In which I come out, and my cousin Susan

I have been blogging for a while. I used to have no audience, other than a few friends. Blogs used to have about the significance of a myspace page, and now have become much more wonderful and important. But, I have had to reevaluate what and who I write about, in a few ways. I don’t write about my family that much, other than the odd funny anecdote. I have pulled one or two posts in which I spoke critically about physicians or professors. It’s OK to complain to my friends about that. It’s not OK to have that up on a blog that is searchable, even if I haven’t ever mentioned my name or institution on this blog.

So, two things are changing on the blog. I am going to come out, first of all.

*Ahem* My name is Hilary Gerber, and I go to Nova Southeastern University in lovely Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

My name and this blog can be linked in various ways on the interwebs, and I was a little annoyed at only the persistent boundary line crossers making that link. I may as well own the connection.

I was also nervous, for a while, that my loving but very socially conservative family would be googling me for some reason. My mother did once, back in the day, and stumbled across an article I had written for my college newspaper about medicinal marijuana. I stammered so much when she asked me about it, my then boyfriend said, “Well, if she never thought you smoked pot before, she sure does now.”

Well, my brother is the president of a local chapter of the Young Republicans, and blogs under his own name about tea bagging, so I decided I have just as much right to put what I think out there. It’s not like I’m springing it on them that I’m a liberal. And, with all the posts I have been putting up on Facebook recently about the Tebow ad, they must know I am pro-choice. So, hi mom! (I don’t think she reads my blog. But, one day she might stumble on it.)

Secondly, I am still struggling with the best way to write ethically and responsibly. I have decided that whenever I talk about someone’s health experience, especially reproductive experience, I am going to call this person “my cousin Susan”. I don’t have a cousin Susan. She is going to be a stand in for all of the wonderful people whose stories have taught me something. I am going to be trying to go back through older posts and edit in My Cousin Susan. I try to shift around some identifying features, or be vague, already. But, this way I can just assign it to this mythical person, and hopefully make it seem less privacy invading for the original person.

I know I don’t own other people’s lives and stories. I am not a physician yet and don’t have that HIPAA thing going on in most situations I have been in yet, but I am a doula, I have been a midwifery student, and even as a friend, I feel somewhat guilty when I talk about some aspect of someone else’s health or life experience. But, I learn so much from these realities, more than I could ever learn from a textbook or a journal article. They are a big part of why I am so dedicated to women’s health, especially surrounding birth.

So, in order to balance the ambivalence I feel about sharing these stories, which I do, I am going to start calling the main character “my cousin Susan”. I’ll tag this post and all the others with “My Cousin Susan”, and link to an explanation in the side bar.

Almost clean humor

I was listening to Doctor Radio the other day, and the physician who was hosting that particular show was asking for people to call in with jokes. I know a lot of medical jokes. None of them were clean enough to call in for the show.

A friend tipped me off to this cartoon at xkcd today. HA!

When we were mopping the floors at night and cleaning the bathrooms at the birth center where I trained, the other students I was on with at night and I would crack each other up. We were a fun bunch. I remember laughing so hard one night, joking around about someone who had heard an urban legend of the patient who thinks if you have anal sex, the baby will come out of your rectum. One of the other students did this deadpan mock explanation to a patient: “Well, since you had oral sex, you will be vomiting up your child in about 8 months.”

I try, to a certain extent, to keep it sorta professional on this blog, especially since I am going to be applying to residency in a few years, and you never know when an internet savvy academic ob/gyn might be popping by. (Hi, Dr. Fogelson!) But, if you ever catch me in a real life, in a social situation, and it isn’t a residency interview, ask me the one about the ob/gyn and the pizza delivery driver.

Al Franken, Senator

I have been nothing but impressed so far by Senator Al Franken. I think he is a much better Senator than he was a radio show host.

Here is an excerpt from the keynote speech he made at NARAL’s Roe v Wade anniversary luncheon: (Hat tip, Alas, a blog)

Shortly after I (finally) became a Senator, I was appointed to the Judiciary Committee.

At first I thought: Well, this is weird. I’m not a lawyer. How am I going to ask the right questions?

But I did some research and discovered most Americans aren’t lawyers. It’s true.

And so to me, the right questions aren’t the ones a lawyer would necessarily ask. They’re questions the American people would ask.

