Features
A humane doctor who helped women in their hour of greatest need
The attitude of society varies greatly. For example in Sri Lanka many a village girl had a child with no father claiming paternity. But in the higher reaches of the social ladder this was considered a fate worse than death and a disgrace to the entire family. In more developed countries it is now accepted.
Religions too vary in their attitude to abortion. I will only write about Buddhism and transfer the answer given by an erudite bhikkhu who was ordained after many years as a top official and familied man. His reply to my question went thus: “The straightforward answer is that it is an infringement of the first precept. However, the cardinal question is intention. Circumstances for abortion are varied. If due to one’s misbehaviour a woman becomes pregnant, her whole intention is to get rid of the growing fetus – intention of depriving life.
In the case of rape the pregnancy is unintentional and the moral question arises as to whether the woman should suffer for an unintended act. More than the intention of killing is the intention of not being shamed by society. If an abortion is due to medical reasons the consent may be given with a heavy heart. It’s a bit akin to sacrificing one’s limb for the sale of life. Buddhism is a pragmatic religion. There is no way of escaping the consequences of one’s actions but the intensity of the after effects (vipaka) depend on intention (chethana). Killing a mosquito and killing one’s mother are not the same, although both are killings.”
Governments have been concerned about the right to life and the correctness or illegality of abortion. In Ceylon/Sri Lanka rules were Victorian, so to say, totally against abortion which was illegal. Even consequent to rape it was not possible to have a doctor perform the abortion. But abortions were carried out illegally and mostly by quacks and thus with terrible after effects or death to the woman who wanted to be rid of the unwelcome fetus occurred. How else can a woman tolerate the result of rape by a rapist, or near rape by a husband totally unconcerned of the wife’s reproductive rights and the impossibility of enlarging an already economically depressed family?
Illegality vs legality
From accessing the free encyclopedia via Internet, I got the following:
“Abortion is illegal in Sri Lanka except when it is needed to save the life of the pregnant mother. It is punishable by up to three years imprisonment. Attempts to liberalize abortion law in 1995, 2011 and 2013 were unsuccessful.” (We are in the 21st century where hopes are to land humans on Mars and AI is transforming the digital sphere. In the vital area of the need of a woman, we are still in the Iron Age if not the Stone Age!)
The quote adds: “One 1998 UN report estimated an abortion rate of 45 for every 1,000 women of reproductive age. Despite the law, mifepristone and misoprostal can be purchased under the table at many pharmacies. (Also internetted and found these two drugs “are used to end an intrauterine pregnancy through ten weeks gestation.”)
There is an addendum to the ruling. “Under the guidelines for post-abortion care issued by the Ministry of Health in 2015, any woman who undergoes an abortion can seek medical care for complications at any government facility without fear of prosecution. (Small mercy, but how many know of this?) Abortion needs to be legalized.
In the US, the question of the right to life and abortion have been hotly debated and laws promulgated. Deaths have resulted; doctors who performed abortions to save the life of the mother have been threatened and clinics forcibly closed down. Then in 1973 was heard the landmark Roe v. Wade case when the Supreme Court ruled to establish a constitutional right to abortion, based on the right to privacy.
It was a case challenging Texas laws that criminalized abortion. The plaintiff, Jane Roe (pseudonym for Norma McCorvey) argued that these laws violated her constitutional right to privacy. “The Court in a 7-2 decision agreed with Roe, holding that the Constitution protected a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion. This ruling effectively legalized abortion nationwide.” USA gave a woman her reproductive right.
But, here’s the BUT. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in the case of Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, (in Mississippi) ending the constitutional right to abortion. “The decision returned the authority to regulate abortion to individual states, leading to a patchwork of laws across the country, with some states banning abortion and others maintaining access.”
All the above is the introduction to my topic this Sunday. I write of the life and death of a particularly humane doctor who recognized the suffering undergone by women in being impregnated and not wanting a child; it being impossible for her to have the child, usually being unmarried or totally repugnant of her rapist or having too many children already in the family.
Hale Harvey – Merciful to women in dire need
I was sent the obituary of Dr Hale Harvey III by Emily Langer in The Washington Post of March 18 with title Physician transformed abortion care in US before Roe v. Wade.
He established in 1970 in New York one of the first major abortion clinics in the US with a few others doing the same. These clinics served thousands of women and expanded reproductive rights by demonstrating that abortions could be safely, humanely and affordably provided out of hospitals. This was before the ruling of Roe v. Wade, so they were not safe and there were protests and even attacks on clinics and medical personnel.
Dr Harvey was trained in philosophy as well as medicine and public health and helped to transform the practice of abortion in the US during his brief and often controversial medical career. His most significant work for women was in the 1960s when abortion across the country was illegal. In the 1970s many States, including New York started liberalizing the law. His clinic in Manhattan gave him much kudos and prominence, neither of which he needed or sought. Then it emerged that he had been performing abortion surgery without a license. He had surrendered his license in 1969 in Louisiana, his home state, after authorities discovered that he was providing abortions in defiance of state laws.
He was born in New Orleans on December 12, 1931, to a rich clan but his family was poor and he saw how women suffered unwanted pregnancies. Hence him studying public health and moving to being a medical conscientious objector, believing that women had the right over their own bodies. He received his BA in philosophy in 1955 and a medical degree in 1966 from the State University of Louisiana and a Masters in public health and PhD in philosophy from New Orleans Tulane University in 1969. Born Christian he tended towards atheism.
Dr Harvey’s Manhattan clinic worked all through the week with 24 doctors providing about 100 abortions a day. Charge was $200 per procedure but dropped to $125. Women in dire straits paid $25 or nothing. Cases were taken in when it was ensured the women were having the abortion of their own free will and needing it. They were cared for psychologically too. After Roe the clinic served as a blueprint for clinics across the country.
In 1972 he left the US for the UK and settled down with family in the Isle of Wight. He and wife Helen Cox divorced but his daughter and son were devoted to him. He went to England to settle down because he admired the country’s National Health Service and enjoyed BBC.
He continued working in public health. He bought an old mansion called Puckaster Close and offered free boarding to those in need, enjoying philosophical conversations. In 2014 his home burnt down. He died on February 14 this year in Dorchester, England, after complications from a fall. He was 93.His humaneness and concern for troubled women was immense. One insisted on decency was never to look down even on an irresponsible woman.