A camera crew visits Denise and Buzz at home.
About Bump+
In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court gave women a choice. Thirty-seven years later, we're giving them a voice. BUMP+ is a provocative web series from Yellow Line Studio that follows the fictional stories of three women facing unintended pregnancies.
Watch the episodes. Share your story. Join the conversation.
Emily's Blog
-
Blog
Katie, Hailey, and Denise have been through so much—so much heartbreak. Each journey has been difficult and painful. They’ve made their decisions; and in that sense, each journey is at an end. But now they have to figure out how to live with the choices they’ve made.
I worry for Katie and John. I [...]
New Features
-
Bump+ The Conversation Continues
To Our Audience -
Bump+ The Show has come to an end – but the conversation it has sparked is just beginning.
When we launched this experiment, the only thing we knew for sure was that the time for a new kind of conversation about the sensitive topic of abortion had come. We hoped that story [...] -
No Voting
The creators of Bump+ would like to address several errant media reports. Headlines around the world have said Bump+ trivializes the issue of abortion. Fox News has suggested that Bump+ is an “abortion game show.” It is not. We take the stories of our characters and the choices that lie ahead of [...]
-
Lauri Deason – Producer
Lauri responds to the question of creating television shows.
To Our Audience -
Bump+ The Show has come to an end – but the conversation it has sparked is just beginning.
As word about Bump+ spread to 64 countries across the globe, controversy and criticism from people on both sides of the debate followed; but instead of listening to them, you found the courage to listen to each other. Six weeks and more than 125,000 site visits later, your responses not only to our characters, but also to each other has proved to the world what we suspected all along – we were right to trust in the goodness and intelligence of our audience. We are intensely humbled by the stories you’ve shared and the respect you have shown to each other. Your partnership has challenged us to see this debate in new ways, and reminded the world that we don’t have to agree to listen and respond with compassion. Thank you for that gift.
Comments on individual episodes have now been closed in order to preserve what was The Bump Experience as it unfolded. A new comment thread has been opened here to keep the conversation going. Please visit this link to share your story and join the conversation.
Another great episode. The characters are really coming into their own and depicting, what I think is, a distilled version of many realities.
I’m still very excited about this project. The only thing that saddens me is that it is clearly still our tendency as commentors to bring our own prejudices to the table. For example, we’re still assuming things like pro-lifers are religious and pro-choicers are not – neither of these assumptions is necessarily true. It also feels like we’re still relying on some of those same-old-same-old arguments (although Raspberry J’s comment about convictions I found educational, even if it didn’t exactly help move compassionate conversation along.) Whether those arguments are based in fact or opinion is a little beside the point. We’re supposed to be opening communication, not trying to prove each other wrong at every response.
I most enjoy hearing peoples’ stories and how those stories could provide “real life” instances for the writers and actors to feed off. Bravo to those, like Amy M, who are helping in this way! Thank you for sharing your stories.
Also, thank you to the producers for your clarifying comments. Since it seems like commentors have accused you of both a pro-life agenda and a pro-choice agenda, I’d say you should take that as a cue that you’re riding the line just fine.
Maybe Buzz is not who hurt Denise? Maybe he is not the father of this child?
Why does Denise speak French to the children? (previous episode) Doesn’t anyone find that intriguing?
Why is that intriguing? With her accent, I’m assuming she grew up speaking the language, so why wouldn’t she speak it to her kids?
OK so it’s very easy for all of us viewers to pass judgment on this guy Buzz, but do you think he’s all that bad? Obviously he’s taking care of his family given the cards he’s been dealt in his life.
Are we really sure about the abusive parts, or are we just taking Denise’s word for it? Don’t get me wrong, I do not defend abuse or violence, period! But please don’t be quick to judge.
Having said that, I give props to the show’s producers for the original idea, and to the convincing actors. Is it David Imani who’s playing Buzz?
Although I would’ve wanted to see another couple in a very common situation where the girl got knocked up after a one night stand, and the guy has no saying if she should have an abortion or not… maybe something for future episodes.
Denise has never admitted that Buzz abuses her: the doctor saw a bruise on her neck during the pilot episode. She almost seems oblivious to the abuse aspect of the relationship. That is so common among abused women, until someone confronts them directly about it (which the producers really have not done) and/or some serious incident happens that requires outside intervention. Even then, there is a strong reluctance to leave the abuser. Generally there is a deep dependence one way or both in such a relationship. The woman has a hard time envisioning any other possibility for her (or her children’s) lives.
My aunt was the sweetest, most loving woman in the world. She always made time for me. In the ’80s she was married to a very abusive man, much like Denise is. He coerced her into getting an abortion. He told her that he would kill her if she didn’t. She didn’t know that he was sleeping with someone else behind her back. They got a divorce several years later.
She drank often because of an injury from a car accident. However, after the abortion, she started binge drinking really heavy alcohol. She died about 16 years after the abortion from cirrhosis of the liver.
Her abortion didn’t help her at all. It compounded the problem. It made the problem ten times worse. I miss my aunt very much. Her death has hurt everyone in my family, and we have a large family. My dad and aunt come from a family of 14 children. So, you can imagine just how many people the situation has had an impact on.
