.jpg)
Sarah Palin Admits She Considered Abortion
Categories: Pregnancy & Birth, Celeb Parenting
Click the image to see more shots of Sarah Palin and her family. Photo by Win McNamee, Getty Images
It was an shocking confession from the former Vice-Presidential candidate, a staunch pro-life advocate who once said she'd oppose abortion even if her own daughter was raped. Trig's prenatal testing shook her, said Palin. "....Just for a fleeting moment I thought, 'No one knows me here; no one would ever know.' ... My amniocentesis came back and then I understood why some people would think they could change their circumstances, just take care of it. Todd didn't even know (the test results)."
It wasn't only the fear of developmental delays, though. Palin admits she wasn't sure she wanted to become a mother again at age 44. "Plus, I was old," she told the crowd. "And I thought, 'Very funny, God. My name's Sarah, but my husband's not Abraham, he's Todd.'" Palin, in the thick of her career, said she had a hard time imagining "putting down the BlackBerry and picking up the breast pump."
Palin Family Album
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her husband Todd have five children with short, masculine and certainly unique names: Track, 19, Bristol, 18, (with Levi Johnston), Willow, 14, Piper, 7, and Trig, 8 months (not pictured). Read More
Fredy Perojo, AOL
"We both love each other," Levi Johnston, 18, told the AP in a rare interview about his relationship with 18-year-old Bristol Palin. "We both want to marry each other. And that's what we are going to do."
Paul Sancya, AP
Levi Johnston called himself a "redneck' on his MySpace page.
Justin Sullivan, Getty Images
Sarah Palin initially hid her pregnancy with Trig from the public, causing rumors that Trig was her grandson via Bristol.
Win McNamee, Getty Images
Gov. Sarah Palin, her husband Todd, and daughters Bristol,16, right, and Piper, 5, at the end of a 2006 inauguration ceremony in Fairbanks. Palin, 42, is the first female and youngest governor of Alaska.
Al Grillo, AP
"Trig is beautiful and already adored by us," read a statement by the Palin when Trig was born on April 18. "We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed."
Paul J. Richards, AFP / Getty Images
"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned," the Palins's statement said when they announced her pregnancy. "As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows that she has our unconditional love and support."
Robyn Beck, AFP/Getty Images
Chuck Heath, 70, (pictured with wife Sally), Sarah Palin's father, said gift boxes for his newest grandson are piling up in the governor's mail room from all over the world. There's no way the family will ever be able to answer every letter, he said, although they are trying.
Charlie Neibergall, AP
Then-Republican U.S. vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, her daughters, Piper, Willow, and husband Todd walk out onto the ice to drop the ceremonial first puck before a St. Louis Blues and Los Angeles Kings hockey game.
Whitney Curtis, Getty Images
Sherry Johnston, Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston's other grandma -- besides Sarah Palin -- pled not guilty for charges of selling OxyContin. "I was in pain, and I'm still in pain," she told People.com.
Al Grillo, AP
There are few people in America who feel ambivalent about Sarah Palin; it seems either you adore her or she makes you want to stick sharp, pointy things in your ears. And it was her stance on abortion, I think, that was one of the biggest issues that alienated her from other women. Though these comments were meant to energize her pro-life supporters -- she did choose "life," after all -- I wonder if they'll make other women look at her in a different light. She's a mom who got bad news while she was pregnant with a baby she wasn't sure she wanted. Her feelings were very human, and her admission to them took courage.
There are some who will take Palin's comments and use them to support her unrelenting views on abortion. And that is certainly their right. But here's what I think: Sarah Palin did make a choice. No matter how briefly she considered it, she looked carefully at the options given to her and then weighed them, one against the other. And then she chose. The reason she had a choice in the first place was because she lives in a country where abortion is legal.
I respect Sarah Palin for her honesty. I think she opened the door -- whether she meant to or not -- to a more empathetic conversation with her statements. She's told women, "Yeah, I get it. I understand what it's like to be there, to be afraid, to be unsure." But what she's yet to do is show support for programs that could prevent unplanned pregnancies to begin with, or to admit that other women deserve the options that she had. Where she takes the conversation from here -- with her voice and with her vote, remain to be seen.
