A Friend Stopped By | 07/13/2009 12:00 am

How My Decision About a Late-Term Abortion Affected My Marriage, by Alice Eve Cohen

The author of the searing new memoir What I Thought I Knew speaks about the most important decision she ever made.

By Alice Eve Cohen

Alice Eve Cohen

Janet Charles Photography

Editor’s Note: Alice Eve Cohen is the author of What I Thought I Knew, just published by Viking. A solo theater artist and playwright, she is the recipient of a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts, and is a teacher at the New School in New York City.

Ten years ago, Michael and I had an emotional turning point that nearly jeopardized our marriage. I was 44, he was 34, and we were engaged. I was facing the terrifying possibility of a late-term abortion, with one week to decide.

When I was 30, I was diagnosed as infertile. My doctor told me that I could never get pregnant naturally, and strongly cautioned me not to attempt pregnancy with fertility treatment, as I would never be able to carry a baby past six months. So at age 44, when I started to feel sick, my various doctors attributed my ailments to early menopause and other conditions related to aging. Six months, numerous X-rays, CAT scans, prescription hormones and a slew of doctors later, I was raced to an emergency CAT scan for a large abdominal tumor — which turned out not to be a tumor at all. I was six months pregnant.

I desperately didn't want to have this baby, and I hated myself for not wanting it.

I’d had no prenatal care, the fetus had been subjected to six months of tests and treatments, which were known to cause birth defects and other injuries, and I had every reason to believe that the baby would suffer further debilitating injury from premature birth. I wanted to terminate the pregnancy, but at 24 weeks, said my doctor, it was too late for an abortion in New York State.

I desperately didn’t want to have this baby, and I hated myself for not wanting it. I had been unhappy before, but I had never thought about killing myself. Now I began to think of suicide as my way out: the only way to end the pregnancy, and the best solution to protect the unborn baby from a life of pain.

Michael came with me to see an abortion specialist. "Since you’re contemplating suicide, you could have an abortion in Kansas, where, if the mother’s life is in danger, an abortion is legal up until the 28th week," he told us. "Seven days from today." At my request, he scheduled an abortion in Wichita for the following Tuesday. "Think about it for the next few days before you decide," he said. Then he turned to Michael. "What do you think about all this?"

"Me? Oh, Jesus … a lot of different things," Michael answered. "I’ve seen Alice in the throes of this terrible unhappiness, and I don’t recognize her. I’ve been politically in favor of choice, but uncommitted on the personal side — it’s been an abstraction. But now that this is suddenly so real, all I can think is that there’s a baby. Our baby. My baby. And I can’t stand the thought of this baby being aborted. So If Alice has an abortion, I won’t go to Wichita with her. And I might not be here when she gets back. I’ll have my own unbearable sorrow about losing this baby, about endorsing this decision. But I don’t want Alice to kill herself. So she should do what she needs to do."

I spent the week wrestling with this impossible decision. On the day before I was scheduled to fly to Wichita, Michael begged me not to have the abortion. "I’ve already decided to have the baby," I said. Michael thanked me and burst into tears.

For the past ten years, this turning point moment in our relationship — Michael acknowledging my right to choose, but telling me he might leave me if I had the abortion — has remained a largely unspoken but crucial shared memory, equal parts rift and bridge between us.

367 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

SHOULD have just as much right to say what happens to that child as the woman does.

i disagree - he has no control over her body. he gave up his right to decide for his sperm when he let it loose. if he doesn’t want a woman making those kinds of decisions, they need to talk before they have sex about these potential consequences, or he needs to get a vasectomy.

I don’t think arguing for man’s right in regards to a pregnancy is akin to saying that women and children are property.

how is it NOT? that’s exactly what it is… someone else controlling another persons body and medical decisions.

What I often see quoted is men taking exes to court, because the woman decided on her own to abort a child for her own reasons, w/o consulting the father

oh how DARE she believe she has rights over her own body!

i thought you said the woman wasn’t his property? if she isn’t his property, why exactly do these men feel they have MORE say over her body?

Arguing that men have no rights in regards to a pregnancy because they can’t carry the child is a lazy and fallacious argument

it is neither of those things… if he had a uterus, i would never say a woman has any right to decide what he does with his body.

what’s lazy is your non-argument.

