinnati entrepreneur named Joe who flew women from Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana to New York for legal abortions. Joe had a thriving business before Roe v. Wade.

With more than 25 states having already restricted abortion or planning on doing so if the Supreme Court further limits a woman’s right to choose, 21st-century “Joes” must be poised at the prospect of being back in the business of transporting women to states where abortion is accessible.

Paul L. Newman

Merion Station, Pa.