That said, Denise and her children need to get away from Buzz if he’s really that abusive. An abortion won’t help anyone in that family, it will only make the situation worse. Abortion is like a virulent disease. It’s effects spread wide and far, and hurts everyone in it’s path. It tears up relationships, it tears lives apart, causes hurt, guilt, anger, and pain. It changes you. It changes everyone around you. And it’s not a good kind of change. It’s not something I would ever recommend to anyone for any reason.
For more information on how abortion effects people’s lives, look up Dr. Alveda King and the Silent No More Awareness Campaign. They’ll tell you that abortion is not something you get when you’re looking for a better outcome. It’s something you regret for the rest of your life.
It is not right to assume or predict that abortion “hurts everyone in its path.” That is a judgement that you are making for every woman and every friend or family member of every woman who chooses to have an abortion. That absolute attitude is the same absolute attitude that religious people push with the “no sex before marriage” message – that is – that it’ll only cause pain and sorrow and that nothing good could come of it. Simply not true!!
Consider a perspective different than your own! Consider that while abortion may not be the right choice for you, it IS the right choice for others. Consider that many women have had an abortion and have moved forward in their lives – without the permanent guilt, anger and destruction you speak of.
I disagree strongly with the message of fear that you are selling. Hold fast to your convictions, but respect that they are just that: YOURS. Others feel differently and that is okay!
K,
I agree whole-heartedly with you. Clearly, having an abortion was not the right choice for Amy M’s aunt, but at the same time it is the right choice for many women and they move forward to lead the life they want to after the abortion. If the world was a perfect place no woman would ever be coerced into an abortion (like Amy M’s aunt) or stopped from having one when she decides it is the right choice for her.
Also, in the real world, Denise cannot just leave and not allow Buzz access to the baby if she CTT because Buzz is the father and has rights. If he is not the father to the other two children and Denise decides to terminate the pregnancy, she has a much better chance of successfully leaving Buzz, which I would argue might be the best choice for Denise and her children.
K,
Whether Amy M is right or wrong about abortion hurting everyone in its path, I don’t think you understand the meaning of truth when you condemn her “absolute attitude.”
“Hold fast to your convictions,” you said, “but respect that they are just that: YOURS. Others feel differently and that is okay!”
May I respectfully ask what a conviction is if not a belief that something is absolutely true? If my convictions are only true for me or are only my own feelings on the issue, why should I hold fast to them? Sounds like a waste of energy to me.
The word “conviction” comes from the Latin “convincere,” which means “to completely conquer.” Thus, if I have a conviction, it means I have been completely conquered by a truth that is independent of my own personal feelings. In fact, my reason could convince me of a truth that is entirely contrary to all my feelings, previous opinions, and common sense. Einstein’s theory of relativity is an excellent example of this. In such a case, my mind would be “conquered” by truth and I would have to change my life to conform with that truth, just as Einstein’s contemporaries were forced to revise many of their established theories.
Since having a conviction means that you believe you have a reliable connection to reality, it is a great act of charity to try to convince others of what you believe is true. Truth is a good thing, even though it may be uncomfortable. After all, while it may be “okay” for someone to lie in the snow believing they are sunning themselves at the beach, would you praise me if I left that person to freeze to death instead of trying to show him he is mistaken? Perhaps he won’t be pleased if I break into his sunny fantasy world, but if I am truly loving I will do it anyway.
Of course, people can be mistaken or deceived in their convictions, but that does not change the nature of a conviction. Amy M may be right or wrong in her convictions, but she is certainly right in trying to convince others, so long as she does it respectfully, which she certainly did.
Raspberry J, bravo. That was beautifully put.
Raspberry J,
I kind of see where you are getting at, but your example does not hold weight tome. Because your conviction (freezing to death) is a scientific fact (i.e. if you lie in snow trying to sun yourself, eventually you will freeze to death because our bodies can only survive so long in freezing temperatures). As opposed to thinking that abortion is the wrong choice for every woman…that is purely a personal belief probably related to religious belief and/or personal experience.
I am in a different camp though, I do not think every personal held conviction or belief, either faith based or fact based needs to be evangelized. I believe in allowing people generally make decisions for themselves and if they want my opinion on what tehy should do they will ask for it.
I second Anon’s response that the comparison of a man freezing to death is not the same as a moral perspective. Fact and opinion are two very different things.
Respectfully, I feel like your response is a little silly. I liken it to a religious person saying “Well, the Bible says God is real, and if he’s real then everything he said is true, so therefore, here is the truth.” It’s a faulty and circular argument hinging on the fact that one must believe in – and place value on – the Bible. Consider that I do not. So therefore, any argument made referring to the Bible isn’t valid to me because I do not see it as the same absolute source of truth. To relate this to your response, you are saying “If you say conviction, then you mean the word convince. And if you mean convince, then you mean to conquer. And if you mean conquer then, you mean persuade.” Uh, no. I mean “conviction: a firmly held opinion or belief.” I don’t think the Latin word train is necessary, as I am sure almost any word/sentence could be deconstructed and reconstructed as one suitably finds if that is the road taken.
