I pray you are not pregnant

By Kit-Bacon Gressitt

 

Last week, a person I admire wrote, “I hate people.” Without missing a beat, I emailed back, “I love that you wrote that.” And that gave me pause. Earlier in the week, I had read a chapter from Maythee Rojas’ Women of Color and Feminism. Rojas wrote about love’s being the fuel of feminist activism, a force for social change. It is through love — of oneself and others — that we build the necessary bridges between the great global diversity of women and their issues, uniting us in action and visionary change. In her book, Rojas made a clarion call for love, but I was feeling hate.

So I looked at the email exchange, I thought about Rojas’ message, I contemplated guilt and put it aside, and I opted instead to consider my response to the thing that initiated the original email. That thing is this:

On Wednesday, lifesitenews.com, an anti-abortion website, published a piece by blogger Elise Hilton entitled, “Why I rejected Plan B after my disabled daughter was raped.” Hilton’s piece reported the kidnapping and prolonged sexual assault of her daughter and Hilton’s subsequent decision not to administer the Plan B emergency contraceptive provided by the women’s shelter clinic to which her daughter was taken after 48 hours of captivity and violation.

Hilton used her byline at LifeSiteNews and she profiles herself on her personal blog — Kissing the Leper: Acknowledging the perfect joy of suffering in Christ, but having a little fun along the way — where she also posted the piece.

With her column’s publication, Hilton raised significant concerns about sexual assault victims’ rights, the rights of people with disabilities, and reproductive justice. Before reviewing these issues, it’s important to acknowledge that, after reading several of Hilton’s blog posts, I have assumed her daughter is an adult or approaching adulthood, as she was taken to a women’s shelter rather than a children’s hospital. Hilton herself reports that her daughter has bi-polar disorder and a cognitive disability, which her blog content suggests might be Down Syndrome. All of which contribute to my concerns:

1. In revealing her own identity attached to the online post, Hilton essentially revealed to the world the identity of her daughter, the victim, and the devastating nature of the crimes committed against her. Hilton also made this information available to the perpetrator of these crimes, who Hilton reported had not been apprehended. While she might serve as her daughter’s legal decision-maker, had she been predominantly concerned about her daughter’s wellbeing, her right to the privacy normally afforded victims of sexual assault, Hilton could have published her piece anonymously — or not at all. Instead, she blasted her daughter’s assault around the virtual globe with adequate identifying information to lead back to her daughter. Thus, Hilton blatantly violated the victim’s confidentiality.

2. In the context of her column, Hilton rendered the crimes against her daughter a secondary issue to her own struggle between her anti-abortion stance and the option of using Plan B to prevent any possible pregnancy as a result of her daughter’s repeated rapes. Hilton certainly has a right to her opinions and to their publication, but in doing so, she invites criticism. And, as a writer, an editor and a book critic, I offer this: Hilton’s column exemplifies a dedication to anti-abortion ideology that precludes compassion for real humans in the real throes of reproductive crisis. She sacrificed her daughter’s confidentiality and, potentially, her daughter’s wellbeing for the purpose of anti-abortion propaganda.

3. Hilton represented her decision to withhold Plan B from her daughter as a spiritual triumph. But Hilton’s triumph could be her daughter’s undoing. In rejecting Plan B, she denied her daughter treatment to prevent a possible pregnancy; her daughter with bi-polar disorder, a disorder exacerbated by pregnancy, a disorder many treatments for which are contraindicated for pregnant women. In rejecting Plan B, Hilton forced on her daughter the prospect of motherhood, motherhood for a woman supposedly disabled enough that her mother must make her most crucial decisions for her. Hilton’s column is a forthright and specific declaration of her violation of her daughter’s reproductive rights. Whatever informed decision her daughter might have made for herself, without the imposition of Hilton’s ideology, we will never know.

Ultimately, in publishing her column, Hilton has demonstrated terrible failures. Hilton has failed to honor a victim of sexual assault with the comforts of confidentiality. Hilton has failed to honor her daughter, a person with disabilities, with the grace of respect due her individuality. Hilton has failed to honor a woman whose reproductive justice was first denied for 48 hours by a rapist, and then again by her mother. Hilton’s disregard for her daughter’s unique humanity, her daughter’s individual rights, reveals Hilton’s disdain for her “disabled daughter,” no matter how much she loves her.

So, is it hate that I feel for Hilton? Upon reflection, I find it is not. Rather, it is rage, rage at a person who would so brutally violate a vulnerable woman — her daughter — for the sake of a cause. I am not a praying person, but I offer up this prayer for Hilton’s daughter: I pray you are not pregnant. Next, I’ll try very hard to love your mother.

Love,
K-B

Crossposted at the Ocean Beach Rag, The Progressive Post and San Diego Gay & Lesbian News.

Comments (6)

AnnFebruary 5th, 2012 at 4:47 pm

I so agree with you!

And further fueling my rage is Elise Hilton’s wilful ignorance about how Plan B works — it prevents ovulation! It does not prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum! It is birth control, not an abortifacent! So while Elise Hilton is congratulating herself for choosing not to “kill” her daughter’s putative conceptus — Plan B would not have had any effect upon an already fertilized ovum! Even from this woman’s own fanatical point of view, the proferred contraceptive wouldn’t have caused an “abortion”!

Comments on Elise Hilton’s original post are now closed, or I’d be pointing out that Hilton, in her attempt to explain what was wrong with Plan B, provided a link to a Catholic Conference of Bishops bulletin dated 1998 — which discussed the drug Preven, a two-dose emergency contraceptive containing estrogen and progestin.

Plan B was first approved by the FDA in 1999, is single-dose, and progestin-only (levonorgestrel) – and has recently been shown conclusively not to prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum, i.e., conceptus (or, to Catholic Bishops, a “pre-born baby). Elise Hilton based her decision on a 1998 clerical position paper about a completely different drug!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kbgressittFebruary 5th, 2012 at 4:52 pm

Thank you for your great comment, Ann. I also tried to post a comment to correct the misinformation that Hilton and other commenters posted about Plan B, and also found comments closed — as they are on Hilton’s own blog. I hope this simply means they are thin-skinned, but I’m concerned it suggests that they don’t want their readers to be accurately informed. Arghh.

Milton TaylorFebruary 6th, 2012 at 7:33 am

The comments above and your insightful perception of this act by this Zealot (Elise Hilton) expresses my views on this incident. I too, hope there was no pregnancy as a result of these assaults upon the victim, first by the assailant and the second by her Mother(?) with the outrageous speculation regarding her conception and not allowing the use of Plan B.

Elise MackFebruary 6th, 2012 at 8:21 am

I love you, Kit-Bacon.

MillieFebruary 6th, 2012 at 10:08 am

The mother is as guilty of abuse of the daughter as the kidnapper/rapist. Too bad she won’t go before a court to answer for her guilt. Too bad stupidity isn’t isn’t a crime. She’d be guilty of that, too.

Mike CroghanFebruary 6th, 2012 at 5:28 pm

I’m particularly sensitive these days to issues of respect for vulnerable people. I don’t give a rat’s ass about Ms. Hilton or her fanaticism. What I care about is respect for a young woman, old enough to conceive. Dammit, if she’s old enough to coneive, she’s old enough AT THE VERY LEAST to be given her options and a voice in choices made – about HER health, about HER life. GRRRRR!

Leave a comment

Your comment