Is it possible for abortion to be discussed in a thoughtful, empathetic way? What do you think? And what do you think about Palin's comments?
Recent Posts
- Reviews: What's New This Week (11/06/2009)
- Jim Carrey's "A Christmas Carol" Creepy in a Good Way (11/06/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (11/06/2009)
- Babies Pick Up Mothers' Accents In The Womb (11/06/2009)
- Recall: Adventure Playsets (11/06/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mihir 4-21-2009 @ 3:59PM
this should be fun ...
Reply
Karen 4-22-2009 @ 8:51AM
The fear and feelings associated with finding out your are unexpectedly pregnant are not the result of having a choice. Those feelings exist even when there is not the option of legal abortion.
There are many of life's situations that we can momentarily wish there was another option. That doesn't mean that we ought to legalize bad choices. For those of us that believe abortion is terminating life -- there IS NO CHOICE. That doesn't mean we can't have feelings, but our brains override how we feel and we do the right thing despite how we feel.
We are not victims of our feelings. We do not have to act on emotion. We should choose to act on well thought out opinion. If it is life at conception, then abortion is murder. If it is not, then it is irrelevant. For those of us that are sure it is life, there can be no justification for abortion (including rape). That doesn't mean that there aren't moments when we wish life's circumstances had been different. That doesn't mean that women that choose abortion don't have a hard choice, just that those of us that think it is murdering an innocent child think it is the WRONG choice.
Reply
Karen 4-22-2009 @ 1:19PM
Melissa -- I've heard all of the "examples" of cases where it is ok to terminate life, and you aren't going to be able to come up with an example that changes my mind.
It isn't a high horse, it is a well thought out, full of life experiences decision.
The situation you described, and others like it are horrible, but it does not justify taking a life in my opinion. If you want a different opinion = have at it. There are plenty of arguments on both sides and I doubt either of us are going to shed new light on the subject.
However, I was addressing the issue in this particular article. Sarah Palin thought of abortion. I don't think she had those thought because abortion is currently legal. I think she had those thought because it is human nature to have such thought (and others like them) when faced with unexpected challenges. Most people think of the "what ifs."
EH 4-22-2009 @ 4:09PM
I respect your opinion if, in fact, you consider life at the moment of conception in all forms...i.e. - Many against even early term abortion have a problem with what they term as "killing a child" but have no problem leaving unused embryo's frozen in petri dishes or "disposed of" after sucessful invitro......same stage of development so what's the difference?
If the belief in God does not allow a pregnancy termination from the moment of conception then the same belief should apply to infertility...example - Octo Mom didn't want to "play God" and insisted on using all of the embryo's...maybe her God didn't intend for her to have them in the first place...
I personally believe their are instances where abortion is acceptable and even preferable...as with anything, it is not a black & white issue.
Sarah Palin's admittance of the thought falls under the category of "abortion because of inconvenience"...not a life threatening situation, incest or rape.
The bottom line to me is it doesn't really matter why someone get's an abortion but when...other then religious based views, the first trimester is a time frame that fits more into the category of potential of a child rather then A child. Having had one early term miscarriage I have never entertained the idea of mourning an actual child...it was a sadness of the possibility of what could have been...the potential of having a child. Having a six year old now reinforces that feeling even more that the miscarriage I had was the potential and not actual child. That was Nature's way (not God's) and if I had needed a lot of fertility help I would have gone that route AND left the additional embryo's unused.
Karen 4-22-2009 @ 4:24PM
I have the same concerns about embryos that are disposed of. I am opposed to purposefully creating them and them destroying them.
Look, I totally get wanting to have an abortion in certain circumstances and I totally get the joy of someone that is unable to have a child experiences because because of invitro fertilization, surrogacy, etc.
But I'm not ever going to believe that deliberately taking steps to end a life is the right thing to do. I can understand the motivations and the desperation at times, but I'm not going to be convinced it is right.
And I certainly understand that the level of relationship is far different with an unseen child than a child of any age that you have held, nurtured etc. But it has nothing to do wtih when I define life.