My definition of the word ‘conviction’ is that it is a firmly held belief or opinion. It is PERSONAL. It is not a matter of what is right or wrong – it is a matter of personal belief and opinion!!! It is absolute truth, but for one individual, not for all mankind. The value you give to the word is different than the value I give.
You say “having a conviction means that you believe you have a reliable connection to reality” – the key word here is BELIEVE. Everyone believes different things! It’s not about misunderstanding the meaning of truth – it’s about the fact that truth is subjective and varies for everyone. Others believe differently than I do and I respect that!
What I do not respect (in regards to religion, abortion, politics, homosexuality, capital punishment, euthanasia, etc) is the arrogance of thinking “I am right, everyone else is wrong, so therefore, I must change them.” I believe in accepting that we are all different and that others beliefs are just as valuable as mine. And yes, my convictions may only be true for me. That is what makes them MY convictions. I am secure in them and do not consider them a waste of energy. I tolerate differences in opinion and though I may strongly disagree with others, I do not need to convince them to think as I do.
As Anon said, if others ask, I will share … but I too take a great stand against evangelism of any sort. To each their own.
Dear K,
If you don’t believe in absolute, universal truth (except in cases that can be verified by scientific experiment), then there is no point in continuing our conversation. Conversations, after all, depend on the idea that some opinions are more true than others, and that dialogue can thus lead to a greater degree of shared truth.
Since you do not believe this, nothing I can say will make any difference, so I won’t argue with you. For other reasons as well, I will be unable to respond again. But I would like to pose a question for your consideration as I sign out of the conversation:
What makes your belief that truth is subjective a “fact” when our belief that truth is objective is only an “opinion”? Since you believe that “others beliefs are just as valuable as mine,” why did you reproach Amy M for her conviction that she should try to convince other people of what she believes? You may not like evangelism, but in your posts you have defended your conviction that truth is subjective with quite an evangelical vigor.
Raspberry K,
I tolerate that which is tolerant. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts, beliefs and feelings.
It doesn’t matter to me what your personal “truths” are. I only care that you respectfully step back and allow for other people to have a difference of opinion. Your posts have shown an inability to do that, as with each response you become more condescending. In that case, it’s a little hard to be tolerant. Pro choice supporters accept that others are pro life. We do not seek to change anyones mind. You do not see pro choice people standing outside hospitals holding signs that tell women to abort their babies. We respect that for some people abortion is not an option.
I “reproached” Amy for her judgment of abortion because it was not tolerant. She has every right to believe whatever she wants, as do you, but saying that abortion is awful and horrible and always the wrong choice is ignorant. That is not the case. Abortion is not wrong because someone says it is wrong. Her experiences or anyone else’s are not all encompassing!
I sense that you are becoming angry because I will not bend to your way of thought. It’s quite typical of people who have the agenda of forcing their beliefs onto others – an inability to just let things be. I will not agree with you, and it leaves you dishevelled and desperate to get your point across.
Here is a thought: let’s agree to disagree. Your way of living or looking at life is not the only way. Talking down to me or manipulating my words won’t change that fact. And yes, it IS fact that your way of life isn’t the only way – proven by the incredible diversity in belief systems and lifestyles across the world. You say that dialogue can lead to a greater degree of shared truth, but what you really mean is “dialogue can lead to a greater degree of shared truth – as long as you agree with everything I say.” Coercion is not the same thing as dialogue. And in order to lead to a greater degree of truth, you must first be willing to consider that other truths exist.
You miss something big here, and that is that I am not arguing abortions are right or wrong. My ONLY point is that YOUR OPINION IS YOUR OPINION. The arrogance with which you refuse to admit that we’re all entitled to believe in different things amuses me. It truly reminds me of every debate I have ever had with a religious person. It’s the same heels dug in “I am right because I read the Bible and God wrote the Bible so therefore the Bible is real” conversation. Except that this time it’s about a lesson we all learn in Kindergarden, which is that everyone is different and it’s okay. I do not think this is rocket science!
It is a little difficult to reason or engage with someone who stubbornly stands there saying “I am right. I know the absolute truth, it’s the only truth, there is no such thing as other perspectives or possibilities, so no matter what you say, you are wrong and I am right.”
May you eventually discover the ability to tolerate and accept the differences in others!
Dear K and Rasberry J,
As I read through this thread one thought comes to mind that may be helpful to you. My thought is this:
It is a human quality to want to share with others something that we see as good and beautiful. An awesome example of this is the success of free online photo sharing sites like Picasa and Flickr. People see and capture beautiful things through the lens of their camera, and they want to share it with others. There is something fulfilling and ennobling to a person when they share something they see as beautiful and good.
People with a faith-based perspective often see something very beautiful in their faith that they want to share. This works both ways. K, you see your vision—truth as being subjective and the need for tolerance—as beautiful as well. I admire your conclusion about “agreeing to disagree.” I see the value in this conversation if both sides are able to recognize the fact that the other side is seeking to live by values that they truly perceive as being good.
