Lauren's Analysis of "We Do Abortions Here"

Lauren Archibald
Professor Kerry Spencer
Honors Writing 150
17 October 2011
Abortion from a Different Perspective

Few subjects are more controversial than abortion. It generates heated political and moral disputes in which debate contributors voice their opinions on when life begins and who has the right to take it away. Much of society is familiar with these arguments posed by opinionated and influential individuals, but it is likely that these prominent people have never actually experienced or witnessed an abortion. They do not understand the complicated emotions involved in an abortion and they have not gathered their own evidence for their case. A truly persuasive argument would be from a person who is familiar with abortion, one who is involved in the practice. In “We Do Abortions Here: A Nurse’s Story,” Sallie Tisdale addresses the issue from a perspective not often revealed: the point of view of one performing the abortions. Using anecdotal experiences, blunt diction, and an inverted appeal to pathos, Tisdale displays abortion from a qualified point of view to successfully persuade the audience of the injustice of abortion.

Primarily, Tisdale uses her experiences with the patients at the abortion clinic to strengthen her underlying argument against abortion. She describes the women at the clinic, from the young and ignorant to the “statistical misfits.” However, a common reaction occurs in the differing women once the procedure begins: “A well of woe seems to open beneath many women when they hear the thumping sound. The anticipation of the moment has finally come to fruit; the moment has arrived when the loss is no longer an imagined one. It has come true.” Even though all of the women had decided that they wanted an abortion, when it was finally done they were confused and sorrowful. Just as with many major moments of change in our lives, even if it is anticipated, the change fills us with disbelief and confusion. A similar thing happened to these women, except the major change in their lives was the ending of another life and another future, both for themselves and their unborn children. The sadness expressed by those who actually support and choose to participate in abortion supports the author’s opinion of its inhumanity.

Not only does Tisdale utilize her involvements with patients to illustrate the unkindness of abortion, but she also applies her own personal experience to show the affects abortion has on the frame of mind of those who perform the procedure. The narrator and her colleagues prefer a broad view, to “survey the scene in all its distance and size,” rather than to “focus on the small details, suddenly so close.” This general standpoint on their occupation shows that, due to the controversial and delicate work they do, they must ignore the specifics of their procedures to allow themselves to do them. Dwelling on the reality that they are destroying a vulnerable being would prevent them from doing their job. The author confesses that “abortion requires of [her] an entirely new set of assumptions,” further supporting the notion that the work of abortion is so merciless that a person with an ordinary state of mind would not be able to do it. By using the personal experiences of herself and her colleagues, the author demonstrates that the nurses and doctors have to have a different and calloused set of views for their vocation because of the degree of injustice in abortion.

Additionally, Tisdale uses matter-of-fact diction to further support her argument against abortion. By using blunt and realistic language, the author makes her argument seem more credible and furthers the idea of the necessity for impassive thinking when surrounded by abortion. For example, when the narrator describes an dead fetus she says, “but when I look in the basin, among the curdlike blood clots, I see an elfin thorax, attenuated, its pencil like ribs all in parallel rows with tiny knobs of spine rounding upwards. A translucent arm and hand swim beside.” Instead of using strong and passionate connotation in this graphic description of an aborted fetus, a situation wherein persuasive emotion would typically be applied, Tisdale uses professional and unaffected language. This makes her argument appear more sensible and reliable, while simultaneously advancing the idea of the required emotionless stance needed to work with abortion. Tisdale’s matter-of-fact diction contributes to convincing the audience of the wrongness of abortion.

In connection with the use of blunt diction, Tisdale employs an inverted appeal to pathos to capture the emotional attachment of the audience; by explaining the absence of compassion involved in the procedure of abortion, the author inversely arouses emotion in the reader. Throughout the article, she speaks of the “cultivated disregard” developed in her occupation. As she says, it is a “sweet brutality we practice here, a stark and loving dispassion.” Rather than passionately expounding upon the atrocities of abortion, she simply describes the lack of emotion in her work. Once again, we see that in order to perform the procedure, workers must to take on a different conscious state. This deficiency of sentiment awakens a strong emotion in the reader as they recognize that the already inhumane act is intensified by the ruthless way in which it is conducted. Furthermore, the pitiless way in which the aborted fetuses are described provokes sympathetic responses to the end of a life not yet begun. Through an inverted appeal to pathos, the author continues to persuade the audience of the cruelty of abortion.

Tisdale doesn’t write this article just as someone who has researched or studied the subject; she writes it as a woman who actually has experience executing abortions. Though she works for an abortion clinic and acknowledges several cases where abortion seems justified, the reader senses an underlying opposition with the practice through her personal experiences, blunt diction, and an inverted appeal to pathos. We are able to see abortion in another context through her unique perspective, from inner disagreement to acceptance of its existence, in which she “imagine(s) a world where this won’t be necessary, and then return(s) to the world where it is.”