What One Woman Saw After Her Abortion

This woman, who calls herself Jane, took pictures of the aftermath of her abortion to demystify abortion and to show what a "baby" really looks like after an abortion at six weeks.  There are no feet or hands.  There is nothing but blood and cells, as one can see from the pictures on her site.  It is nothing like what you see on those fake pictures so many anti-abortion people propagate.

My intention in documenting and sharing my abortion is to demystify the sensationalist images propagated by the religious and political right on this matter. The images of lifeless fetuses are used as propaganda in the prolife/prochoice debate in which individual women and their bodies are used as pawns to push a cultural, political, and religious agenda in the United States.

At 6 weeks of pregnancy, my abortion looked very different than the images I saw when I entered the clinic that day.

No, the doctor did not chop or shred the baby in the process of removing it.  It was just cells and barely a blimp on an ultrasound before the abortion, nothing more.

Valerie Tarico confirmed she saw the same thing after her abortion, which she does not regret either.

They say that the walls of Dr. Tiller’s clinic are lined with letters from grateful families.  I can understand that gratitude.  Whenever tirades against abortion catch my attention, I look at our elder daughter with wonder and gratitude.  Without abortion she wouldn’t exist, and if I knew where to find the warm Canadian-trained Singaporean physician who gave us the gift of Brynn, I would send her one of those letters, too.

…

Who do you know who wouldn’t be here if a brave doctor hadn’t made a moral commitment like the one that cost George Tiller his life?  What do those fundamentalists think keeps someone like Dr. George Tiller working behind bullet proof glass after being shot in both arms?  The gifts of life given by an abortion provider are hard to measure, but I think that Dr. Tiller knew.   I hope they publish those letters in a book.

Anyway, the photos the woman took of her abortion are interesting to say the least and a lot safer than prior Roe v. Wade.

Mriana

Mriana is a humanist and the author of "A Source of Misery". She has two grown sons and raises cats. She enjoys writing, reading, science, philosophy, psychology, and other subjects. Mriana is also an animal lover, who cares for their welfare as living beings, who are part of the earth. She is a huge Star Trek fan in a little body.

More Posts - Website - Twitter - Facebook

  • Deborah_B

    This is very timely, considering those "moving billboards" that will be visiting a number of cities. I think it's the pictures of hands, feet and so forth that get people upset about abortion.

    I personally had no idea what an abortion looks like. This was very educational.

    • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

      I thought it was timely, as well as educational, too and I'm glad she posted those pictures. I left her a message thanking her and a link to this article I wrote about her pictures. Hopefully she appreciates it.

    • http://wevehadenoughohio.com/ WHEOhio

      I knew exactly what it looked like, and for so long I've regretted not photographing my own abortion. I've volunteered in the same clinic that performed my procedure – but of course, it would be entirely unethical to ask a patient for permission to photograph anything to do with her procedure. (!)

      I've waited for the day when real abortion photographs hit the internet. I couldn't be happier to see the lies and propaganda blown out of the water.

  • http://www.facebook.com/valeree.braz Valeree Braz

    "Whenever tirades against abortion catch my attention, I look at our
    elder daughter with wonder and gratitude. Without abortion she wouldn’t
    exist, and if I knew where to find the warm Canadian-trained
    Singaporean physician who gave us the gift of Brynn, I would send her one of those letters, too"

    Did I miss something here??? Without abortion, her daughter wouldn't be here? I'm pretty sure she would still be here if abortion didn't exist, babies are what happens when you don't terminate…

    Seriously?? Did I miss something?? Am I reading it wrong??

    • Kim

      Protip: Read the article. If that doesn't work, yes, you are missing something. It's called reading comprehension.

      • http://www.facebook.com/valeree.braz Valeree Braz

        It's called sarcasm, hag.

    • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

      You missed the fact that she conceived again only a few months after she aborted the other. Said child would have been a totally different child, not the one she has now. Thus, she would not have been born.

      • anna powers

        Good to know that somehow she just KNEW the aborted child would have been not worth the beating heart it had when it was ripped out of her womb…. honestly, if she hadn't aborted the other child and had kept it, she would have learned to love him or her just as much as the child who does exist, and she wouldn't know the difference. She certainly wouldn't be sitting around trying to rationalize a miniature human life as a "clump of cells". I am a nursing major, and a textbook can verify that it is a biologically inaccurate load of BS used to salvage her conscience.

        • jakyl

          you're disgusting, anna. Even if you learn to love said child, maybe you cant afford it, maybe its a rape baby, maybe your life is in danger if you were to deliver. and as for adoption, it fucks people up. besides its not a child, its a loose grouping of cells you dumbass,

          • Mike

            Well, if she couldn't afford that one, why did she get pregnant again just a few months later? What makes Anna disgusting? Cause she disagrees with your opinion on the subject matter… I think that's pretty disgusting, and makes you the dumbass… Good day!

            • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

              Again, it wasn't that she could not afford the child. It has to do with quality of life and not quantity, as well as cell division. It wasn't even a child at that point.

          • http://www.facebook.com/valeree.braz Valeree Braz

            Those cases are few & far between, most women get abortions because they don't want to have a kid right then. If you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex.

        • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

          I agree that statement is disgusting, because IF she had that child, neither she nor her husband would have careers to support their family and she never would have had healthy children. Besides, that child, if it managed to be born, had a high chance of dying too. Rationalizing? Really? Is that what you think? She's not rationalizing. She's telling her story so that people will understand the need to keep abortions legal. Biologically inaccurate? Go back and reread you textbook, dear. It was a clump of cells.

          • Mike

            She got pregnant a few months after her abortion….
            That doesn't make any sense!
            Anna is right… How can she abort one CHILD, then get pregnant a few months later, keep that one and be happy? Chances are too much isn't changing in a few months…

            • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

              Yes, it does make sense when her and her husband are trying for a healthy child. The first pregnancy, the cells did not form right in which to create a child that is capable of having a quality life. The second pregnancy the cells development worked as it is suppose to in which to create a child with a quality life.

              Maybe those who do not understand need to research and study cell development. Your baby, when it was first conceived never did look like a human. It literally was a clump of cells that was separating and dividing. This cell division eventually leads to something that looks human, but could also be a chimp or a gorilla. It is the DNA sequencing, if their is no error in the coding, that decides what the ultimate outcome of all the cell division becomes.

              Of course, to those who do not understand cell division and DNA sequencing, I am probably speaking Greek and therefore you don't understand enough to know that the first baby would have been so deformed that it would have no quality life, but the second one was not and would have a quality life. Quantity of life is not always as good as quality. One can have all the quantity of life, but if the quality of it is not so good, then living that life is not so great for the person who has to live it. Just because you give a child with severe MR life, doesn't mean you actually giving them a wonderful gift.

        • http://www.houseofbetazed.com Mriana

          What beating heart? I don't think you understand cell development or what happens when cell development goes wrong at all.

  • Pingback: Pro-Choice: Pro-Choice vs Anti-Choice | Timid Atheist Rambles