Essay in Rochester, NY local paper about the 95-10 Initiative (NYS)
——————————————————————————–
From this morning’s Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.
Urge Abstinence, Adoptions
(January 22, 2007) — Many analysts believe that despite the pro-choice gains netted by the Democratic Party in the 2006 election, that the election outcome was more a statement about our country’s dissatisfaction with the Iraq war than a referendum on abortion.
Still, not one Democratic incumbent who was pro-life lost, and six pro-life Democrats were added to Congress. And, not one Republican who is pro-choice was re-elected.
If the tide is changing, Gov. Eliot Spitzer should consider support for a New York version of the 95-10 Initiative. Sponsored by Democrats for Life of America, this plan is intended to reduce the number of abortions by 95 percent in 10 years by promoting abstinence, personal responsibility, adoptions and support for women and families facing unplanned pregnancy. Tennessee and Michigan introduced similar initiatives in 2006. Other states plan to work on the legislation in 2007-08.
In their book Take It Back — Our Party, Our Country, Our Future, James Carville and Paul Begala advise Democratic candidates to pay less attention to pro-choice special interest groups and agree that the goal ought to be to reduce abortions.
The 95-10 Initiative would empower women, support pregnant women and protect unborn children by encouraging adoption, making the adoption tax credit permanent and giving women with unplanned pregnancies counseling information on adoption. It expands the Women, Infants and Children program, which gives nutritional support to new moms and their babies. In all, the 95-10 Initiative lists 17 policy proposals to reduce the number of abortions. We challenge Gov. Spitzer to adopt the 95-10 Initiative as part of his “One New York” policy agenda. Women and children in New York state would greatly benefit; abortions in New York would sharply decrease.
On this, the 34th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, 54 newly elected congressional representatives pledged bipartisanship while serving in the 110th Congress. Could this bipartisanship occur within the moral framework of a slowly evolving pro-life electorate? If so, we could see new respect and protections for the vulnerable victims of both war and abortion.
This seems to be what the voters want; the result would be a better America, a better New York state, and a Democratic Party that just might take back the presidency.
Amato, of Greece, is a board member, Democrats for Life of New York State; Payne is president, Democrats for Life of New York.
And I reponded:
Eliot Spitzer
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
518-474-8390
Dear Governor Spitzer,
I just read an essay in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle regarding NY State 95-10 Initiative which has me very concerned. As quoted from the article:
“The 95-10 Initiative would empower women, support pregnant women and protect unborn children by encouraging adoption, making the adoption tax credit permanent and giving women with unplanned pregnancies counseling information on adoption. It expands the Women, Infants and Children program, which gives nutritional support to new moms and their babies. In all, the 95-10 Initiative lists 17 policy proposals to reduce the number of abortions. We challenge Gov. Spitzer to adopt the 95-10 Initiative as part of his “One New York” policy agenda. Women and children in New York state would greatly benefit; abortions in New York would sharply decrease.”
Oh, dear Governor, please tell me that you are able to see though the misinformation that you are hand fed by the ProLife contingencies.mother They pawn off on you nothing but wishful thinking.
First off, nothing has ever shown that increased adoption education reduces the number of abortions.mother The two do not go hand in hand. Abortion is a reproductive choice where a woman is empowered to decided if she wants to continue a pregnancy.mother Adoption is a parenting “choice” made after the initial reproductive choice. Often months after, the time frames alone make it impossible to exchange one “choice” with another.
What helps to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the numbers of unintentional pregnancies. As you well know, this is done with education, access to birth control, increased health care, reduced pharmacy rates, and then more education and public awareness. NY would make a more well founded investment in their dollars providing these services to prevent pregnancy.
Once an unplanned pregnancy occurs, a woman and child are much better served by increased social policies that enable her to be able to successfully parent her child, rather than abort or be unnecessarily separated from that child though adoption. Again, better health care recourses, improved job opportunities, low cost and subsidized day care, educational opportunities and low income housing will make her much more confident that she can be a good parent. We should be supporting and honoring the mother child bond and making children a priority, not punishing woman for having sex and being failed by birth control by removing their children from them. Women mostly terminate or surrender child based on economic limitations in their lives. Removing a child does not improve the situations in their lives, only increases their grief and loss. The great majority of women who “choose” adoption desperately want their child, but are lead to believe by the industry that profits form them that they have no choice.
The adoption tax credit, while sounding good and benefiting those who wish to adopt, do not benefit a unborn child slated for adoption. Yes, it does encourage prospective adoptive parents to consider adoption from foster care, but for the yet unborn, the monies saved in the tax credit are better off going to the natural biological mother so that she may keep her child. Increasing the tax rates, as currently proposed by the federal government will only increase the fees demanded by agencies as was done with the latest increase to 10,500.00. Anyone involved in the adoption industry has noted this and an increase is frown upon by the noted Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute.
Adoption education is terribly skewed. Please, I beg you, before New York, as a state, endorses such an institution as the great white hope to decreasing abortions, look into the real facts about what adoption will do to both mothers and children. Agencies have not been forthcoming regarding the risks and ramifications to relinquishing mothers. Women considering adoption do NOT make an informed choices based on real facts and risks. There is greater regulation for drug ads on TV and plastic surgery than for a permanent separation from ones blood and a life altering decision. The National Council for Adoption, an agency lobby group,mother which was federally funded millions in grant money to develop adoption awareness training, has produced nothing but propaganda. I know, I have a copy of it. There is no regulation for adoption advertising, and having the “counseling” done by this who would profit by the transfer of parental rights is an outright conflict of interest.
As a life long NY citizen, and as a mother who has both lost a child to adoption, underwent medical terminations of pregnancies, and successfully parented three young New Yorkers, I can tell you that the greatest single regret I have in my life was losing my oldest son. It was completely unnecessary and has done no benefit, but to create great grief and continuous loss for my whole family. I was not told of the risks to me or my child, only the benefits and made out to be the great answer to all. I was enabled and encouraged to deny my child’s father his right to parent by unethical means.mother And to this day, there is still a great black hole in my life. Having experienced all…parenting even when difficult is much more rewarding, abortion much less upsetting, and adoption the single most detrimental force on my life.
Adoption is one of those things that looks good on paper, like Communism. There is a great need for major reform in the industry before it can be deemed as the answer to anything. Please do not allow NY to promote something that has such a huge lack of ethics and morality, zero regulation, blatant false advertisement, and withholds pertinent information from those it claims to help. I belong to several international and national organizations to educate and promote reform in the adoption community and, even while emotionally effected by it, can defiantly offer you more fact based information with a more objective agenda then what is fed to you by anti woman enthusiasts. Do not think for one second that adoption empowers women. It forces woman to become un mothers, negates their humanity and treats them like breed cows. Adoption aborts the mother.
I will be lobbying in Albany on February 6th, 2007 with Unsealed Initiative, the group supporting bill #9823, which will unseal adoptees original birth certificates. I would love to present to you some of the important information you should have before promoting adoption as a state initiative to benefit it’s citizens. Until then, I suggest that you look to New Zealand for a better model of what adoption laws and legislation should be. Also, there is great information on the internet from non agency affiliated sources: The Evan B. Donaldson “Rights and Well being of Birthparents in Adoption” is a great place to start. I also suggest the web pages for www.OriginsUSA.org, especially the research areas as they have the known scientific studies on the long term effects of relinquishment.
I hope that providing these truthful views and education materials can be of some benefit to your understanding of adoption issues and also for the thousands of women and children in this great state of ours. Please feel free to contact me at any time at this number ******.
Yours sincerely,