By Amanda C on 07/13/2009 5:58 pm

e-mail alert

Personally, I don’t think that every man has the right to determine whether the girl he knocks up keeps the child or not. Granted, if the two are in a commited relationship, then he should definately be involved in the decision making. But if the pregnancy is a result of an accident, then by all means, she should have every right to do what she sees fit. But, and now here’s where it gets sticky, if she decides to go through with an unwanted pregnancy because HE doesn’t want her to abort it, then rather than giving the baby up for adoption, she should sign over her parental rights to him and let him take care of the child. After all, if he’s so adamant about forcing her to keep the baby, then he should be prepared to take care of it himself. Not her. Because most children don’t fare well with a parent who never wanted them in the first place. I mean, if most men can father a child and then walk away from it and leave the mother to raise it on her own, then why can’t a woman walk away from a child she gives birth to and leave the father to raise it on his own? And, as the mother of a teenage son, that is one important lesson the he will be taught. That if he’s going to convince his pregnant girlfriend not to abort just because she doesn’t want it, then he should be ready to take care of it on his own.

By Ruby Stewart on 07/17/2009 6:20 pm

e-mail alert

I’ve noticed that any time a woman gives up her perental rights she is usually vilified WITHOUT knowing the full facts. I was friends with a woman who did sign over her parental rights to the father of the baby because she did not want kids. When it was found out in our small town all you heard about her was ‘is she on drugs?’ ‘did the courts decided that she was THAT bad of a person?’ ‘What is wrong with her to give up her child?’ and the last one that ended up with me getting into and argument in the local dinner with me defending the woman was ‘Well she must not be ANY kind of a woman just to give up that poor child to the father of all people’ Though there is nothing wrong with the father of the child in fact last I heard he was raising the child wonderfully. But the point is, that this is something I’ve noticed if a woman gives up her perantal rights she is vilified while if a guy does it he’s applauded. so if a woman gives birth to a child she doesnt want she is then vilified for ‘walking away’ from that childs life.

By DJ Dirr on 07/27/2009 12:11 pm

e-mail alert

Women in society are always vilified when it comes to the choices she makes regarding children. Something’s wrong with them if they don’t want kids. They’re out of their mind if they have more than 4 kids (even that can seem like too many in some circles). They’re selfish if the decide to hire a nanny. (Remember the woman who was vilified when her child was killed by an au pair?) They’re too old fashioned or not liberated enough if the decide to become at-home moms. Many women are looked down upon if they’re seen breastfeeding in public; and those who formula feed are considered as not wanting the best for their children. And let’s not EVEN talk about discipline. So, as a woman in today’s society, it seems that no matter what decision we make, we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. Personally, we all know why we make the decions we make — good or bad. It’s just that we’re put down by those who don’t agree with our choices without knowing the reasons behind them. The worst part — those who put us women down because of our decisions are other women.

By Ruby Stewart on 07/28/2009 12:06 am

e-mail alert

it is complete nonsense, messy, i agree.

why exactly do people think someone else but me can make my medical decisions?

if a man doesn’t want a baby or doesn’t want to give up his rights to his sperm, he needs to keep the swimmers in his pants.

By Amanda C on 07/13/2009 5:52 pm

e-mail alert

Surely it’s not simply a matter of women’s choise always

it certainly is.

we fail to consider the men’s right to choose.

they do have the right to choose: for their own bodies.

my uterus is no one elses but mine. what part of bodily autonomy do you not understand?

that’s like me saying "what about my right to choose for my husband to have his kidney removed"?

By Amanda C on 07/13/2009 5:50 pm

e-mail alert

Not everyone sees a fetus as the same as a kidney. Some people see it as a person. Who happens to be occupying your uterus.

By Kelly F on 07/14/2009 7:01 am

e-mail alert

Kelly, these are the same folks who compared pregnancy to a hen (the man) merely offering up her (his) eggs and a pig (the woman) sacrificing her life for someone’s breakfast. I’ve never thought of motherhood as giving up my very life. But that’s just me, I guess.

By Deena B. on 07/14/2009 7:16 am

e-mail alert

and does another person have the right to force you to donate your organs, tissues, and fluids to keep them alive?

By Amanda C on 07/14/2009 1:30 pm

e-mail alert

I think there is a fundamental assumption that pro-choice people have, which is that fetuses are not babies, but organs. Given that assumption, then there is nothing wrong with abortion. But no one has ever convinced me, or a large number of people in this country, that a baby is not a baby just because it’s not viable outside the womb. It has a heart, and a brain, and brainwaves, and different genetic material.

