The ethics of using photos of aborted fetuses, and where do they come from?
posted by: Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux 38 days ago
Last week was Respect Life Week on my campus. Needless to say, as the president of the pro-choice group, this is not my favorite week of the year. But I also enjoy the challenge of trying to reach out to people on the opposite end of the political spectrum; among other events, I attended a dinner where I tried to steer the conversation away from personhood and on to how we can actually reduce the numbers of abortions (because isn't that what we all really want, when we stop casting it in terms of murder?).
The pro-lifers had created a display of photos of fetuses at different stages of development and placed them outside the student center, in one of the highest-traffic areas of campus. Mid-week, I noticed that a few of them were gone. It turned out that the posters had been vandalized, torn off their plywood mounts. "Debate with words, not soft-focus photography," was scrawled across one of the mounts in black ink.
Asked to comment on the vandalism, of course I said that I was disappointed that a student would resort to vandalizing another student's display in order to make a point. People on my campus have a lot of trouble owning their words and actions, and I think action was reflective of that unfortunate tendency. But I've also been thinking about the use of these photos of fetuses - and the ones that are far more extreme than the ones used by my campus' pro-life group, the photos that depict aborted fetuses. These photos scream from billboards, pamphlets and bus sides; they were infamously pasted to murdered pro-life activist James Pouillon's protest signs. The New York Times' "Lens" blog had an extremely interesting piece on October 9 about how these photos are taken. It got me thinking about the ethics of using these photos for the purposes of activism.
The author of the blog post, Damien Cave, talked to a woman who had intimate experience with retrieval and photography of aborted fetuses, Monica Migliorino Miller, a professor of theology at Madonna University and the director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society. Migliorino Miller had at one point been in possession of boxes of aborted fetuses that she had retrieved, along with other pro-life activists, from a loading dock in suburban Chicago. These were later buried by pro-life activists in a service presided over by the archbishop of Chicago. She has also found aborted fetuses in dumpsters behind Chicago and Michigan abortion clinics, leading to investigations (in the case of the Michigan clinics) of the companies' removal processes. It was these incidents that inspired Migliorino Miller to start taking pictures of the fetuses. “We felt it was very important to make a record of the reality of abortion,” she said.
She defended the protesters' right to use the images, saying, “In order to see the humanity and beauty of something so small, you have to enlarge it,” she said. “Otherwise, the baby is invisible and dismissed.” Her views on the use of the images has evolved, saying that she doesn't think they're appropriate for deliberate direction at children because they can't "intellectualize" them.
To me, however, the use of images of aborted fetuses smacks of the language in the recent Oklahoma law that will require doctors to post information online about whether anesthetic was used during every abortion performed in the state, or whether a "live baby" was born from the abortion. Inevitably, it privileges fetal rights over maternal rights and does not acknowledge the fact that most abortions take place during the first trimester, when the fetus does not remotely resemble the photos of late-stage abortions that are commonly used by protesters.
What was most shocking to me, though, was that sometimes these photos don't even depict aborted fetuses. One of the most famous photos used by the pro-life movement is of a fetus named Malachi, found in Dallas in 1993 (trigger warning: the linked photo of Malachi is extremely graphic). The fetuses were "put together" by a Dallas doctor; there is footage (not available online) of the doctor weeping as he did so. What's left out is the fact that there was no date on the jar where the fetuses were found, or any evidence that the damage done to the fetus was not from simple decomposition. There is also no proof that Malachi was even an aborted fetus; "he" could have been miscarried.
This information, to me, is enough reason to stop using these images. They are incredibly powerful photos, which is of course why they're employed by the pro-life movement, but their effect is often to deter women from obtaining abortions, or to shame and guilt them when they do so. They also make an impact on legislators who make crucial decisions about a woman's right to choose. The idea that these images might not be of aborted fetuses, or even that they don't represent the vast number of abortions, is something that the pro-life movement needs to consider when they ponder the ethics of using these photos, something that I hope they do. My conclusion would be that these "guerilla" missions to retrieve fetuses from clinics are sloppy, and use sentiment to deny women their rights.
The pro-lifers had created a display of photos of fetuses at different stages of development and placed them outside the student center, in one of the highest-traffic areas of campus. Mid-week, I noticed that a few of them were gone. It turned out that the posters had been vandalized, torn off their plywood mounts. "Debate with words, not soft-focus photography," was scrawled across one of the mounts in black ink.
Asked to comment on the vandalism, of course I said that I was disappointed that a student would resort to vandalizing another student's display in order to make a point. People on my campus have a lot of trouble owning their words and actions, and I think action was reflective of that unfortunate tendency. But I've also been thinking about the use of these photos of fetuses - and the ones that are far more extreme than the ones used by my campus' pro-life group, the photos that depict aborted fetuses. These photos scream from billboards, pamphlets and bus sides; they were infamously pasted to murdered pro-life activist James Pouillon's protest signs. The New York Times' "Lens" blog had an extremely interesting piece on October 9 about how these photos are taken. It got me thinking about the ethics of using these photos for the purposes of activism.
