A recent op-ed on abortion access seemed somewhat misleading (“Commentary: Maine’s pro-abortion rights lawmakers are misguided,” June 23). The author painted Planned Parenthood as “out-of-state.” Maine has several offices.

The author also said those testifying against the bill didn’t believe abortion to be “health care.”

Those people probably have never experienced an ectopic pregnancy or preeclampsia (usually not manifested until around 20 weeks). They may never have carried four, five or more babies, creating damage that renders them unable to bring another child to term without possibly losing their own life. Extending availability of abortion to 24 weeks allows for unexpected medical problems. Are they advocating leaving children motherless? Would bill opponents help those who produced severely handicapped children?

As to the doctors not adhering to the Hippocratic Oath, were they not first honoring that oath with the mothers?

The author says those opposed to the bill can’t trust doctors who support the bill. No, they are supporting their patients. They are supporting women who feel that the terms and conditions of an abortion are decided between the woman and her doctor. That is supposed to be confidential. To discriminate on the treatment for a woman, decided in the sanctity of a doctor’s office, is invasive. Others, be it legislatures, courts, or pastors have no right to a woman’s private information. Others have no right to shame women who have to have the procedure, many of whom already feel guilty, but know that choosing to live for the children they already have is their most important decision.

Jan Roberson
Harpswell

Copy the Story Link