As for giving up your organs for another person, it’s not the best analogy. It is unfair that 50% of humans can never be subjected to an unwanted pregnancy, arbitrarily saying that it is ok to end the life of a baby because the woman doesn’t want to be pregnant for a relatively short period of time doesn’t make sense to me. It would be nice if no one ever had an unwanted pregnancy, and yes it is unfair that some people aren’t at risk for that, but thats not a justification for killing. I believe there is one case where a person can be obligated to support another life with their body. With the exception of rape, the situation one person is dependent on the support of another is caused by the actions of one of the mother. Just because the situation is unfair to the woman who got pregnant compared to the man who impregnated her doesn’t mean that this should be rectified by killing the baby.

So yes, if it’s my child, because the only way to NOT donate those things would be to directly end their life.

While the baby/fetus debate is at the heart of all abortions, I was drawn to the comments on this article by the horrible assumption that in the case of disability, abortion is more justified.

By Kelly F on 07/15/2009 6:42 am

e-mail alert

which is that fetuses are not babies, but organs

absolutely not, i don’t think that at all - but i know a fetus is a fetus, and it becomes a baby once it is born.

i asked: does another person have the right to force you to donate your blood or organs to keep them alive? if your neighbor needed a lung or a pint of blood and you had a perfect match, do you believe the law should be able to force you to undergo surgery to save this persons life, or force you to donate your blood to keep him alive?

As for giving up your organs for another person, it’s not the best analogy

yes it is. to save another persons life, do you believe the law should force you to donate your organs or blood to save them? if no, then why does a fetus have more rights than anyone else? the woman has to donate the use of her uterus for 9 months, plus donate the use of her body to gestate, and donate her blood, fluids, tissues, DNA, ect… and then undergo a painful, long labor that may leave her with lifelong scars or even kill her.

It would be nice if no one ever had an unwanted pregnancy, and yes it is unfair that some people aren’t at risk for that, but thats not a justification for killing.

if you refused to donate your kidney to a person and they died, would you call that a killing?

With the exception of rape, the situation one person is dependent on the support of another is caused by the actions of one of the mother.

so you are for abortion in cases of rape? that fetus didn’t do anything, that fetus is still as innocent as any other fetus. why are you punishing women who decided to have sex, but forgiving women who were raped?

Just because the situation is unfair to the woman who got pregnant compared to the man who impregnated her doesn’t mean that this should be rectified by killing the baby.

but you would allow fetuses to be aborted if the mother was raped? but… the fetus did not do anything, they are just as innocent. the only difference is the mother was raped, and in another, the mother willingly had sex.

why do the actions of the mother have anything to do with who has the right to abort?

So yes, if it’s my child, because the only way to NOT donate those things would be to directly end their life.

what about a stranger who needs your kidney? should the law be able to force you to donate your organs to save him?

I was drawn to the comments on this article by the horrible assumption that in the case of disability, abortion is more justified.

any woman has every right to terminate her pregnancy for any reason whatsoever. thank god.

By Amanda C on 07/15/2009 4:08 pm

e-mail alert

No, but I don’t see anyone arguing for that here. I think a distinction needs to be made-in the case of a random or non-serious relationship, where the man isn’t an involved party, it should be the woman’s say. HOWEVER, in the case of a committed, long term relationship, BOTH partners should have a say. I would expect to be included in the decison for my husband to have a vasectomy, for example…because that could have an impact on my life. I would consider it a betrayal of trust if he just went and did it without at least discussing it with me. Nor would I expect any man to stay married to me, or in a relationship with me, if went and aborted his child without including him in the decision, because it is HIS child too…he was part of the process in creating it, he should be part of the process in deciding if we proceed with it or not.

That said, I also wouldn’t stay in a relationship with ANY man who demanded that I give him children, regardless of its impact on me, just because HE wants them. That is an immature, unhealthy relationship. I also don’t think that’s what was going on with the writer of this article. Her FIANCE (she wanted to marry this man and spend the rest of her life with him, he wasn’t just some random one-night stand) deserved some consideration in the matter.

By Elizabeth Newman on 07/15/2009 1:44 pm

e-mail alert

No, but I don’t see anyone arguing for that here.

that’s what forced pregnancy is - you are forcing women to donate the use of their uterus, their entire bodies, their DNA, blood, fluid, tissues, ect, to gestate and create and keep alive a fetus. it is the exact same thing as forcing a person to donate their organs or blood to save the life of another person.