That is what I think the challenge of Bump is: to recognize that people on the other side are genuinely seeking and wanting to share what they believe is good. It can be hard for pro-life people to recognize that when a woman chooses to have an abortion she is often genuinely trying to choose what she perceives to be the greatest good for herself, for others involved, and for the baby (I am thinking of stories that have been shared here about women who did not want their children to be born into abuse or extreme poverty, for example.)
This analogy of sharing beauty and goodness and recognizing it in what others share has been helpful to me as I have interacted on the site. I find I have to put in effort to find the beauty in what people I do not agree with are saying, particularly on the abortion issue. I have found it very rewarding thus far to find the beauty and value the person who is sharing their thoughts. I hope this thought will be helpful to you as well.
@ K, it sounds like you have had experiences of being insulted by people coming from a faith-based background. I think it is important for pro-life people and people of faith to hear and understand that there are many like you out there who share your negative experiences of people with biblical faith. The bible is supposed to be an invitation, and human freedom is not only a right, but a sacred right: one of the things that make us human.
As a woman of faith standing in for other people of faith who may have insulted you, I want to extend a sincere apology. You and all others who do not share our faith should be treated with the utmost respect at all times.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences. I believe they add value to this Bump experiment.
@ Rasberry J, I hope this is helpful to you. I think K felt you were talking down to her but I am guessing that was not your intent. It is challenging to find ways to have a discussion like this. I hope you will come back to Bump.
Thank you, Sister Mary Agnes–
You are right, I did not mean to talk down to K at all! Nor did I mean to sound coercive or intolerant.
K, I apologize for not being more careful in my choice of words! I am a college student in TX, so I’m a bit too used to writing academic essays with strong thesis statements. Please forgive me, and thank you for putting up with my mistakes as I learn how to discuss real life issues with love and compassion!
While I see your basic point, I fail to see how an abortion would help Denise in this particular situation, even if it is abusive. She clearly loves her kids, hates the idea of having an abortion, but is trapped with Buzz. And unlike many people in this situation, she has a producer offering to help her and her children leave, and to help her get on her feet. She has a chance to get funds and a stable home set up, I don’t see a need for her to “have” to get an abortion if she can get away.
That being said, as a steadfast opponent of abortion, I do agree that you are correct that many women can move forward without guilt, anger and destruction. However, the fact that any number of women would experience this after having an abortion seems to single a problem with abortion to begin with. I mean, even if not EVERYONE experiences this, if there is something that is known to cause these reactions in a high number of women that is a fairly disturbing fact to begin with.
Furthermore, my biggest issue with abortion is that it often takes control out of the fathers hands, and is often used as a form of birth control. Giving it the title “women’s choice” makes it sound as if only one person contributed genetic material, but it is equally the father and mothers baby. Furthermore, while I can see how in the past abortion was needed more as women were trapped in situations where they were being forced to have children they did not want, but now there are so many alternatives I feel that abortion is used as a back-up option for not being careful.
“I feel that abortion is used as a back-up option for not being careful.”
Guess what- contraception fails. Women can be very careful and still end up with an unplanned/ unwanted pregnancy. That includes married women, adult women, financially stable women. There are many reasons to decide not to continue a pregnancy.
Dear K,
I am a little surprised at your responses here. You have been very balanced in your comments throughout this site, but I think you came down on Amy M with a little more harshness than you probably intended. Amy M was not selling a message of fear. She was simply sharing her story and making recommendations to the characters in this web series based on her life experience. Her message was consistent with the story she shared. That really is what this Bump forum is supposed to be for. I think that some of your words may have blurred your own message of tolerance a little–something which obviously you did not intend to do.
I wish to interject here on the thread that begins with Amy M’s story above and continues with replies from K, Anon, Raspberry J. and Sister Mary Agnes. Although many good points were made on both sides of the debate, there was one valuable distinction, which may have been at the root of the misunderstanding. I hope that it diffuses some of the tension that everyone seemed to feel with this last exchange and instead leads to continued sharing on some of the valuable topics introduced by this discussion. Since I am essentially responding to 9 (or more) different posts, it is likely to be rather long, so I hope you will bear with me.
First I wish to address my belief that as Amy M was so vulnerably sharing her loving impression on what happened, as she observed, as a result of the abortion that her aunt had so many years ago, she did, in fact, use some generalizations to try and punctuate her opinions. But I would tend to try and give the benefit of the doubt to people who are sharing personal experiences, especially of such magnitude. They may get caught up in the emotion of it and not even realize that there could be a better way to communicate, so that people will listen. I don’t think she was trying to sell a message of fear, so much as trying to tell her very, emotional, personal experience with abortion.
The natural reaction to such generalizations, however is often one of defense, as we see illustrated in the next post from K and the one after that, from Anon, and we often see people stop listening once they are on the defensive. Where once the discussion may have been led by reason (as defined as: a premise of an argument in support of a belief, or the ability to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic) it has now been overcome by passion (as defined as: a strong and barely controllable emotion). I by no means wish to say that passion has no merit in the current discussion, on the contrary, passion (as defined as: an intense desire or enthusiasm for something) is very relevant to this topic. In fact, we see that many people have this passion on both sides of the argument, and the SOMETHING that they have enthusiasm or intense desire FOR is, obviously not the abortion itself, but to effectively sway the other side to see the legitimacy of their attitude toward it. Believe me when I say, from an outsider’s view, you are ALL doing this very thing, and in that endeavor you have much in common.
