latshe has notsu ered, aside from ayal. [twas a difficult painful dilemma - promise by speaking out, or Stay quiet. This ans so much to me that I was willing to face the eats and abuse I have experienced, so other men

0 suffer in silence, will break the silence. What fakes abortion even more painful is that nobody sees latmen also have feelings. And with society heeding minists hollering ‘‘Every child a wanted child,

ery mother a willing mother,’’ we’ ve been brain- ashed to think a child is unwanted unless the mother nts it. This lack of respect, and ignorance of fa-

ers in abortion counselling, denies a father’s com- lex emotions concerning the loss of a possibly

nted child. This lack of involvement makes it more icult to come to terms with the loss. Any man who experienced abortion should make his feelings

rd. If more of us come out, we can make abortion ss painful loss.

surprising as it sounds, ISOJ fully supports the

it to not be forced to be a parent, but no one

ould have the unilateral right to destroy an unborn ild. In a way, we are both “‘*pro-life’’ and ‘‘pro- ice’’. Are these positions really so far apart? esently yes, as there is currently no way to separate : debate of the mother’s body versus the baby’s

, because affirming one overrides the other.

re’s no way around it, until science finds a way to ‘racta fetus without destroying it. If this could be ine, a woman who did not wish to be pregnant anda ther who wants the child, could both be respected, ‘transferring the fetus into a willing mother or tificial womb. However, none of this will ever come pass if the government heeds some feminists cries at such technology is ‘‘experimentation on women’s t ies’’ and “‘usurps our reproductive functions,”’

d bans research, That it ‘‘usurps’’ reproduction is ‘en, but so what? If womencan have free abortions d reproduce without men (artificial insemination),

eh men should be able to have children without the RMISSION of women. As for being experimenta- that is also given, but be reminded that without timentation on bodies, male or female, there

uld be no life-saving surgery, and no abortions. Minists can’t shut their eyes to experiments for nologies that serve their ends and then condemn nologies that don’t, by using the grounds of erimentation,’’ because both require it. Ifyou

ve, as Ido, that science can end to this bitter pute, your chance is here. Send your opinions to

the federal Commission on New Reproductive Tech- nologies [Editors’ note: since the writing of this column, the Commision on New Reproductive Tech- nologies has been disbanded]. Otherwise, the only Opinions heard, and thus the only opinions repre- sented when laws are recommended, will be feminist biased. For more information, call the Commission at

1-800-668-7060 and ask for an information kit, orcall TSOJ at 851-3496.

In conclusion, I hope that this *“scratching the sur- face’’ of men’s issues is enough to convince you that men also have problems, and that not all men ‘‘con- trol the laws’’. If we did, we wouldn’t have these problems, would we? Even the most radical <“PC* cannot deny this argument, as this is precisely how society viewed their beliefs (ie., ‘‘notaproblem’’) before they were ‘‘correct’’. For us, Our journey

started over 19 years ago, but we have only just begun.

>

Health Centre Hours

Monday: Dr. Tweel 10:00 - 1:00 Tuesday: Dr.MacKenzie 1:30-4:00 Wednesday: Dr. Stewart —_10:00- 1:00 Thursady: Dr. Reid 9:30 - 12:30

The nurse is available from 8:30-4:30 Monday to Friday. Phone 566- 0616 for an appointment and we'll do our best to accommodate your needs.

Sharon Mullin- Zimmermann, RN. U.P.E.I. Health Nurse

ORK IN FRANCE OR THE U.S.A.!

April 1, 1992