logo
I've Kept This Secret For 56 Years. I'm Telling The Truth Now In The Hope That It Will Save Lives.

I've Kept This Secret For 56 Years. I'm Telling The Truth Now In The Hope That It Will Save Lives.

Yahoo20-07-2025
'If your period is late, here's what you do: Boil up half a bottle of red wine and drink it while it's hot. Then stand on a chair and jump off several times. That should take care of it.'
It was March 1957, and I'd just finished packing my trunk. I would be leaving the next day to sail from England to the United States, where I would marry Ezra, my soldier-fiancé. Those were my mother's final words of advice. Not 'never go to bed angry,' or 'pick your battles,' but how to abort a fetus.
Her recommendation was unusual. Knitting needles were the instrument of choice for many British women trying to abort. Fewer Americans are knitters, so before Roe v. Wade made abortion legal in 1973, many women in the United States — or individuals from whom they sought assistance to end their pregnancies — used wire coat hangers. My mother believed her alternative method was a safe one.
I smiled to myself, for I was pretty sure her instructions were useless. Only married women had access to contraception in the United Kingdom, so I planned to be fitted with a diaphragm as soon as I arrived in America. I was confident I would be able to avoid any unplanned pregnancies.
The day after I landed, I looked up 'obstetricians and gynecologists' in the yellow pages and found a doctor nearby. I was disappointed when she refused to fit me, telling me I should come back after I was married. Just like in Britain, the United States only provided contraception to married women at that time. My wedding was two weeks away. What did this doctor think was going to happen on my honeymoon?
Our first child, Ruth, was born after we'd been married for two years — just as Ezra and I planned. Dan was born 21 months later. Although I was often exhausted, I found taking care of two little children exhilarating. Watching their development was an unfolding miracle. Then, three and a half years later, when we were living in Palo Alto, California, I discovered I was pregnant again.
While I was still in the throes of morning sickness, Ruth and Dan both came down with German measles, aka rubella. Everyone knew if you caught it when you were pregnant, especially in the first trimester, the baby was at high risk for serious birth defects like deafness, cataracts, heart malfunctions, developmental disabilities, and liver and spleen damage. The baby might also be stillborn.
I asked my obstetrician what he would do if I contracted rubella. 'Nothing,' he replied with a shrug. A pregnant friend got rubella from one of her children and received the same answer from her doctor. She attempted suicide because of it and spent the rest of her life in a vegetative state.
After our third child, Jonathan, was born, we moved to Berkeley, where I was fitted with an IUD.
Ezra's architectural practice was thriving, and he was teaching at UC Berkeley. His work involved frequent travel to the East Coast, and he was away for weeks at a time. I was being pulled in many different directions by three children with very different needs. I began to feel inadequate as a parent — out of my comfort zone and overwhelmed.
I struggled to hold things together for five years. When Jonathan entered kindergarten in 1969, I was thrilled to be able to return to my studies at the University of California. Kindergarten was half a day, and I was able to coordinate my classes with his. Life finally took on a comfortable rhythm.
One morning in October that year, I woke up feeling the familiar signs of early pregnancy. At first, I denied the possibility. Abortion was illegal, so I continued to rely on my IUD, considered the safest form of birth control available at the time. I had been told they were 99% effective, which meant I was now part of the unlucky 1%.
The thought of a baby growing together with the IUD was terrifying. What damage could that cause? But, more than that, I knew I couldn't handle taking care of another baby. Life was just beginning to feel normal. The prospect of dealing with a fourth child filled me with dread.
I made an appointment with my obstetrician, who confirmed I was pregnant.
'I suppose I'll have to resign myself to having another baby,' I said, my eyes stinging with tears. 'We thought our family was complete. I don't know how I'm going to manage. I'm afraid it'll push me over the edge.'
'It sounds as if you might not want another baby,' my doctor said.
'No. I really don't. I'm stretched so thin already.'
'Go home and talk to your husband. If the two of you decide you definitely don't want to continue the pregnancy, here's what you'll do,' he told me. 'Call my office and tell them you are having a lot of bleeding. They will tell you to go to the emergency room, and I'll meet you there.'
I had been looking down into my purse, groping for a tissue. I felt my jaw drop as I raised my eyes to meet his. He was smiling and nodding slowly as he spoke. In his subtle, gentle way, he was offering me a choice — one I'd never anticipated would be possible for me. A sense of relief washed over my entire body. I had thought I was trapped, and I had been offered a way out.