A side note, when discussing what comes natural, one must remember that the difference between doing just what comes natural, and principled self-restraint is called, CIVILIZATION. And, if I might add, it’s wonderful to hear counter perspectives and be compelled to measure and evaluate your own perspective – even to the point of discomfort. However, if pluralism is extrapolated into meaning moral relativism, that’s when the danger signs begin.
On to my next observation when Raspberry J “comes on the scene”, if you will. She intuitively knew that the discussion had been taken in a new direction, or perhaps directed it there by trying to point out that at the foundation of your arguments was a world-view distinction between Anon and K’s perspective and hers. This is where the definition of words really comes in to play, and we can see disagreement ensue because the definition of terms is not understood and agreed upon.
I would like to point out that both Raspberry J and K are in agreement in their definition of the word conviction. Raspberry J said, “May I respectfully ask what a conviction is if not a belief that something is absolutely true?” K said (in a post just a few below), “My definition of the word ‘conviction’ is that it is a firmly held belief or opinion. With a little liberty in syntax, basically the same definition.
Now that it has been demonstrated that you are both in agreement in the definition of the word conviction, the question that needs to be asked is how did you arrive at that conviction? This is where the difference in world-views comes in. Both, K and Anon, did a fairly good job of describing their world-view as relativistic, while Raspberry J holds the position of an absolute truth orientation. May I submit that the word truth is used with different definitions and that is what led to a misunderstanding. When Raspberry J asked the question, ”If my convictions are only true for me or are only my own feelings on the issue, why should I hold fast to them?“ (by the way, it’s very good question for us all to ponder) I believe it would have been helpful for her to define the word true. Especially since she started the post saying that she didn’t think K understood the meaning of truth when she condemn Amy M’s ”absolute attitude.“
At the risk of sounding like a teacher, and I sincerely hope that is not the case here, I am merely trying to point out the breakdown in your communication, allow me to define a couple of words here.
RELATIVISM:
The doctrine that knowledge, truth and morality exist in relation to culture, society or historical context, and are not absolute.
ABSOLUTE:
as an adjective
1. Not qualified or diminished in any way; total
2. viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative.
as a noun
a value or principal that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things.
TRUTH:
1. the quality or state of being true.
2. that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
3. a fact or belief that is accepted as true.
From these definitions, it is fairly easy to see that when K uses the word truth, what she means is probably the third definition most of the time. Whereas when Raspberry J uses the word and adds the qualifier, absolute before it, she has attributed a quality to the word truth, so now the full meaning of the words absolute truth, when used together, is more accurately defined as – total and not relative or comparative truth. Needless to say, it could be quite confusing for someone to understand what K meant when she said, ”It is not a matter of what is right or wrong – it is a matter of personal belief and opinion!!! It is absolute truth, but for one individual, not for all mankind.“ Just by adding that one qualifier, absolute, to the word truth her statement became a non sequitur.
Real communication carries with it great responsibility. A responsibility to give the benefit of the doubt and confirm assumptions prior to making them. A few simple questions is all that is needed to clear up many misunderstandings. If we want to create a kinder, gentler and, I might add, more civilized society, we can start there. I postulate that had any of you recognized the opportunity to clear the air with a few simple questions, your communication would have been more effective and hopefully less defensive.
If you will indulge me a bit more, I would like to say that I have learned this lesson, often times the hard way because of my propensity of a passionate nature, and I am sure that I will undoubtedly have to apologize again (just like Raspberry J has so vulnerably and honorably done) in what may be the not so distant future. The fact of the matter is, effective communication is not easy, especially when emotions get involved. And we humans are flawed and we don’t always get it right the first time. I have also learned that many of my prior convictions have been changed because I discovered they were unfounded. Because of this, I happen to agree with Raspberry J’s astute observation that dialo can lead to a greater degree of shared truth, but I would add, only if we ALL remain teachable.
This whole discussion reminds me of a sage teacher I once had the great fortune to learn under, who very effectively demonstrated the errors in my thinking by asking me simple, straight-forward questions:
When I said – ”You shouldn’t push your morality on me.“
He asked – ”Why not?“
It was hard for me to answer this without contradicting myself. When I said ”You shouldn’t“… I was actually doing the very thing I was admonishing him for. I was pushing MY morality on him.
When I said – ”You are intolerant and arrogant.“
He asked – ”What do you mean by that?“
I replied – ”You think you’re right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong.“
He asked – ”Tell me, do you think your views are right?“
I replied – ”Yes.“
He asked – ”Help me out here, why is it that when I think I’m right, I’m intolerant, but when you think you’re right, you’re just right?“
This professor and I had many more conversations like this that I could share, but I just want to finish with one which was more on the point:
He asked – ”Can you clear this up for me?“ If partial birth abortion is morally acceptable, on what grounds do we condemn infanticide? Because it seems to me, the only difference between the two is the location of the baby, one partially outside the womb – partial birth abortion – and one completely out. And location seems completely irrelevant to the value of the baby to me. Am I missing something here?”
