Dear Editor,
I would like to take a moment to present another side of the "reproductive rights" issue discussed in an article featuring Lon Newman, executive director of Family Planning Health Services. Mr. Newman was named one of the "people to watch" in the upcoming year, and was described as confident, and possibly somewhat cavalier in his approach to increasing universal access to reproductive health care. I personally found several of his attitudes and statements flat out insulting.
As a woman myself, it's maddening to have this man speaking as though he truly cares about my health, when in fact, he regularily promotes things that have the potential to be detrimental to my reproductive health. A medication without possible side effects does not exist, yet the birth control pill, and several other artifical hormone replacements are presented as "natural and harmless". The truth is that several studies show that these pills that we are so eager to push as early as middle school clearly show their potential for detrimental side effects ranging from blood clots and strokes, all the way to cancer. Are they indicated at times....I'm sure they are, but they should not be used so indiscriminately as Mr. Newman cares to promote.
Even more frustrating to me, though, is the statement that my fertility is somehow preventing me from "participating fully in this society". I would like to ask Mr. Newman what he defines as full participation. I imagine that our definitions would be extremely different, as I tend to believe that accepting children as the most amazing blessings that they are, and then investing all I have into raising them to be great, is about the most productive that I can be. Just as Lon Newman is entitiled to his view, there are those of us who believe that reproductive health is actually about reproducing. I believe that teaching children about the beauty of sexual relations within the context of marriage is both responsible and a great gift to them. The article on Newman clearly opposes abstinence training, but there exist several reliable studies that show its effectiveness. And no matter what a person choses to promote, no one can deny that abstinence is the ONLY method of birth control that is 100% effective in preventing unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Promoting the birth control pill and giving out free condoms to children hardly responsible or reliable enough to consistently use them, seems somewhat unwise. And to then promote giving these prescription medications to teen girls without parental knowledge or consent is extremely concerning and hardly "worth watching" as the City Pages would encourage us to do.
Lastly, I am disappointed in the author of this article who refers to people who meet on a regular basis to peacefully and quietly pray outside of Family Planning Health Services as "picketers". I know that when I hear the word "picketers", I imagine something very different than the actual people and activities that you are describing. I can plainly see that the opinion of this author is that all of Newman's opinions and goals are good ones. In this great country, however, we are allowed to differ in our opinions and express those that we desire and aspire to provide truthful information to people willing to receive it about the beauty of life and truly healthy reproduction. In fact, plans are under way for a community-wide prayer effort, called the power of peaceful prayer and community educating, and is all about promoting and protecting life. We would prefer to be referred to as prayer warriors, rather than picketers, and would welcome the participation of anyone interested!
Sara Ryan
Letter to the Editor--Wausau City Pages