Re: letter from David Walters

Dear editor,

I am very aware that the "legal" or "medical" name for this procedure is D&E. The intial author used that term. I also know what it (D&E) is, and what it does. No changing of the names is going to change what actually happens during the procedure.

I chose to use a personal experience approach rather than pure logic. And I, like hundreds of thousands of other pro-life people, have NEVER condoned violence -- and no, I didn't sleep through Sunday School either. Such comments obscure the issue, and prevent real dialogue. As Jesus said, "look to the log in your own eye..." As an aside, Mr. Terry has been aquitted of all charges, and his name has been cleared. It was proved that the charges of violence by him or the protests he led were based on false testimony. It's also been proved (and documented) that most of the testimony used to drive the Roe v Wade case originally was also false, but pro-abortion people never seem to care...

Secondly, Mr. Walters is right. My other degree is not medical. It's in molecular and developmental biology, and my research prior to entering ministry focussed on "reproductive and endocrine metabolism" (BTW that's how a woman becomes ready for pregnancy, and how she reacts during pregnancy -- particularly with regard to hormonal responses). Still, I consider myself fairly well informed. I will look for the sources I remember putting into print that such a procedure as D&E is never medically necessary, however legal. I truly believe it came from a medical organization (either the AMA or American Gynecolgical Society, or something like that). If I am wrong, I will gladly own up.

I do know several lawyers and gynecologists. They all agree it (D&E) is legal, but never necessary to save the life of the mother. And as we all know, just because something is legal doesn't make it right. Personally, with my background, leaving aside all theology, you will never convince me that dilating a woman's cervix and partially delivering (or "extracting") the baby BREECH (that's legs first!) is ever going to be safer than other options. Even the procedure where they crush the fetus' head in utero, and take it out a piece at a time is safer. The trauma, however, is much greater on the fetal organs and musculature and ruins it for most research purposes. This is a biological fact, having to do with traumatic physical stress, and the release of various toxins, hormones, and neurochemicals at death.

Finally, I stand by what I said as far as early detection of developmental disorders and defects. There are many different procedures out there for determining such things, from blood tests for alpha-fetal proteins to actual amniocentesis and genetic screening. The pregnancy should never have to go that late if the mother (or couple) is going to consider abortion.

I don't consider what I said to be ranting; perhaps those who disagree automatically assume that anyone who does, is. If there are published documents or journals that do state unequivocably that D&E is ever the medical procedure of choice (other than to harvest fetal parts and cells), I would love to have Mr. Walters give me those. I would like to read them, find out who funded the authors, and what their primary research focus is.

I say again that condoning this procedure, in particular, hurts the witness of the church. If folks would like to have a reasoned, "theological" debate, I would be happy to oblige.

In Christ,