After much deliberation, I had to admit he wasn’t missing anything, but perhaps I was. I had many inconsistencies in my thinking and I gladly accepted the corrections.
I humbly share these stories of life lessons I have learned, not to come off as a know-it-all, on the contrary, I hope to be perceived as someone who has made a life-time commitment to learning, but so that someone else may possibly glean these lessons without having to make the same mistakes I have. As iron sharpens iron, no man is an island. We depend on each other intellectually, for it is by reasoning together that we find out what we need and how to obtain it, not to mention what we should live for and how.
Sister Mary Agnes, I commend you for your ability to communicate in such a way that exudes love, love, love. I see you as a living example of what Christ compels us to do in 1 Corinthians 13:1-3, “If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.”
Love becomes, not so much an emotion as a action that we choose. I believe you are choosing well and exemplifying this, my fear is that some may misinterpret your compassion as a sign that you have fallen for the lie of being politically correct in order to merely gloss over deep differences, just for the sake of superficial harmony and perhaps follow that lead. Regardless if they do, I implore you to continue to be the voice that consistently reminds us that love should be our priority and default here on this web experiment, and in ALL areas of life. Thank you for being you!
Dear Carpe Diem,
Thank you for that amazing post above, and your careful analysis of the conversation on this thread. So much careful thought is being put into this site by so many people, it is beautiful!
Thank you also for your kind words to me. You are right, I have worried a few times that people might think I am just being “politically correct” or superficial. I decided to stop worrying about it. When I respond, I just try to connect with each person as best as I can in a way I think they will understand, and in a way that I hope will move the discussion forward in a positive way.
I think some people are afraid that to understand another person’s point of view is equal to betraying one’s own point of view. I hope my posts can help show people that is not the case.
Bump has provided an amazing opportunity and I am glad to see more and more people joining in the conversation.
Dear Amy M,
Thank you for sharing your aunt’s story. I think this is what the Bump platform is asking for, that people share their stories and the conclusion they have drawn from the stories they themselves share.
Thank you so much Sister. Thank you to everyone who has been supportive. You’re right, I meant no harm. However, I haven’t ever met anyone who abortion has actually helped, and have only heard stories from and about people who have been hurt by it. Their relationships and their lives have fallen apart at the seams, and they spiral down until they seek help. I know for fact from my aunt’s case that Denise would not be helped by having an abortion. That’s why posted what I did: to give you a better understanding of what happens when victims of abuse try to use abortion as a solution to a horrible problem.
There are people out there who can help: women’s shelters, crisis pregnancy centers, church programs, etc. In the case of Denise, there is a producer who is willing to help her and her children escape this situation that they are in. I very much dislike abortion for the hurt I’ve seen and felt it cause. I try my hardest to help others when I see a need for it, and in so many cases abortion leaves a lot needed. I have not seen a single problem that abortion has solved other than ectopic pregnancies, and even in that case, there are solutions other than a direct abortion.
Like I said before, if you don’t believe me about the wake of destruction left by abortion, look up Dr. Alveda King and the Silent No More Awareness Campaign. You can also look up RealChoice, the blog and the website, which are run by a member of Operation Rescue, and there are many, MANY stories in those pages, which will tell you the same thing. Women deserve better than abortion.
Thank you Amy for that sweet response. I believe you when you said you had no ill intent. In fact, I had written a response myself to the whole thread that ensued because of your comment, but I haven’t posted it yet because I read the Sister’s kind response and wanted to comment on that as well.
There were so many good points brought up because of your comments to spark meaningful conversation and it’s hard to decide which ones to focus on. Still as I look out my window at the beautiful sunrise this morning, I am reminded of the hope of each new dawn. This whole bump+ experience is just like that. It has the potential to start something new, “to call to people on both sides of the abortion debate to open the lines of communication and find workable solutions to the problem of unintended pregnancies”, to quote from the producers.
I don’t know that we have found any workable solutions to the problem just yet, but I remain hopeful that all involved will find that through learning to listen and listening to learn we can all move in that direction together.
P.S. Can you expound a bit on your comment about ectopic pregnancies? I’m curious.
How horrible it must be to be in a situation like Denise’s. One can only wonder what happened after the crew left. And why is it so hard for women in this situation to leave abusive men? She was offered help and she refused. God help her.
Denise….
My heart just absolutely breaks. Honey, you had a chance to get out! Get yourself out of there! You deserve soooo much better than all of that.
After watching through all of the episodes again, my wife and I think that the producers have left each of the women some positive options that do not include abortion.
Denise will not have a happy ending unless she leaves her abusive relationship, either permanently or until Buzz has made some real, measurable progress in counseling. Terminating a pregnancy would just be adding to the collateral damage from the abuse she takes from Buzz – for her relationship to be so terrible that she is afraid to bring a new baby into it is tragic indeed. Denise needs to value herself enough to remove herself and her children from harm’s way, so that she does not need to fear to give birth to a new baby. I know that some will think “Single Mom, 3 kids, way too difficult!”, but that statement does a disservice to the single moms we know who are making it work, with help from the church, family, and social services. Denise needs a new support network to make her feel loved and capable, and help prevent her from making a life-ending decision – abortion – out of fear. No decision should be made out of fear.