HOWEVER, in the case of a committed, long term relationship, BOTH partners should have a say.

i was talking about legal laws, not personal relationship issues. i believe people should be totally open and honest with their partners: i am. i tell my partners i will not have children, i have no desire, and i will never give birth, regardless of if i get pregnant. it will be terminated, period.

By Amanda C on 07/15/2009 4:12 pm

e-mail alert

***that’s what forced pregnancy is - you are forcing women to donate the use of their uterus, their entire bodies, their DNA, blood, fluid, tissues, ect, to gestate and create and keep alive a fetus. it is the exact same thing as forcing a person to donate their organs or blood to save the life of another person. ****

I’m sorry, but if you engage in sex, weren’t raped, are under the age of 55, have not been sterilized, and don’t make good use of the wide variety of contraceptive devices available today, then there is no such thing as a "forced pregnancy". I’m not exactly sure where your rabid hate of pregnancy comes from, but it creates an enormous wall when trying to have any kind of rational discussion on this subject.

And no, it is NOT like forcing someone to donate an organ to someone…pregnancy doesn’t cause you to lose essential body parts, and in most cases (note I said most, not all), there is nothing about that will kill you. Not to mention, I’m sure that if a woman was forced by a SO, against the advice of a physician, to carry on a pregnancy that damaged/ended her life, she could probably find a lawyer who would take that on.

I admire you for being honest about not wanting kids; lord knows there are plenty of kids in this world who have parents who didn’t really want them. It’s a rare person who will be honest and upfront about that.

By Elizabeth Newman on 07/16/2009 2:58 pm

e-mail alert

there is no such thing as a "forced pregnancy"

yes there is. if a woman is pregnant (i don’t care HOW she got that way - and why do YOU care how she got that way? are you looking to punish or reward women based on their actions?) and does not want to continue with the pregnancy, and you force her to, that is called a forced pregnancy and it is ethically disgusting and morally bankrupt.

I’m not exactly sure where your rabid hate of pregnancy comes from, but it creates an enormous wall when trying to have any kind of rational discussion on this subject.

i don’t have a hate of pregnancy, i don’t even hate kids, i just have no desire to be someones caretaker unless its my grammy or my aunties. why do you think i have a hate for pregnancy?

but taxes? i proudly pay my taxes and hope the money goes to much-needed, underfunded social programs that help single moms, single dads, poor families, and poor kids get food, clothing, shelter, education, and love. i love kids, i think children are very important and should be protected and cared for by the nation. the whole "it takes a village" thing.

what about pregnancies that result in major damage/hemmhorage to the uterus and you must have a hysterectomy? you lose your uterus.

and having to carry another creature in your body and allow it to leech your fluids and energy is dangerous, and pregnancy can cause many complications that can harm a woman for a lifetime:

pelvic-girdle pain that can last the rest of the females’ life resulting in weakness and inability to lift objects, gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia (causes high blood pressure and involves damage to females’ kidneys and liver), Eclampsia (maternal morality rate of 1.8%), hypertension, uterine rupture

i could go on, but i’m sure you get the point.

Not to mention, I’m sure that if a woman was forced by a SO, against the advice of a physician, to carry on a pregnancy that damaged/ended her life, she could probably find a lawyer who would take that on.

ew, the entire point of womens rights was so NO ONE CAN CONTROL YOU. what a horrible nightmare it would be to actually be controlled by the contents of my uterus. i hope that never comes true.

I admire you for being honest about not wanting kids; lord knows there are plenty of kids in this world who have parents who didn’t really want them. It’s a rare person who will be honest and upfront about that.

most childfree people aren’t open with most people about their choices to avoid kids - people discriminate against us and (like you) accuse us of hating kids and of being selfish.

i’ve had enough people smirk knowingly and say "oh, you’ll want kids someday sweetie" that it makes me want to puke. and some of those people included doctors whom i went to for a consultation on sterilization.

and i care too much about children to give birth to one that i dont want, especially in the face of how many foster kids are alone and unwanted in this country. the foster care system cannot take on more than it already has, and it is already traumatizing and abusing kids as it is, thanks to underfunding and insanely restrictive adoption laws.

i do not hate pregnancy (i just dont want it for myself) and i do not hate kids. in fact, i care very much about children, personally and individually, and it offends me that people seem to take birth and pregnancy so lightly.

this all boils down to the rights of your own body. who controls your body: you, your partner, the government, or the contents of your uterus?

i control mine.

By Amanda C on 07/16/2009 3:33 pm