But my point is not whether or not abortion is right or not. I just don't think that Palin considering abortion has a whole lot to do with whether or not it is legal. I think it has to do with dealing with unexpected circumstances.
bromac 4-22-2009 @ 12:23PM
If she had paid any attention to current research, rather than playing cheerleader, she would have known the risks of down syndrome after age 40 and made the appropriate decision at that point to use contraception if she did not want a child with a disorder.
Reply
steff hartman 4-23-2009 @ 7:30AM
So harsh, Bromac! Sometimes contraception fails....and I would never want to be in the limelight, like politicians and celebs always are! Although I don't think I would ever have an abortion, I cannot say I was always overjoyed to be pregnant. A pregnancy I lost, came at a time when we were stressed and already had 2 children close in age. Thankfully, we live in a country that, at least right now, allows us freedom to make choices. The media and government should stay out of the whole abortion issue. It should be the mother's choice and Sarah Palin's choice is no one's business...not newsworthy.
P. T. 4-23-2009 @ 3:13PM
Looks like Sarah had pro choice. Enough said.
SKL 4-22-2009 @ 1:36PM
I'd hate to tell you all the things I've momentarily thought about doing to my daughters that shouldn't be legal!
I'm glad Ms. Palin was honest. There is no real basis for the argument that her pro-life positions mean she has no compassion. Would it be logical to say that everyone who is against infanticide has no compassion for mothers with post-partum depression? That same illogic has been applied by the liberals to deny Ms. Palin a fair hearing in this regard.
The pro-life stance is a compassionate one. It believes that parents, boyfriends, abortionists, and others should not be allowed to pressure/coerce a girl or woman into having an abortion. It believes that a parent's economic, educational, or racial background are not grounds for denying any child the right to try his own hand at success in this world. It believes that rape and incest should not be swept under the rug by a convenient procedure blotting out the evidence and leaving the culprit free, but must be prosecuted most aggressively. It believes that real consequences are most likely to deter irresponsible behavior that breaks down both the body and the self-esteem. It believes that the world is a better place for the diversity we naturally find within it. A large percentage of pro-life individuals have experienced an unintended pregnancy or a child known before birth to have significant special needs. Do pro-choicers really think they have no understanding / compassion? Or are they just jumping on a bandwagon without thinking at all?
Reply
Darcy 4-23-2009 @ 8:10PM
I am pro-choice, but conservatively so. I know of a woman who had a late-term abortion of twin boys. At six months along. This is wrong. If the fetus is viable outside the womb, the doctor should be required to perform a Caesarian. However, having known rape victims, I can tell you that forcing them to carry a child to term would physically make them sick. The thought of bearing a rapist's child makes you want to throw up until your guts come out. Rape has enough consequences without adding a pregnancy into it! Also, what about all the women who are peri-menopausal? I am 47, and can still get pregnant. The last thing I need right now, or ever, due to my age, is a baby! If I got pregnant, I would have an abortion. Too bad if you don't like it. I'm in no shape to become a mother. The final question is, "Who has the right to force a woman to carry a child to term?" Why? What about the woman's privacy? And her rights? People have sex now well into their old age. You're going to condemn a lot of married women and their husbands, if you think a woman approaching menopause should be forced to carry a child, if she were pregnant. Again, too bad on you.
Emily 4-22-2009 @ 2:45PM
Sarah Palin did state during the campaign last fall that she would never impose her beliefs about abortion on others, so she clearly is pro-choice; she just does not believe abortion is the right choice for her, which is fine.
Reply
Stephanie 4-22-2009 @ 3:08PM
I have an unwritten rule about talking about abortion on the internet, but I'm going to break it just to make this observation:
Thinking about breaking into someone's house (or any other act) and then not doing it does not by extension mean that said person supports "choice" in breaking into houses.
I hear this same argument a lot when talking about Bristol Palin's pregnancy. I can consider all sorts of acts and my simply thinking about those acts does not automatically mean I am pro-people-being-able-to-legally-commit-those-acts.