And that’s what I did in my first hearing. It just happened that my first hearing was a high profile one: the Judiciary Committee was considering the nomination for Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.
[...]

Let me set it up a bit. The day before, one of my Republican colleagues had been – I guess the right word is “hectoring” – Judge Sotomayor, repeatedly asking her whether the word “abortion” appeared anywhere in the Constitution.

Of course, it doesn’t. But whether it does or not is beside the point. So she answered by speaking to the question behind the question. But finally after being asked for the third time, Judge Sotomayor replied, “No. The word ‘abortion’ is not in the Constitution.”

Which my colleague treated as an “Aha!” moment.

So the next day, I felt compelled to follow up.

I brought up her exchange with my colleague from the previous day, and then asked, “Do the words ‘birth control’ appear anywhere in the Constitution?”

“No, they don’t,” Judge Sotomayor replied quite correctly.

“How about the word ‘privacy?’ Does that appear anywhere in the Constitution?”

She said. “No, the word ‘privacy’ isn’t in the Constitution either.”

I think you can see where I was going. And so could everyone in the hearing room.

You know, there are a lot of words that express bedrock constitutional principles – words like federalism, checks and balances, and separation of powers – that never appear in the Constitution. That doesn’t mean that the Constitution didn’t set up a federalist system, enumerating certain express powers to the federal government and reserving certain powers for the states. And it doesn’t mean that the Constitution didn’t set up a system of “checks and balances” by creating the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, granting each certain powers, creating what is well known as a “separation of powers.”

And even though the word “privacy” does not appear in the Constitution, the Court has long recognized a protection for privacy.

And that is why I followed my questions about the words “birth control” and “privacy” to ask whether Judge Sotomayor agreed that the Court had held that the Constitution created not just a right to privacy, but that it was also established precedent that women had a right to choose to have an abortion.

She said, yes, that was established precedent. That it was settled law. And she agreed that the job of a Supreme Court justice was not to make new law from the bench.

You know, it’s funny. Whenever a Republican runs for the Senate or for president and is asked, “What do you look for in a prospective Justice for the Supreme Court?” Republicans always answer, “I want a judge that doesn’t make law from the bench.”

[...]

In the last year alone….

We saw Representative Bart Stupak use the health care bill as a bludgeon, restricting women’s health choices in a bill that was meant to expand them.

We watched with frustration as the Supreme Court overturned a century’s worth of precedents to further their conservative activist agenda.

We are watching as the Senate continues to block Dawn Johnsen’s confirmation to a critical role at the Department of Justice because of her pro-choice views.

And we saw Dr. Tiller murdered at church… AT HIS CHURCH…. murdered for the choice he provided for women.

I want to thank Dr. Sella for being here today, and I want to join you in honoring his memory.

And that’s why the work you do at NARAL is indispensible. Because the forces on the other side are persistent, single-minded, and even violent.

A woman’s right to choose is never fully won. It must be won anew every day, every year, every Congress, and every generation.

Even though most Americans support abortion rights, even though most Americans understand that no woman ever plans an unwanted pregnancy, that no woman ever thinks she’ll have to make such a painful and personal choice, those who would deny that choice press on, undeterred.

In a lot of ways that fight is going to be incremental. In 2007 – after Justice O’Connor’s departure, we saw the Roberts Court reject the longstanding precedent that an exception for a woman’s health must be a component of any law that restricts abortion rights.

Even when the woman’s health includes her reproductive health. That’s what Dr. Tiller did so often in his work. Perform abortions on fetuses that would not be viable outside the womb in order to protect a woman’s ability to bear children in the future. Ironically, what could be more pro-life?

[...]

Now, let me say that there are millions of people in this country who have a sincere objection to abortion, and much of that is based on strongly held religious conviction. And I respect that. In America, we respect each other’s religious beliefs. But we are not governed by them.

It’s called the “separation of church and state,” a phrase which, like “separation of powers,” does not appear in the Constitution, but which is created just as clearly in the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

So to those people whose religious conviction leads them to a moral opposition to abortion, I say that’s your right, that’s your choice. Don’t have an abortion. But also, do everything you can to work together with us to diminish the reasons we have abortions.

Support comprehensive sex education and access to affordable family planning services. Support funding for maternal child health programs, WIC, and affordable child care so new mothers have security and the resources they need to raise a healthy child.

