The internet has become flooded this week with comments regarding a story involving senior Aliza Shvarts and her senior project. According to the article, first published in Yale's school newspaper, the project involved Shvarts impregnating herself and using abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages throughout a nine month period.
---------------------------------------------------
There’s controversy regarding the truth of the student’s actuality of being pregnant, but that’s not the issue I’m focusing on. If indeed this is true, what are the complications that come as baggage?
---------------------------------------------------
With large amounts of argument and opinion surrounding the issue, the idea of freedom of speech has raised concern. Some argue it's Shvarts's right do with her body as she chooses, while others believe she is taking advantage of the freedom.
------------------------------------------------
Subsequent articles posted on news outlets, such as those on MSNBC.com, Poynter.org, and The Washington Post, sometimes contain over 100 posted comments per article.
According to Shvarts, she supposedly wanted to create a forum of discussion on the issue itself by using art.
-------------------------------------------------
Shvarts states in the article, “I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity,” Shvarts said. “I think that I’m creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be.”
------------------------------------------------
Has she really done this? It appears there's more controversy regarding what she's done rather than the abortion issue.
----------------------------------------------
According to the same Yale Daily News article, "Sara Rahman ’09 said, in her opinion, Shvarts is abusing her constitutional right to do what she chooses with her body.
---------------------------------------------
'[Shvarts’ exhibit] turns what is a serious decision for women into an absurdism,' Rahman said. 'It discounts the gravity of the situation that is abortion.'"
-----------------------------------------------
The U. S. Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
--------------------------------------
Is Shvarts's senior project essentially abusing freedom of speech? I'm not so quite sure she is. As disturbing as her actions allegedly are, a woman has the right to do to her body as she pleases. Whether she secretly “miscarried” or publicly announces it does not violate any law. True, some can claim Shvarts’s abuse of it, but there is nothing they can do to change it or punish Shvarts.
------------------------------------------
I have one more comment. What I don't understand is how the media can call what she did a miscarriage. By admitting to the fact that she took drugs to induce miscarrying, she is admitting to having an abortion. I love how the media consistently refers to it as a miscarriage; the play on prose appears to be making light of what she supposedly did.
(STILL not paragraphing!)
No comments:
Post a Comment