Reply
Sandyone 4-22-2009 @ 3:26PM
Oh, I'm quite sure that she meant to open that door! Folks who are against abortion aren't just against it because they don't understand how difficult a pregnancy can be. We're not a bunch of crazed women haters. Most of us are regular people, remarkably similar to the regular people around us. We just happen to have a very strong belief that human life is sacred and the state should protect it, not allow it to be destroyed at will.
Palin was just letting everyone know that pro-lifers are not the caricatures that we have been painted. We *do* have credibility and *have* thought through our position. There is far more logic and reason to back up the pro-life position than there ever was or ever will be to back up the pro-choice position. Pro-choice arguments are based on points that science has proven wrong ("just a blob", "my body, my choice", "doesn't feel pain", etc.) and emotionally charged situations that rarely occur. "Tough cases make bad law". It was never more true than in the case of abortion.
I nodded in agreement (with Palin) as I read about this speech. Of *course* she searched for a way out of difficulty. That's human nature. Pregnancy can be scary. I've been prolife since I was a wee child. Back then, I thought women who killed their babies were unspeakably evil. As I've matured, I've come to understand how a woman might reach the decision to abort. I still think it's wrong, but I understand. All the understanding in the world won't ever make it right.
I know about hard cases, but no matter how tough the case is, the bottom line is that abortion stops a beating heart. It ends a life and it can never be a morally correct choice.
It's interesting that your take is that 'at least she had a choice'. Why is 'having a choice' held in such high regard? I'm all for choice when it doesn't cost one person his or her life, but the way our society reveres a woman's right to choose to kill her unborn child just doesn't make sense to me. Why is that choice such a great thing to have? Margaret Sanger, famous eugenicist, had a great marketing advisor..."just call it 'choice' and Americans will trample themselves to defend it!" (they actually did hire a marketing firm to help them sell the idea to the people)
Sadly, abortion is a legal option, open to anyone, no matter how much or how little they value unborn life. I look forward to the day when we consider abortion to be as unthinkable as we now think of slavery and the Jewish holocaust. It will still occur, but at least the majority of decent people will protest it and know that it is wrong.
Reply
Kathy 4-23-2009 @ 2:14PM
Melissa,
So, you are telling me it is ok to MURDER a child because a wrong was done to another? You are the one who needs to come down off your high horse. Two wrongs don't make a right. There is no such thing as pro choice, babies never choose to die. Abortion is a selfish cop out. Do you actually know the statistics of a woman becoming pregnant after she is raped or what about aborting a child because of the danger to the mother? So if she gets an abortion after a rape, this will only add to her turmoil. If she doesn't want the baby, there is always adoption. I have three daughters and two sons. They all feel the same way. An innocent life shouldn't have to be murdered, it is still a life.
Reply
Ellie 4-23-2009 @ 11:59PM
Kathy,
You're making it sound like if you're pro-choice, you automatically love killing babies. This is never the case. While if I personally was ever in such a horrific situation, I would most likely choose not to abort because of my own moral beliefs. However, I do not think these opinions should be enforced on anyone else. It's called pro-choice for a reason, not anti-life. Women should have the right to be able to choose what is best for them, particulary if it will benefit everybody in the end. I don't believe abortion is selfish. I believe that if you are incapable of taking care of a child or providing a happy and healthy life for them, but because of your own beliefs you force upon both parties a poorer life, that, in my opinion, is the true selfish deed.Maybe these embryo's never chose to die, but they never chose to be born either. It's always up to the mother for that to happen.
Anita 4-24-2009 @ 9:26AM
But yet, having an abortion is anti-life (otherwise known as murder).
mrspbh 4-23-2009 @ 7:54PM
Ellie,
What is your take on adoption? Abortion is shortsighted and can appear to be selfish. What about the choice to sacrifice for other human beings that are unable to have children? I can't imagine the pain that couples feel everyday knowing that they would have loved and respected one of the 4,000 babies whose body parts were put back together after an abortion to make sure "they got it all" and then were disposed of in the trash or ground up in a commercial garbage disposal. I placed a baby girl for adoption when I was a teenager and I am thankful that I don't have to live with the "choice" that I allowed her to be killed. She found me about 10 years ago and one of the first things the said to me was, "Thank you for not having an abortion." On her birthday, she sends me a gift for giving her life.
