An intresting Boston Legal - spoiler

[question everything]

A young, 16 year old girl from China wanted an abortion but could not get her mother's consent, so she went to the practice that is the subject of the series to get a court approval. (They used a legal term that I cannot recall now).

The senior partner, Shirley Schmidt, a woman who, apparently had abortions and also a child of her own, was hesitant to be a co-chair. She kinda agreed with the mother that every woman who underwent abortion has never fully recovered from it - emotionally.

They appeared before a woman judge to present their case. The mother continued saying that she knew her daughter better than anyone else, better than the girl herself. The girl was very poised and articulate, talking about what would happen to her if "she" were born (the fetus), about how teen mothers are destined to be poor and on welfare.

Then Shirley starts doing research to find out that in China and in India, abortions are being done to select males only. Also that even in this countries, there are a lot more boys than girls being born to American of Chinese descent, and she asked the girl about it, since she referred to her fetus as a "she."

As the judge was reaching a verdict to allow the girl to go ahead, "Shirley" tried to express her objections for the reason the girl wanted the abortion, saying that "choice was supposed to have liberated women, not obliterate them."

The judge, however, expressed her dismay that women (and girls) who choose to terminate their pregnancies would have to jump over one more hurdle: "explaining" their reasons. "Do you really want to go there," the judge asked "Shirley." And the petition was granted.

[NanceGreggs]

1. I'm calling it now ...

... if this episode doesn't garner an Emmy for writing, it just ain't in town.

This exquisitely written piece gave voice to every side of the choice argument (and yes, there are more than merely two), and presented each side at its most perfectly human, i.e. equally reasonable, passionate, moral, and intelligent.

Kudos to the writers, who approached the topic with the perfect balance between sensitivity and common sense, natural human emotion and the legal right to put emotions in perspective when just, when fair - when necessary.

Absolutely spellbinding.

[question everything]

2. This program is so good, that I am glad I am not the one who have to choose

which one to submit.

For some reason I could not watch it last Monday, so taped it and only yesterday watched it.

At the end, they showed all the main characters voting. There were kind hazy images interchanging showing each standing in line, then in the booth, marking their ballots - all paper ones, btw, and sliding them into the scanner.

[iverglas]

3. I found it obnoxious

I found the constant talk about mothers and babies offensive -- women and fetuses, please.

I found the incessant use of the term "pro-life" to describe the anti-choice position offensive.

I found the Shirley Schmidt character's whining about no woman ever getting over an abortion offensive -- I suppose women get over having children they don't want, and relinquishing children for adoption. Maybe there's some other option we haven't heard about ...

I found the crap about "genocide" of women via termination of pregnancies where the fetus was female offensive. Give people pensions so they don't favour male children, give women property and other rights within the family, give women education and employment opportunities, so they have genuine choices about their own pregnancies in places and cultures where those rights and opportunities are not always available, value women and not just female fetuses, and *then* pontificate about sex-selection abortion.

People in China don't favour male children, when they are told to have only one child, just because they like boys better. There are no public old-age pensions in China. Boys are the pensions for a lot of people. That tradition and mindset doesn't always get left behind when someone emigrates. A woman who is economically dependent on her husband (and his family) may not have a lot of choice when it comes to which pregnancy to keep or terminate, the choice being to terminate a pregnancy where the fetus is female or get thrown out on the street -- and there's no big reason to think that outlawing sex-selection abortion would improve their situation, given that we know that outlawing abortion really just endangers women in multiple ways. Just for examples.


Yes, the dramatic tension has to be set up, so it can culminate in the judge asking whether anyone really wants women to have to offer up reasons for wanting to terminate a pregnancy, and having their ability to exercise that right made conditional on presenting acceptable reasons.

But there was a whole lot of crap in there that wasn't necessary for that purpose.

[PeaceNikki]

4. In addition...

I found the insistence that every person who's had or been involved in the decision to have an abortion is "haunted" forever to be absolute bullshit and very out of character for both Shirley and Allan Shore.

I love this show, but they are really doing a lot in this last season that is out of character for the main players.

[galaxy21]

5. I think they handled it as well as they could have

They couldn't say 'abortion is wrong' or 'abortion is right' because its a show that is constantly examining grey areas. But, in the end I think that turned into one of its flaws because the writers just didn't want to take one position or the other.



There was a great episode of sex and the city that dealt with Miranda dealing with her unwanted pregnancy, and Carrie reflecting on her own experience a few years earlier. Miranda decides to keep the child, and Carrie realizes she made the correct choice and doesn't regret it. It wasn't patrionising at all and seemed well written and realistic.