The Girls Who Went Away: The Hidden History of Women Who Surrendered Children for Adoption in the Decades Before Roe v. Wade
Author:
Genre: History
Book Type: Paperback
Author:
Genre: History
Book Type: Paperback
Helpful Score: 2
---- Warning: person opinions included. No offense intended, I'm just puzzled. ----
Very interesting book, but I'm still puzzled about the title. The stories about women who surrendered children for adoption, feeling they had no other choice, were very sad and I learned a lot about their experiences and feelings. But I'm not sure what it has to do with Roe v. Wade. The book doesn't discuss abortion, except to say that it wasn't an option for most women during the time period written about. I can't imagine that anyone would feel that abortion is a better choice for many of the young women in the book. Most were well along in the pregnancy before they admitted to themselves or their families that they were pregnant. Others, who at first expected to keep their babies and get married, would not have considered abortion. Many were Catholic and ended up at Catholic maternity homes. Even if abortion had been legal back then I can't imagine many of them would have chosen it as an option. Or is the idea that after Roe v. Wade these young women who were convinced by their parents, doctors & priests to surrender their baby for adoption, would have been convinced to have an abortion instead?
Is the premise that once abortion became legal these unwed, young women would have had abortions instead of adoptions and saved themselves from the years of grief that they experienced? If that's the assumption, I want to see the book about how some women experience years of grief, guilt and pain due to the decision to have an abortion in the years since Roe v. Wade. I guess I'm feeling that the title suggests that Roe v. Wade offered a better solution and I just don't believe that is true. Still, it's a fascinating book that I am glad I took the time to read. I very much agree with many of the women's suggestions that young moms can be good moms if they are given the support that they need to do so.
Very interesting book, but I'm still puzzled about the title. The stories about women who surrendered children for adoption, feeling they had no other choice, were very sad and I learned a lot about their experiences and feelings. But I'm not sure what it has to do with Roe v. Wade. The book doesn't discuss abortion, except to say that it wasn't an option for most women during the time period written about. I can't imagine that anyone would feel that abortion is a better choice for many of the young women in the book. Most were well along in the pregnancy before they admitted to themselves or their families that they were pregnant. Others, who at first expected to keep their babies and get married, would not have considered abortion. Many were Catholic and ended up at Catholic maternity homes. Even if abortion had been legal back then I can't imagine many of them would have chosen it as an option. Or is the idea that after Roe v. Wade these young women who were convinced by their parents, doctors & priests to surrender their baby for adoption, would have been convinced to have an abortion instead?
Is the premise that once abortion became legal these unwed, young women would have had abortions instead of adoptions and saved themselves from the years of grief that they experienced? If that's the assumption, I want to see the book about how some women experience years of grief, guilt and pain due to the decision to have an abortion in the years since Roe v. Wade. I guess I'm feeling that the title suggests that Roe v. Wade offered a better solution and I just don't believe that is true. Still, it's a fascinating book that I am glad I took the time to read. I very much agree with many of the women's suggestions that young moms can be good moms if they are given the support that they need to do so.