When Ezra and I talked after dinner, there were no doubts — neither of us wanted more children.
The next day was Saturday. I called my doctor's office and lied to the receptionist about bleeding heavily. Ezra drove me to the hospital, where we met the doctor. The two men shook hands, and the doctor told my husband, 'Not to worry — I'll take good care of her.'
As I was wheeled into the operating room, the nurse walking beside the gurney squeezed my hand. 'You'll be fine,' she said. That's the last thing I remember about the procedure.
When I awoke from the anesthesia, I got dressed and waited for Ezra and the children to pick me up in the hospital lobby. They arrived in the late afternoon. They'd gone to a football game, and the children were still excited about it.
That evening, Ezra and I hugged and shared our thoughts about how relieved we were. He was particularly attentive and brought a stool so I could put my feet up. After he washed the dishes, he slipped out and came back with a tub of butter pecan ice cream — my favorite — our special way of marking important occasions.
I didn't mention the experience to any of my friends. I had broken the law, and if word got out about my doctor's willingness to perform this procedure, his life could be ruined. The threat of legal action scared me into silence. I've maintained that silence until now.
What would I have done if my doctor hadn't opened up this window of opportunity? Friends were going to Mexico for abortions, but the status of medical care in that country was a mystery to me. I could have ended up with a botched procedure, as often happened with the illegal abortions that were performed in so-called back alleys in the United States. Or what if I didn't have access to health care in the first place or the money to pay for the procedure, as many other women and families did — and do — not have.
I also believed only a properly trained obstetrician could be trusted to remove the IUD nestling in my uterus beside my growing baby. Its removal was another opportunity for mistakes to be made. I am risk-averse and would have probably turned down these choices and carried the fetus to term. I would have been an angry, depleted mother to all my children.
Today, at the age of 92, my reproductive years are far in the past, but old age doesn't temper the anger I feel towards the legislators who exercise their power to order a woman to carry her pregnancy to term whether she wants to or not. Women seeking abortions are often portrayed as foolish teenagers, but thousands of mature women with families are being put in this position just like I was.
Our current legislators believe a few fertilized cells are more important than a woman's quality of life — a quality of life that ripples through her existing family. Right-to-lifers scream about 'partial birth abortions' while women who have suffered and wept through such rare procedures because of serious health issues are viewed as murderers.
I'm telling my story now because maybe it will help wake us up to the nightmare we've created. Had I been forced to have a fourth child, the impact would have been devastating — not only for me, but for my family. We have failed the many women who find themselves in the same position I was. I was afraid to speak up back then. I am speaking up now.
We are back in the days before Roe v. Wade, a time when women are being denied control of their own bodies. Doctors are understandably afraid to follow my obstetrician's example. Miscarriages are looked on with suspicion and without sympathy for a woman's grief when she experiences one. Women with dangerous pregnancy complications are told to wait for 'nature to take its course,' which puts their lives at risk. Many have died.
Stories about women who spend their lives regretting their abortions and dreaming about the child-who-might-have-been spread throughout antiabortion communities. My post-abortion experience was the opposite. It enabled us to have the family we wanted. I've had no regrets.
I will always be grateful to my obstetrician who was willing to risk imprisonment and the loss of his career to perform my illegal abortion. Now that we've gone back in time, women who don't want to bear a child will still find ways to abort a fetus just as they did before abortions became legal. They'll just be forced to do it in unsafe and potentially deadly ways.
We are going back to the days of coat hangers and knitting needles.
Cynthia Ehrenkrantz is a writer and storyteller. She was born in Britain and immigrated to the United States in 1957. Her memoir, 'Seeking Shelter: Memoir of a Jewish Girlhood in Wartime Britain,' is available wherever books are sold. She lives in Westchester County, New York.
Do you have a compelling personal story you'd like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we're looking for here and send us a pitch at pitch@huffpost.com.
Related...
My Great-Grandpa Killed My Great-Grandma Giving Her An Abortion On Their Kitchen Table
My 11-Year-Old Patient Was Pregnant. Here's What I Want You To Know About Being 'Pro-Life.'
To My 2 Exes Whose Fetuses I Aborted: You're Welcome
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ex-NBA star's wife bitten by shark in Puerto Rico
Ex-NBA star's wife bitten by shark in Puerto Rico

