Most Americans probably assume that the abortion debate between “pro-life” and “pro-choice” proponents is stalemated. This is one of the reasons I have never published on the topic, although it is a regular unit in courses I teach. What more is there to write? The landscape appears overplowed, with desertification surrounding the canyon separating the opposing camps. With this book, however, Charles Camosy of Fordham University argues that fecund common ground now exists upon which we can move past this putative impasse.
Much has been and continues to be written on abortion, especially in op-eds and social media. Yet, as Camosy notes, “Very few pieces are even aware of what their opponents are actually arguing, much less engaging it in a fair and careful way” (2). Good classroom teacher that he is, Camosy provides an accessible volume aiming to help readers better inform their consciences through honest consideration of the complexities and nuances of this issue.
The first chapter maps the political maneuvers of Democrats and Republicans over the decades, wherein their stands on abortion have shifted, so that their current positions are actually “the opposite of their natural political instincts and philosophies” (17; emphasis in the original). Camosy excels in exfoliating the usual binaries: “pro-life” versus “pro-choice,” Republican versus Democrat, religious versus secular, conservative versus liberal. Also, he drills into the data on current abortion practices. Of importance, in his view, is that 2 percent of the 1.2 million abortions performed per year are connected with rape or saving the life of the mother—and, according to polls, most Americans believe abortion is morally justified in such cases. They also now want abortion for other reasons to be more restricted. Key for Camosy are current demographics: the rise of the millennials and Hispanics in the United States, along with the fact that abortion-related jurisprudence is already undergoing change. Yet, I would point out that polls can cut both ways, since, as Camosy repeatedly notes, some 90 percent of fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted. What do millennials and Hispanics think about that?
The next two chapters cover ground more moral-theological. In “Who or What Is the Fetus?,” Camosy surveys the standard points/counterpoints about personhood, viability, potential, and the like before concluding that “prenatal children” (his preferred term, although he also uses “fetus”) are persons who “deserve equal protection of the law, including a right to life” (56; emphasis in the original). In “Aiming at Death or Ceasing to Aid?,” he draws on the Catholic moral tradition's teaching on “direct killing” (e.g., homicide, “direct abortion,” which aims at the death of the fetus), “indirect killing” (e.g., self-defense, “indirect abortion,” which does not aim at the death of the fetus), and “refusal to aid” (e.g., letting someone die for a proportionately serious reason). Here Camosy considers cases beyond the removal of the fallopian tubes, such as the use of Plan B, Ella, and RU-486. For Catholic moralists, this chapter may renew debate on “intrinsic evil” and the purportedly prodigal method of proportionalism—Camosy's endnote attempting to dissociate himself from that notwithstanding (176).
The fourth chapter considers public policy and law, including the criminalization of direct abortion and, drawing on earlier work by M. Cathleen Kaveny, the way law can teach morality in society. I wish Camosy had engaged Kaveny's more recent books on law, virtue, religion, and public discourse, however. The fifth chapter relies on Catholic pro-life feminist Sidney Callahan's work to argue that most choices for abortion are really not as free and pro-women as assumed. Although in his introduction, Camosy recommends humility, solidarity with interlocutors, and avoiding dismissive words/phrases, I fear that some might feel his writing a bit patronizing here.
In the final chapter, Camosy creatively suggests “a way forward” by proposing legislation: the Mother and Prenatal Child Protection Act (MPCPA, although some “pro-choicers” might hold that MPCPA stands for Morality Police Concerning Pregnancy and Abortion). This piece of legislation seeks to protect the life of the fetus while also giving due consideration to legal protection and social support for the mother.
I appreciate Camosy's audacity and hope that this book will spark discussion in classrooms, parish groups, and beyond. An agent should get him invited to speak in as many venues possible, including TV talk shows.