I agree with Roger wholeheartedly. My husband’s mother was a single mother of three children and was given the option to abort her last (my husband). She chose to keep him and now my three children have a wonderful father who is committed to do better than his father did. She did it through the help of social services and family – like the above comment mentions. At one time she had several jobs to make ends meet, but she survived. She raised three children who have families of their own. I truly believe there is a good side to every problem. I’m going to thank my mother in law today for blessing me with the best gift in my life, my husband. I came from an abusive family but now I am able to feel safe within my own family, something amazing!
This show is pathedic! It is obvious as the show progresses that the individuals in charge of the show have no real intention of having open dialog on both ends of this issue but are instead pushing an agenda! This may explain why your comments have reduced by half since your first two episodes! It also explains why they took such drastic measures to gain audience attention this week! Had this been a true reality show the real producer would have never brought the show to a suspected abusers house, purely because of the liability factor had said abuser acted out! The constant editing and deleting of comments and labeling them as agrumenative and or personal attacks, when there is obviously no such dialog further shows the weakness of your entire concept! It is a shame because I was really excited when I first learned of the project and concept in the beginning, but now I think that like many others I will probably stop participating. The problem with listening and engaging with people in an open and honest conversation like this is that most of the time one side wants you to listen and when it becomes your turn to share your side, all of a sudden the conversation is over. Thanks bump for making this an obviously one sided conversasion!
I’m sorry you’re disappointed in the show, A. I can’t comment on what the producer of an actual reality show would indeed do, but the actions of Bump+’s (fictional) producer in this episode ring true to me. Comments are edited to help promote real dialog and not simply angry rhetoric. For the record, comments from both sides of the issue have been edited and deleted. We do not show any partiality towards any belief being put forward on the comment boards. We are only interested in promoting a real conversation between our viewers.
Last time I checked the statement of absolute fact concerning the law, science or a medical procedure is not angry rhetoric, it is in fact a statement of facts. If you were in fact editing impartially when you edited the comment that stated abortion is murder and that the murder of unborn children can be legally prosecuted when the child is killed outside of a medical office, then too you should have edited the comment by the person who stated that abortion is not murder! How can we have an open conversation about the topic of Abortion when we can’t even be honest about what the topic entails? Like I said you are obviously pushing an agenda! On another note your fictional producer is then incredibly irresponsible to take such a risk, knowing that by doing so they could further aggitate an abuser and potentially cause serious harm to the participant and her children!
A, I encourage you to scroll down a little bit on this thread. The producers gave an in-depth explanation of why they depicted the fictional producers going to Denise’s home.
I agree A. Three of my posts were removed after a few hours, and I was a bit confused as to why. I realized that I had quoted medical reviews and some anti-abortion activists. I had replied to someone saying that it was ok to abort early because the baby had no understanding of their surroundings and had no concept of dreams or plans. I, of course, disagree. I said what about the people who have severe mental disorders, who cannot associate with anyone around them and have no sense of reality – according to their theory, I assumed that they too could be “post-birth aborted” (or murdered). This comment was promptly taken off. I wish people could put into perspective what is really going on and be ok with expanding their theories. And I really hope this comment is not removed either.
A,
I have been watching the show and read a lot of the comments, and honestly can’t tell what “agenda” you think this show is pushing. I have seen some real honest vulnerability and genuinely caring people on both sides of the issue. I have been touched by stories shared from the heart, by responses filled with compassion, and by a willingness to set aside anger and hatred for understanding (not to be confused with apathetic agreement) and caring concern (not to be confused with patronizing pity).
I think that the story, and even the very issue itself, are far less important than a willingness from the audience to see those with differing view points and even differing beliefs as worthwhile, good intentioned, valuable people deserving of being treated with respect and compassion.
Minds are never changed with self-righteous or enraged arguments. But when there is first a meeting of the hearts in respect and compassion, you never know where it will lead. Bump has provided this opportunity for many people.
Well, I definitely was “Surprised” by the visit to the home, and a bit startled. Here’s my take on it: Buzz is probably a great guy when he is sober, and terrifying and abusive when he is drunk. The fact that Denise lied about Buzz making cookies and watching the kids so she could go to her appointment seems very consistent to me with behaviors of some people who have loved ones who are alcoholics. Denise’s denial of the gravity of her situation seems realistic to me also. I have cared for children of alcoholics and these are behaviors I have seen over and over. When she said Buzz baked those cookies a couple of episodes back, she probably could have passed a lie detector test.
I am guessing that Denise very much wants her baby (as she said in earlier episodes), but is not sure what Buzz’s reaction will be. I think she heard about the reality show, was willing to sign the contract to get the financial help, and was planning to announce her pregnancy and the financial help to Buzz all at the same time. The fact that she agreed in the contract to a possible home visit was something she never took seriously. She has created her own inner world for survival and the confrontations from the outside were things she never banked on. All of this is a guess, of course, based on what I am surmising from her behaviors and responses from the beginning. Depending on how close my guess is to the real story, this comment might give the producers some amusement . . .
