Back in February, my family had a dual celebration. We celebrated both my sister-in-law’s birthday and my son getting ready to move out to Colorado for a new job. A very ordinary celebration, and yet extraordinary too. Extraordinary because neither of the guests of honor would have been there if it were not for the ability to access advances in medical science.
You see, I was only able to have my son, 23 years ago, thanks to In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). And my sister-in-law had just celebrated her one-year anniversary after having received a stem cell transplant treatment for acute leukemia. Now, as we approach another election, these and other medical advances that could help countless others are again under attack.
One risk to many in our country is to be denied access to the same care that so helped my sister-in-law. You see; to have a stem cell transplant, a person first must undergo treatment with very strong chemotherapy that completely wipes out their stem cells. Stem cells are found both in bone marrow and in fetal tissue. If a pregnant person is diagnosed with leukemia, they either must terminate the pregnancy to have this life saving treatment or delay the treatment until the end of the pregnancy.
Acute leukemia is a very aggressive disease, many will not survive the nine months that it takes to carry a pregnancy to term. And yet, in about half of the states in our country, a pregnant woman diagnosed with leukemia won’t have the right to determine what decision is best for her own health.
Leukemia is but one example of several serious medical conditions in which optimal care cannot be administered during pregnancy. Still others, such as those with a pregnancy complication or maybe in an abusive relationship cannot consider an abortion to save their own lives. Anti-abortion politicians say that there are medical exceptions, but the laws are written either so vaguely or so restrictively that doctors caring for the most complicated patients are unable to use their medical training and judgement to be able to offer their patients the care that they need. At least, not without fear of arrest and/or loss of their medical license.
There are politicians up and down the ballot this fall (even here in CT) who suggest that there can be a political compromise. Insincere politicians who found it politically advantageous to previously support the fall of Roe and previously openly supported abortion bans at various gestational ages, now say their ok with each state deciding what medical care can be allowed within its borders.
Some politicians offer to have “carve outs”, a list of conditions in which abortions may be allowed, but a simple list cannot possibly account for all possible conditions in which abortion should be considered. A list is not a replacement for the compassion, knowledge and judgement of a trusted medical professional. Others suggest a 15-week abortion ban is a “reasonable” compromise. But that would put patients whose condition is diagnosed after this gestational age at risk. When an individual’s health is being considered no patient should be forced to accept a “compromise.” Everyone, in every state, should be able to choose the best possible health care that is available. This includes access to abortion.
And then, there are some anti-abortion politicians who were “surprised” that the policies they have promoted would be used to prevent couples from being able to have a child using IVF. Although many are now scrambling to have yet another “carve-out” for IVF, they miss the point.
To have to say that the decision to undergo IVF should be between a patient and their doctor is stating the obvious. We don’t have to say that the decision to undergo an appendectomy or to start on medication to treat high blood pressure should be between the patient and their doctor. Healthcare involves a physician making a diagnosis, discussing treatment options and the patient deciding which option is best for them. Like surgery, prescription medication and IVF, abortion is also healthcare. The decision for all healthcare treatment options should always be between the patient and their physician, this includes abortion.
Access to IVF and stem cell transplants allowed my family to have a truly extraordinary-ordinary celebration. My hope is that families across our state and our country can have unlimited access to their own extraordinary-ordinary days. For that to be able to continue to happen, we all need to support candidates who don’t think healthcare should be compromised. They need to commit to supporting continued medical and scientific research and access for everyone to comprehensive, compassionate, and scientifically based healthcare in our state and in our country.
We, as voters need to support candidates who are committed to access to all healthcare options to every person in every state in our country.
Maryanne McDonnell lives in Bolton.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
