Committee to review implementation
of abortion policy July/Aug 98



Committee to review implementation
of abortion policy


By John H. Adams
The Presbyterian Layman

CHARLOTTE – An effort to ensure that the pro-life view gets a better hearing in denominational policies and communications won endorsement of sorts from the 210th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA).

The commissioners did not, however, approve the recommendation of their Committee on Health Education, which would have ensured a balanced review of the denomination’s policy along with consultation by the independent Presbyterians Pro-Life (PPL).

Instead, they voted to have the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) review implementation of 1992 General Assembly’s narrative on “Abortion and Problem Pregnancies,” with no particular reference to ensuring a pro-life strand in the review.

Narrative recognizes two views
The 1992 narrative affirms the right of choice, but it also affirms the pro-life view and opposes abortion as a method of birth control. Presbyterians Pro-Life has complained that official statements and publications by the denomination’s agencies and Washington lobbying office have consistently presented only the pro-choice side.

The General Assembly’s Health and Education Committee approved an overture calling for review of denominational resources by a task force appointed by the General Assembly Council and comprised of two pro-life members and two pro-choice members. That task force would have met annually with a representative of the PCUSA’s Women’s Ministry Division and Presbyterians Pro-Life before submitting a report to the 212th General Assembly.

But the commissioners rejected that proposal and instead approved a motion that makes the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy the watchdog.

Undue influence alleged
Doug Mitchell, a Boston minister who served on the Health and Education Committee, submitted the motion that was approved by the commissioners. Noting that “roughly 80 percent of Presbyterians have a pro-choice position,” Mitchell said pro-life Presbyterians were trying to exercise undue influence on the denomination.

Mitchell also opposed pulling up a chair for PPL at the review table. “As an independent organization, they are not bound by policies of the church.’’

The Rev. Alan H. Landes of Denver defended the Health and Education Committee’s overture. “I believe I speak for the committee when I say that we have a strong concern for balance.” He reiterated that the General Assembly narrative is sensitive to both the pro-choice and pro-life views, and that the committee believed it important to bring both sides together in reviewing implementation of the narrative.

But one commissioner strongly opposed participation by PPL, or any other independent group, in the review. “If we asked Presbyterians for Lesbian and Gay concerns to sit down at the table … I think there would be a hue and cry.’’

Example of differences
An example of the differences in views about abortion occurred during the Health and Education Committee’s hearing and debates.

One debate focused on a phenomenon called “post-abortion syndrome,” in which women encounter severe depression and health problems even years after having an abortion. Several members questioned the scientific reality of post-abortion syndrome and said studies showed that women rarely suffer physically or psychologically because of an abortion.

One physician said that after 1.5 million abortions in the United States women are at no greater risk from the procedure than having a shot of penicillin. He quoted former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, who, though “no friend of abortion,” found no scientific evidence for continuing depression or health problems.

Recent research cited
But Terry Schlossberg, executive director of PPL, countered that Koop based his assessment on now-outdated findings. “In the late 1980s, Surgeon General Koop investigated research done to that point. His findings were that very little research had been done.”

Since Koop left office, Schlossberg said, several studies have been made that show that many woman have suffered severely as a result of having an abortion. She cited a study in Norway that demonstrated a significant rise in suicides and attempted suicides. Schlossberg said studies in the United States are also confirming the validity of post-abortion syndrome.

William Wilberforce - 19th century abolitionist Actor/director John Eldredge portrayed 19th-century abolitionist William Wilberforce at the Presbyterians Pro-Life dinner buffet. A member of Parliament and a devout Christian, Wilberforce devoted more than 50 years of his life to ending slavery in England. Although a critic insisted “humanity is a matter of private conscience,” Wilberforce refused to consider slaves less than fully human and called abolition “a principle above everything political.” In the last letter he wrote before his death, John Wesley encouraged Wilberforce, “Unless God has raised you up to be Athanasius contra mundum, you will be worn out by the opposition of men and devils. But if God be for you, who can be against you?”
Actor/director John Eldredge portrayed 19th-century abolitionist William Wilberforce at the Presbyterians Pro-Life dinner buffet.
Photo by Ron Rice

The Presbyterian Layman, July/August 1998 contents

Home, · Archives, · Breaking News,
History of the Lay Committee, · Letters & Editorials,
Book Reviews, · Resources, · Links