Oh yeah, and support comprehensive affordable health care for all.

[...]

I want to leave you today with a story. It’s one that should sound familiar to the millions of women across this country who understand in a very personal way the importance of protecting women’s reproductive rights.

The story is about a Minnesotan named Kim. Kim was a 19-year-old single mother. She was struggling to make ends meet, working full time as a receptionist. Her daughter had health insurance through the state, but she did not. Her boyfriend, her daughter’s father, was extremely abusive.

She was getting the pill through Planned Parenthood at a reduced rate, but after her car broke down, she couldn’t afford that either.

One day her boyfriend demanded that they have sex, but refused to use a condom. He threatened her. She was too afraid to say no. And she ended up pregnant.

She said, “Abortion was absolutely the right choice for me at that time… Had I stayed in that relationship and brought another child into the mix, I would have continued the cycle of abuse and poverty.”

“Making the decision to stop the cycle [allowed me] to concentrate on my daughter and ensure that she will have the financial and emotional stability to go to college and live a successful, happy life. Women need options, women need choices.”

I am here to ask you to keep up the fight, for Kim, and for every woman who has learned – and will learn – that women need options and choices.

Thank you for the work you’ve done – and are continuing to do — to stand up for women’s rights.

I’m proud to stand with you.

And it begins

I saw the first Focus on the Family ad by the Tebows. They direct them to the Focus on the Family website to learn more about their story. You know, the story about a privileged white American woman who had lots of choices. Now, people can go to the Focus on the Family Site and read how their team of doctors thinks birth control is a chemical assault on the unborn.

Nice. I wish they were directed toward these posts instead so they could learn about the 200,000 children whose mothers die each year due to groups like Focus on the Family.

My many hats

I love to cook, and I love to throw parties. My parties are a little different than they were when I went to art school (there will be no band playing, and no kegs), but they still are pretty awesome, if I do say so myself.

I am throwing a Beatles Rock Band / Super Bowl party on Sunday. I am no Super Bowl of football fan, but it’s a good excuse to have people over to play Beatles Rock Band, and make a bunch of food. Although I am a cynic, metaphysically, and don’t think a football team necessarily represents the people of a city meaningfully in MY mind, I am totally rooting for the Saints. For someone who is a self proclaimed metaphysical cynic, sometimes I think things could be good “omens”, and maybe the Saints making it to the Super Bowl right after the Haiti earthquake is a good omen for Haiti. How? Don’t ask me on a universal woo woo scale, but reminding the world of the tragedy and unspeakably inadequate response to Katrina immediately following the Haiti earthquake has to be doing some good.

Anyway, enough depressing stuff. On to the menu! To celebrate the Saints, and New Orleans, I am hosting a New Orleans themed menu. (And, face it Indianapolis, New Orleans has better food).

Check out the proposed menu.

I may be merging my food blog with this blog soon, and changing this blog a little. I’ll keep you up to date, obviously, since you will see all the changes here first!

Reply turned post, blogging civility style

This is a comment on a post on Civility and Blogging at Dispatches from the Culture Wars. (Well, it’s in moderation. I post there occasionally, but there are a lot of links in this comment, so I can see why it may have been flagged as spam.)

It’s a great post and great conversation.

Much to my amazement I am criticized very sharply for expressing what I thought (and still think) to be a perfectly reasonable view. The counter-argument is that the enforcement of ground rules is an act of white male patriarchy and acts to exclude certain subsets of society from taking part. I think this is tosh, actually, but some otherwise intelligent and articulate people seem to believe it. Are such ground rules inherently discriminatory, or are they fair?

Here is my reply:

I think the key thing here is the difference between squashing hostility and squashing any dissenting or non majority voice.

I rarely delete comments on my blog, (I filter spam, of course) and have yet to ban a commenter. I have let arguments continue, even if the commenter is clearly coming from an opposing point of view. I am not, however, squashing voices that are arguing with the white male patriarchy. I am doing quite the opposite.

What I don’t allow is for someone to use my space to be disrespectful or offensive to me or to spout views that are disrespectful and offensive to me. I have asked someone to stop posting without banning them, because I feel like the discussion is not productive, and they are not debating, but randomly spouting nonsense.

Even after deleting their comments, I let dissenting voices post again.