Reply
EH 5-03-2009 @ 1:16PM
Let's not pretend our Foster care system and adoption options are a fairy tale. Dysfunction, abuse and all of life's woe's happen to adopted children, as well.
A bigger issue in the Pro-choice belief is the right for girls of child bearing ages to be educated on their bodies, birth control and sex...that no girl / woman enters into the decision of having sex until she is capable and knowledgeable with all that goes along with this one decision.
Also, the view that no woman is denied the use of birth control due to not being able to afford contraceptives, not being educated on the need for contraceptives or not allowed to get them due to age restrictions.
Let's realize that if sex education and early contraceptive options for girls approaching child bearing age...(11 years old in some cases)...were not met with opposition by so many the abortion rate would be far lower. But these earlier options seem to also be an argued issue with Pro-life...I am confused by this....
Please help me understand why abstinence only seems to be the only preferred answer when so many clearly need other answers such as simple education...
mNm 4-24-2009 @ 7:09PM
I was not (and still am not) a fan of Sarah Palin politically, but I do respect her for being honest about what was going on in her mind during the pregnancy. I'm glad that she didn't lie or pretend to be the Perfect Conservative and say abortion never for one second crossed her mind.
Reply
Darcy 4-23-2009 @ 8:30PM
I need to clarify what I said. I believe that late-term abortions should be illegal. I saw a documentary on the Discovery Channel a few months ago depicting late-term abortion. There were pieces of baby's arms, etc., on a table. Late-term abortion is absolutely wrong and is murder. I believe that any medical person faced with a woman who wants a late-term abortion should legally be required to give her a Caesarian section. They should explain to her, "You're getting what you want - you're getting rid of it. But you're not killing it." She should not have a choice about this.
As far as earlier-term abortions are concerned, I believe that abortion MUST be legal, because of women's situations, etc. As I previously wrote, women can get pregnant into their 50s. Contraceptive failure could occur, and a woman who is either finished raising her children, or who would represent a high-risk pregnancy, would end up pregnant. Telling people not to have sex is not realistic. They are going to have it. And, what about all the married couples, for those who advocate "traditional morality?" People now have sex in their fifties and older, when they are married or not. Forcing midlife women to bear children would be a grave mistake.
Additionally, I must say that women's lives mean that abortion is here to stay. Women do not live at home with their parents anymore; they get their own apartments, etc. They enter careers after leaving high school or college. They have been taught that they count.
Making abortion illegal would only drive it underground.
There is a huge demand for it that simply will not go away.
Prohibition - the criminalization of alcohol in the last century - teaches us that turning the average man or woman into a criminal, by making something they want illegal - like liquor in 1918 - is not smart. Legislating morality has never worked, and never will.
Prior to Roe v. Wade, women used to join together to help other women who needed abortions. Abortion providers often did not provide medically safe abortions, and women faced a risk of death from sepsis or other causes, when they went to them.
Therefore, another reason for abortion remaining legal is to keep it safe, so that women will receive medically clean and acceptable care, without worrying about infection, perforation, or death.
Life teaches us that regardless of whether something is moral or not, people want it. Would you like alcohol to be illegal again, because I think drinking is immoral? That is what we must deal with. NOT taking it away from them. People WILL NOT "straighten out" just because something is made illegal. Those who believe the sexual revolution would be reversed if abortion were made illegal, do not live in reality. People are not going to stop having sex, just because you don't like it. Going to make it illegal, for unmarried people to have sex? Just try enforcing it! Doctors would go underground, to provide abortions, and women would continue getting them. Learn the lesson of history!
I might also say that prior to Roe v. Wade, anyone who had enough money could go to either Sweden or Switzerland, and get an abortion. I'm not sure which it was. So much for "forcing those b*****" to have those babies! (Yes, this is how it was described to me by a pro-life advocate. We should "make them have them." Sure.)
So, now you know what I think of all this. I understand why people, including myself, get upset and hysterical about it. It's an emotional issue. In my opinion, if the government were really concerned about it, they would mount a national contraceptive and sex education campaign. There are too many abortions. But making it illegal is not the way. Educating people to make responsible choices is.
Reply