Fox News

timean hour ago

  • Fox News

Ex-NBA star's wife bitten by shark in Puerto Rico

The pregnant wife of former NBA star Danilo Gallinari revealed on Friday that she had been attacked by a shark in Puerto Rico. Eleonora Boi posted a photo of herself in a hospital bed with her tongue sticking out on her Instagram page with an explanation of the terrifying event. She's expecting her third child with the former New York Knicks forward. She described it as the "worst day of my life." "I never thought I could get attacked by a shark and I was near the shore and on a super crowded beach. Thankfully me and my baby are fine," she wrote, according to a translation. "I was rushed to the rescue and the surgery to fix my poor bruised leg went well. Now I just have to recover from the great scare. . . ." She joked that the shark would be hearing from her lawyer and thanked her husband for his "courage" during the situation. She reportedly suffered a wound on her thigh. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources biologist Nilda Jiménez told El Nuevo Dia that officials were investigating the type of shark that bit Boi. "Based on the photographs provided to us, we believe the characteristics of the bite could be consistent with those of a shark," Nilda told the outlet, via E! News. "But to validate this, a series of analyses would be necessary. For this purpose, medical personnel were asked for samples, which, if available, would be analyzed promptly." Gallinari didn't address the incident. The Italy native played in the NBA from 2008 to 2024 with eight different teams over his career. He averaged 14.9 points and 4.7 rebounds in 777 career games.

HHS further constrains certain vaccine advisers to the CDC, limiting their input in evidence reviews
HHS further constrains certain vaccine advisers to the CDC, limiting their input in evidence reviews

CNN

timean hour ago

  • CNN

HHS further constrains certain vaccine advisers to the CDC, limiting their input in evidence reviews

In a further jolt to the process of reviewing and recommending vaccines at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, another group of outside advisers to the agency was abruptly sidelined this week. In an email sent late Thursday evening, which was obtained by CNN, members of roughly 30 medical and public health organizations who serve as liaison members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, were told they could no longer participate in the committee's crucial workgroups. Liaison members don't vote at ACIP's public meetings on vaccine recommendations, but they can participate by asking questions and commenting on presentations. Behind the scenes, they have also historically done important work undertaking detailed evidence reviews of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines that helps to inform the group's votes. Those reviews happen in subcommittees called workgroups. As of late last year, ACIP had 11 active workgroups. In addition to studying scientific research, workgroups consider issues of public health importance like what age groups might get the most benefit from a vaccine, what an immunization costs and whether it will be accessible to people who should get it. Workgroups also help craft the language of the recommendations that are voted on by the full committee. Votes are typically held during ACIP's three public meetings each year. If ACIP approves a recommendation, it's forwarded to the CDC director for consideration. The director isn't bound by the committee's recommendation but usually follows it. Liaisons include groups like the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Pharmacists Association. Members also represent nurses and public health officials, typically groups that play a significant role in delivering vaccinations. The latest move comes more than a month after US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. removed all 17 voting members of ACIP, replacing them days later with eight of his own picks, many of whom have cast doubt on the safety of vaccines and public policy around vaccination. One member later dropped out during the required financial review. The email sent Thursday called the liaison members 'special interest groups' that are 'expected to have a 'bias' based on their constituency and/or population they represent.' 'It is important that the ACIP workgroup activities remain free of any influence from any special interest groups so ACIP workgroups will no longer include Liaison organizations,' the email said. Andrew Nixon, director of communications for HHS, said in a statement Friday that 'Under the old ACIP, outside pressure to align with vaccine orthodoxy limited asking the hard questions. The old ACIP members were plagued by conflicts of interest, influence and bias. We are fulfilling our promise to the American people to never again allow those conflicts to taint vaccine recommendations.' Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University who has been participating in ACIP for 40 years as both a voting member and a liaison member, said the move to exclude professional organizations from the process of making vaccine recommendations was shortsighted. 'The organizations have a certain ownership in the recommendations because they participate,' Schaffner said. That participation increases buy-in from different stakeholder groups, which helps ACIP recommendations become the accepted standards of medical practice. Without that participation, Schaffner said, there's a risk that groups will make their own vaccine recommendations, which could lead to conflicting and confusing advice. In fact, some outside organizations, including the Vaccine Integrity Project, have already started the process of making independent vaccination recommendations. Shaffner said he also takes issue with the idea that liaison representatives are biased, which he says implies a conflict of interest. 'Every work group member, no matter who they are, is vetted for a conflict of interest,' he said, and that vetting process has only become more stringent over time as society has become more attuned to the problem. 'I have to turn down opportunities because they would interfere with my being on a work group, and that's something I do, or did,' he said. ACIP's charter spells out that some 30 specific groups should hold non-voting seats on the committee. It also allows the HHS secretary to appoint other liaison members as necessary to carry out the functions of the committee. On Friday, eight organizations that are liaisons to the committee said in a joint statement that they were 'deeply disappointed' and 'alarmed' to be barred from reviewing scientific data and informing the development of vaccine recommendations. 'To remove our deep medical expertise from this vital and once transparent process is irresponsible, dangerous to our nation's health, and will further undermine public and clinician trust in vaccines,' said the statement, which was sent by the American Medical Association. New outside experts may be invited to participate in the workgroups as needed based on their expertise, according to an HHS official who spoke on the condition that they not be named because they had not been authorized to share the information, but such inclusion will no longer be based on organizational affiliation. 'Many of these groups don't like us,' the official said. 'They've publicly attacked us.'