I am one of those cynical of unbridled science and technology folks (thus the tinfoil hat reference in my blog title). I am just as willing to look critically at antidepressants as St. John’s Wort. And, I’m a research fellow at my medical school, so I don’t take to kindly to condescension from more-sciencey-than-thou types. And I take less kindly to “what about the white cis able bodied menz???” types.

KALI update

The KALI (Knowledge and Attitudes of Labor Interventions) Questionnaire is launched, and I have almost a dozen responses! But, the physicians aren’t beating my door down to take it. I guess I expected that, but it’s intimidating to have to go out and recruit subjects. I am going to be visiting physician’s offices like a drug rep with no food budget, begging for a few minutes of their time.

I loaded my responses into SPSS. I was able to print out frequency charts for the different questions. Fun!!

I am loathe to make any sweeping statements about the responses that I have already received. I have been pleasantly surprised with the variety and balance in the responses so far. I was surprised that one physician selected “strongly agree” that “I would refer out any patient who wants to hire a doula.” Really? I guess I am naive, but I was hoping for more ignorance of doulas than antipathy. Maybe the question is worded poorly – maybe they have a referral list for doulas? Geez, I have got to stop getting hung up on the wording! Well, the first survey is a learning experience. There is one local hospital that has apparently banned doulas recently, so maybe it’s someone who is there?

I think it is OK to talk about the responses so far without jeopardizing the study if I speak generally and don’t overstep. If there were obstetricians in my area who were reading my blog, that would be a very different story. I wonder if any of them are going to google the name of my study and find this. If they’ve already taken the study, I guess it doesn’t matter. This is getting a little meta.

My very small pool of respondents has a good amount who aren’t huge fans of elective cesarean. Most are fine with it, but I am happy to see it is truly a controversial issue, not just among natural birth advocates but practicing ob/gyns in an area with a high cesarean rate. There is also a variety of opinion on restricting food and water during labor, upright positions, and even intermittent monitoring, which is uncommon to nonexistent in most local hospitals. Good. A monolithic response would mean the survey was poorly written.

I am surprised how low the numbers are on institutional barriers to VBAC. I think most of the responses are from one institution so far, though, and it seems they do not have an institutional policy against VBAC. And, neither does their insurance company. But, now that I think of it, the responses I got on practice types and malpractice insurance coverage were varied, so it is probably a varied group of respondents so far. Hmmm. The respondents so far seem to be more comfortable with VBAC in general than I had expected.

Not a lot of episiotomy defenders in the set so far. I was surprised to see how many said they agreed that episiotomy should be avoided at all costs, and that a patient has a right to refuse an episiotomy. The physician who is the course director for Women’s Health at my medical school gave me feedback on my survey, and he said he found that question very provocative. He would have a serious problem with a woman wanting to refuse any episiotomy.

Most of the doctors so far think Pitocin benefits most laboring women. That matches up with practice patterns I have read.

Anyway, I will am doing an oral presentation at our medical school Research Day. I have two weeks to get more responses and put together a power point. If I can get in front of a group and talk about my preliminary results, I can write about them on my blog, right? Ehhhhhh…..

Anyway, this is an unorthodox entry into the Lamaze Healthy Birth Blog Carnival on avoiding interventions that are not medically necessary. Speaking of unnecessary interventions, I’m off to read the new Cochrane review on restricting food and liquid intake during labor. Thanks for posting about it, Amy.

Reply turned post, human incubator take two

The Mommy Wars Frontliner had another comment at Shakesville to answer my first reply about how a court order to require Samantha Burton to be admitted to a hospital for court ordered bed rest for threatened pre term labor was misguided. Please go back and read the link above and the original post at Shakesville if you need more context.

@MomTFH…

“Her health was NOT in danger…”

Obviously, it was. That, or her fetus’ health was in danger, so if she had any stake in saving it, she had good reason to follow the doctor’s advice. You don’t get prescribed immediate, unequivocal bed-rest without your health (or in this case, the health of your fetus) being seriously in danger. She was on the brink of miscarriage, for god’s sake. Are you suggesting that if they’d just let her out of the hospital, she -wouldn’t- have miscarried? Because that’s ridiculous.