The author of the blog post, Damien Cave, talked to a woman who had intimate experience with retrieval and photography of aborted fetuses, Monica Migliorino Miller, a professor of theology at Madonna University and the director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society. Migliorino Miller had at one point been in possession of boxes of aborted fetuses that she had retrieved, along with other pro-life activists, from a loading dock in suburban Chicago. These were later buried by pro-life activists in a service presided over by the archbishop of Chicago. She has also found aborted fetuses in dumpsters behind Chicago and Michigan abortion clinics, leading to investigations (in the case of the Michigan clinics) of the companies' removal processes. It was these incidents that inspired Migliorino Miller to start taking pictures of the fetuses. “We felt it was very important to make a record of the reality of abortion,” she said.
She defended the protesters' right to use the images, saying, “In order to see the humanity and beauty of something so small, you have to enlarge it,” she said. “Otherwise, the baby is invisible and dismissed.” Her views on the use of the images has evolved, saying that she doesn't think they're appropriate for deliberate direction at children because they can't "intellectualize" them.
To me, however, the use of images of aborted fetuses smacks of the language in the recent Oklahoma law that will require doctors to post information online about whether anesthetic was used during every abortion performed in the state, or whether a "live baby" was born from the abortion. Inevitably, it privileges fetal rights over maternal rights and does not acknowledge the fact that most abortions take place during the first trimester, when the fetus does not remotely resemble the photos of late-stage abortions that are commonly used by protesters.
What was most shocking to me, though, was that sometimes these photos don't even depict aborted fetuses. One of the most famous photos used by the pro-life movement is of a fetus named Malachi, found in Dallas in 1993 (trigger warning: the linked photo of Malachi is extremely graphic). The fetuses were "put together" by a Dallas doctor; there is footage (not available online) of the doctor weeping as he did so. What's left out is the fact that there was no date on the jar where the fetuses were found, or any evidence that the damage done to the fetus was not from simple decomposition. There is also no proof that Malachi was even an aborted fetus; "he" could have been miscarried.
This information, to me, is enough reason to stop using these images. They are incredibly powerful photos, which is of course why they're employed by the pro-life movement, but their effect is often to deter women from obtaining abortions, or to shame and guilt them when they do so. They also make an impact on legislators who make crucial decisions about a woman's right to choose. The idea that these images might not be of aborted fetuses, or even that they don't represent the vast number of abortions, is something that the pro-life movement needs to consider when they ponder the ethics of using these photos, something that I hope they do. My conclusion would be that these "guerilla" missions to retrieve fetuses from clinics are sloppy, and use sentiment to deny women their rights.
Read more: abortion, womens rights, aborted fetus, pro life protesters
comments
we do worry about them, pray for them and try to help them. why don't the pro choice people do the same .
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
"Almost 11 million children die before their fifth birthday each year. Malnutrition and hunger-related diseases cause 60 percent of these deaths."-CARE
Why don't you pro-lifers worry about saving these children. Or the ones that are abducted and murdered or sold for sex or labor. Stop judging others and trying to push your beliefs on everyone else.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
have you ever thought about what would happen if nobody ate meat?
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
My God - the majority of you make me damn sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't get me wrong I don't think abortion is right by no means but I also don't think it is wrong if the baby was to have severe complications or something like that!
You are all so busy shouting that it is a life, but for God's sake, have you ever stopped to think about all the millions of poor animals that get killed everyday for meat - for humans???
And I do not for one second believe that all you anti abortionists are vegans!!! THINK ABOUT IT FOR A MINUTE!!!!
As you all keep saying, a life is life, whether it is a humans or an animals!!
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
i didn't say existed, i said accepted.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
"Life in the womb,,Is called a (babe or (baby (GREEK-BREPHOS)This is the second-most-common new Testament word for a baby"
And what year did they start using it?
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
"if abortion wasn't mentioned in the bible, then how do you know it was accepted in biblical times"
Abortion existed way before biblical times.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Life in the womb,,Is called a (babe or (baby (GREEK-BREPHOS)This is the second-most-common new Testament word for a baby,It is always used for that which is a HUMAN INDIVIDUL SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM ITS MOTHER (LUKE 2:12.16:ACTS 7.19( God Term For The UNBORN )
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Parent, If you've had an abortion,Your aborted child is in heaven right now,JESUS said you can destroy a person's body, But not their SOUL.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
The proponents of late-term abortions don't want anyone to think that a viable human being is being destroyed. Is it wrong to show photographs of premature babies? Six month pre-term babies are routinely being saved and it is becoming more common for 23 week-old babies to live after placement in intensive care. We need to educate women and men about human development and rethink about the morality of saving one child at 23 week and killing another. We also need to be aware of abortion methods. According to a British nurse who has participated in late term abortions: nurse who has worked on late terminations - a procedure she describes as 'horrific' - she uses the crisp language of feminism rather than the biblical rhetoric of pro-lifers: she supports a woman's right to choose in early pregnancy, speedier access to abortions where necessary and better contraception, including the use of three-year contraceptive implants for young women. is a stage when a foetus is a foetus: it's a multiplying mass of cells.But there comes a point where that foetus takes on human characteristics and human feelings and human sentience. We know it's fully formed, we know it responds to a mother's voice and to music.'
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Facebook account:
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
1274637