HHS further constrains certain vaccine advisers to the CDC, limiting their input in evidence reviews
HHS further constrains certain vaccine advisers to the CDC, limiting their input in evidence reviews

CNN

time2 hours ago

  • CNN

HHS further constrains certain vaccine advisers to the CDC, limiting their input in evidence reviews

In a further jolt to the process of reviewing and recommending vaccines at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, another group of outside advisers to the agency was abruptly sidelined this week. In an email sent late Thursday evening, which was obtained by CNN, members of roughly 30 medical and public health organizations who serve as liaison members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, were told they could no longer participate in the committee's crucial workgroups. Liaison members don't vote at ACIP's public meetings on vaccine recommendations, but they can participate by asking questions and commenting on presentations. Behind the scenes, they have also historically done important work undertaking detailed evidence reviews of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines that helps to inform the group's votes. Those reviews happen in subcommittees called workgroups. As of late last year, ACIP had 11 active workgroups. In addition to studying scientific research, workgroups consider issues of public health importance like what age groups might get the most benefit from a vaccine, what an immunization costs and whether it will be accessible to people who should get it. Workgroups also help craft the language of the recommendations that are voted on by the full committee. Votes are typically held during ACIP's three public meetings each year. If ACIP approves a recommendation, it's forwarded to the CDC director for consideration. The director isn't bound by the committee's recommendation but usually follows it. Liaisons include groups like the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Pharmacists Association. Members also represent nurses and public health officials, typically groups that play a significant role in delivering vaccinations. The latest move comes more than a month after US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. removed all 17 voting members of ACIP, replacing them days later with eight of his own picks, many of whom have cast doubt on the safety of vaccines and public policy around vaccination. One member later dropped out during the required financial review. The email sent Thursday called the liaison members 'special interest groups' that are 'expected to have a 'bias' based on their constituency and/or population they represent.' 'It is important that the ACIP workgroup activities remain free of any influence from any special interest groups so ACIP workgroups will no longer include Liaison organizations,' the email said. Andrew Nixon, director of communications for HHS, said in a statement Friday that 'Under the old ACIP, outside pressure to align with vaccine orthodoxy limited asking the hard questions. The old ACIP members were plagued by conflicts of interest, influence and bias. We are fulfilling our promise to the American people to never again allow those conflicts to taint vaccine recommendations.' Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University who has been participating in ACIP for 40 years as both a voting member and a liaison member, said the move to exclude professional organizations from the process of making vaccine recommendations was shortsighted. 'The organizations have a certain ownership in the recommendations because they participate,' Schaffner said. That participation increases buy-in from different stakeholder groups, which helps ACIP recommendations become the accepted standards of medical practice. Without that participation, Schaffner said, there's a risk that groups will make their own vaccine recommendations, which could lead to conflicting and confusing advice. In fact, some outside organizations, including the Vaccine Integrity Project, have already started the process of making independent vaccination recommendations. Shaffner said he also takes issue with the idea that liaison representatives are biased, which he says implies a conflict of interest. 'Every work group member, no matter who they are, is vetted for a conflict of interest,' he said, and that vetting process has only become more stringent over time as society has become more attuned to the problem. 'I have to turn down opportunities because they would interfere with my being on a work group, and that's something I do, or did,' he said. ACIP's charter spells out that some 30 specific groups should hold non-voting seats on the committee. It also allows the HHS secretary to appoint other liaison members as necessary to carry out the functions of the committee. On Friday, eight organizations that are liaisons to the committee said in a joint statement that they were 'deeply disappointed' and 'alarmed' to be barred from reviewing scientific data and informing the development of vaccine recommendations. 'To remove our deep medical expertise from this vital and once transparent process is irresponsible, dangerous to our nation's health, and will further undermine public and clinician trust in vaccines,' said the statement, which was sent by the American Medical Association. New outside experts may be invited to participate in the workgroups as needed based on their expertise, according to an HHS official who spoke on the condition that they not be named because they had not been authorized to share the information, but such inclusion will no longer be based on organizational affiliation. 'Many of these groups don't like us,' the official said. 'They've publicly attacked us.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store