“8 to 10% of all pregnancies in the United States end with premature delivery. Do you think all of these women are required to be on bed rest in the hospital? Bed rest is not proven to prevent pregnancy loss, and was not practical nor desirable for this woman.”

I don’t know how many of those women are required to be on bed rest. I don’t think that’s relevant. The doctor didn’t prescribe her bed rest just because she had a false alarm of premature labor. At any rate, of course bed rest isn’t *proven* to prevent pregnancy loss. -Nothing- is proven to prevent pregnancy loss. Nothing is proven to prevent anything. But if you’re seriously ill, I think bed rest is better than the alternative.

“Just how many mothers are you trying to say care “shit-all” about their babies? 1 in 6 mothers?”

If that’s how many mothers chain-smoke around their kids and during pregnancy, then yeah, I guess so. And just so we’re clear, fathers are not exempt here. If you’re a parent, and you’re willfully exposing your child to dangerous chemicals to an extent that it could fuck up the child’s health for life, you’re a shitty parent, end of story.

“Exercise has also been associated with pregnancy loss. I wonder what you think of women who are selfish enough to take epilepsy meds.”

I believe the former is a myth. As for women with epilepsy, I don’t know why you bring them up. They didn’t choose to have epilepsy, and it says right in the article you linked that not taking medication could deprive the fetus of oxygen during a seizure. There’s a world of difference between a woman who can’t help having epilepsy and a woman who chooses to smoke during her pregnancy.

“Don’t you dare say she didn’t care shit-all about her kids.”

Besides the fact that your anecdote says nothing to the defense of Burton, I see nothing in it to counter my assessment. Caring about people doesn’t prevent us from making mistakes – but it does prevent us from willfully harming them.

@TiPerihelion, you obviously don’t know much about pregnancy or birth, so why are you still offering such strong opinions?

First of all, a miscarriage is a loss before 20 weeks. She was past 20 weeks. You don’t even know what health condition you’re even talking about. “She was on the brink of miscarriage, for god’s sake!”

I have had a miscarriage. 30% or more of pregnancies end in miscarriage. My health was never in danger. Miscarriage does not put a woman’s health in danger unless there is a complication. Miscarriage is much, much safer for a mother than carrying a pregnancy to term. A mother’s health is more in danger from carrying a pregnancy than having a miscarriage or abortion.

The effectiveness of bedrest for PRETERM labor, what she had a “false alarm” of, is exactly relevant because that is what was recommended to this woman. It is not recommended as effective, even by the Cochrane database. I am sure you have never heard of the Cochrane database, but they are the collectors and disseminators of evidence based medicine.

So, how about that fetus again? Now you are admitting it was the fetus, not the woman, who was in danger. Read the original post, read your first comment, and tell me what you think about the judge bringing up the fetus now. Think about the slippery slope here.

As for smoking, fathers and mothers being shitty parents, congrats. You have taken one, small issue, and made it somehow the gold standard for good parenting. Sexual abuse? Neglect? Hey, as long as you’re not a smoker, TiPerihelion thinks you’re a great parent. Oh, wait, no, that’s not how it works? Then stop passing judgments on the parenting skills of people who you have never met. And, that has NOTHING to do with mandating three months of hospital-admitted bed rest to a working, low income woman with two living children and no child care. And smoking during pregnancy? TiPerihelion probably knows a foolproof way for a pregnant woman to stop smoking without using medication during pregnancy, too. I’m waiting breathlessly for you to publish that paper in an addiction journal.

Until you actually know more about the medical conditions you are discussing, no one cares whether you think exercise leads to higher miscarriage rates. It does. It’s called evidence. No one cares what you think when you read one line of an article on epileptic drugs and what they do during pregnancy. Did you read the line that said 90% of the children of these mothers will be born healthy? What about those other 10%? That’s due to the drug effects.

Your attitude and judgment makes mothers afraid to take necessary medications during pregnancy. Your attitude makes women who are smokers during pregnancy hide that from their practitioners instead of getting the help they need to stop. Your attitude defends stripping pregnant women of their rights and identities, and treats them like human incubators.

Looking at residency sites

I am looking at residency site possibilities on line. It’s sort of like window shopping. I am trying to find programs in cities where I know someone, preferably a mother; cities I wouldn’t mind living in, cities with mild climates, cities that are progressive, and programs that seem like they would be progressive, have family planning training, and wouldn’t be malignant. Not all of these sites have all of these qualities.

I am going to use this post as a collection spot for links, info, and rumination.

So, here is my list so far, in no particular order:

University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, at Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami FL APGO Website
University of South Florida in Tampa, FL APGO Website
Oregon Health & Science University in Portland OR
Mountain Area Health Education Center at Mission Hospital in Asheville NC
University of Chapel Hill in Chapel Hill, NC
Duke University Medical Center in Durham, NC
University of Washington in Seattle, WA
Vanderbilt University in Nashville TN
Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, SC
Emory University in Atlanta GA APGO Website
Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta GA APGOWebsite

Update on the Tebow ad

Since I posted about the Tim Tebow anti-choice Scrutinize Your Focus on the Family ad that is scheduled to air during the Super Bowl, I have found out some more disturbing information.

Mrs. Tebow claims that she was told to get an abortion while pregnant in the Philippines, where she and her husband do missionary work. In fact, they run an orphanage there. But, abortion is and has been illegal in the Philippines. Making abortion illegal does not reduce abortions. It just makes them more deadly.

According to this UN Humanitarian Affairs report:

there are an estimated 560,000 cases of induced abortions per year, resulting in some 90,000 women being hospitalised for post-abortion care; and about 1,000 deaths a year in the island nation.

Most of these women are already mothers. Their children are much more likely to die before the age of 12 without a mother. It also makes them more likely to need to go to an orphanage. Like the one the Tebows run, out of the kindness of their Christian hearts.

But, it is the Christian religion* that is contributing to the orphan problem in the Philippines. According to this 2006 Guttmacher report (pdf) on Unintended Pregnancy and Induced Abortion in the Philippines:

At the same time, weak government support for modern contraception and the insistence of the Catholic Church on natural family planning methods contribute to low levels of modern contraceptive use and persistent reliance on less effective methods. Many women use no family planning method at all.

I am all about the middle ground on this issue. I don’t have a problem, like some reproductive rights activists do, with saying I want abortion to be rare. I know it’s hard to discuss something with nuance, but that doesn’t necessarily say it’s because it’s an evil procedure. Unintended pregnancy is the problem. No one wants to be in that situation. The only way to prevent it, experts say in so many places I won’t even bother to link it, is by increasing the autonomy of the women in the community: access to affordable effective contraception and abortion without shame, education, microloans, and the like.

Making abortion illegal and letting them die, bleeding in the hallways of hospitals or in their beds, surrounding by their surviving children, is not pro-life. How can members of the same party who houses Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, also align themselves with groups like Focus on the Family? The supporters of this ad, Focus on the Family and their socially conservative hardline choir, think talking about the poor as breeding stray animals who don’t know any better with unconcealed contempt is compatible with calling the birth control and the IUD “a chemical assault and destruction of some unborn?”.

Let’s reduce abortions, spontaneous or medical. Let’s reduce death. Let’s reduce the number of orphaned children. Let’s prevent unintended and intended pregnancy losses. Effective, affordable contraception is the best way to do this.

*I am not anti Christianity, nor anti all Christians. My family is all quite religious, most of them practicing that religion as pro-life, socially conservative Presbyterians. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue. I was tipped off about the disconnect between Mrs. Tebow’s claims and the reality of reproductive care and maternal mortality by someone who went to Catholic school with my husband. I am off to a celebration of a Catholic christening today of a boy at whose birth I was the doula.

Religion, to me, is personal. That is why I support conscience clauses for health care practitioners, and one-child only laws, and forced abortions or forced sterilizations. But, when it comes to maternal mortality and public health, I don’t think religion has a place in the discussion. Any group that would worship a god that thinks maternal mortality isn’t a higher priority than their rules about sex and reproduction isn’t someone I want at the table. They can preach to their choir all they want, and people can choose to observe in the way that is right between them and their deity(ies) of choice, or lack thereof.

TAKE ACTION:

Go to Emily’s List and sign their petition. This is what I wrote in the comment section:

1000 women died in the Philippines (where Tim Tebow was born, and his family does missionary work) in 2008 alone due to the unavailability of safe, legal abortion.

How many of the orphans at the Tebow’s orphanage had moms who died from the lack of contraception and legal, safe abortion there?

This is not something worth breaking your non controversy Super Bowl ad over.