I hope this doesn’t turn in to some lamo. . . everyone secretly had a good heart, they were just mislead. I really don’t want any abotions to happen but I think this it is the nature of humanity that people struggle and they come out of teh struggle in one of three ways, passively which is choosing the easy path, seeing what is right and choosing it or choosing what is wrong. It’s not just a matter of education it is a matter of choice.
A CLARIFICATION FROM THE PRODUCERS -
The discomfort with this story line is duly noted – and we appreciate your comments. Among other things, the feedback lets us know that you view our fictional characters with a great deal of compassion – and it reinforces our belief in the intelligence and goodness of our audience.
“K” has made the excellent point that workers from an abortion clinic (and, we will add, a crisis pregnancy center or any medical facility) would not show up on a woman’s doorstep. We completely agree, and want to make a few key story points very clear to anyone who may be confused.
1. The decision to ambush the women at their homes is being made solely by the (fictional) producer of the (fictional) reality show. She is within her legal rights to do so because Katie, Denise, and Hailey all signed contracts giving her nearly unlimited access to all facets of their lives. Katie mentioned the contract in the last episode. These contracts are common to all actual reality shows, and are negotiated with the participants before the cameras start rolling. “Ambush” visits like the one portrayed in this episode are also a staple of many actual reality shows. You can assume that, under the terms of the contract, each of the women were informed that such a visit was a possibility.
2. Neither the clinic nor Dr. Patterson has any control in the producer’s decisions regarding the show. He is just one more participant in the show, with his own binding contractual agreement. You may have noticed that tensions have been rising between the entire clinic staff and the producers since the first episode. It is also an ongoing unfortunate reality in the world of “reality” television that many of the people who aspire (for whatever reason) to appear on these shows have unrealistic expectations of what the experience will bring to their lives.
3. As explained by Dr. Patterson in the pilot episode, and clarified in episode 6, his clinic is neither an abortion clinic nor a crisis pregnancy center. It is simply a location chosen by the fictional reality show producers as a setting for their show. Dr. Patterson is a general practitioner who provides basic medical care to the public at that clinic when the cameras are not rolling. He has said he “refers out” for abortions; and regardless of each woman’s decision, his professional involvement with them ends at the conclusion of filming (4 weeks). This is also a standard part of many reality show contracts; and any other option would be viewed as a breach of professional ethics by most medical personnel.
This episode (and the ones to come) reflect what we feel is often the “reality” of reality television. It does not necessarily reflect our own views, or what we, as producers, would do if we had actually made a show like this. (We have stated for the record many times that we would, in fact, never make a show like this involving real people.) We do think it represents the truth of the situation in which these fictional women have willingly placed themselves. In fact, the fictional producer’s moral obligation to the women (and vice versa for that matter, since they signed the contracts) is a serious question we hope you’ll contemplate.
I have been most intriqued by Denise and I have been trying to get a real understanding for why she stays with Buzz. I still can’t really tell if she really loves him. He did refer to her as his wife, so this is additional information that I wasn’t aware of before. I always thought he was just a boyfriend? In his defense, he admitted to liking to live humbly and then went on to say, “but the finer things in life, they’re ours too” while referring to Jack and Mindy, their kids. This may show a kinder gentler side of him, that we have not seen before. I suspect that Denise might see more of Buzz’s vulnerable side than we (the viewing audience) want to think about. We want to automatically make him the bad guy, but remember we only had one side of the story before today. Now Buzz actually has a face and that might blow some of our prior assumptions of him.
Denise seems like a smart gal and she also seems like a survivor, very resourceful really, but in a way, I don’t see her as dependant. I think that there is something we can’t see that keeps her there. If Buzz is her husband and the father of her kids and not as we were led to believe before just her shack-up partner, that would explain a lot. He also say’s “a bun in the oven, a mini-me, let’s toast to the good news”. Maybe he really does see it as good news and he is not just saying that.
I also noticed a few other things about him that I can’t yet tell if it’s just his feeble attempt at showing his ability to protect his family or just his insecurity coming out as possessiveness. For example, when he said,
“I take care of what’s mine” or when he realized that the woman was whispering something to Denise and he perceived, correctly, that she was uncomfortable, he immediately responded by coming outside and his body language showed great possessiveness, even the look he gave to the woman when he came to “rescue” Denise, spoke volumes.
I could probably guess from this first glimpse of Buzz, that he may not have had much of a role model growing up to learn how to be a man, and this is the best that he can do without someone taking an active role in his life and helping him learn.
Denise certainly seems confused and frightened. I hope that Buzz, even though he might be catching on that she is thinking of taking flight (especially after the woman physically whispered in Denise’s ear right in front of him, which only alienated him more) will react from a heart of love and not fear. It seems he might not know how to do that, and this might just be the turning point he needs to force him to man up, take responsibility for his actions and to get the help he deperately needs. Let’s hope so!
Just a side note, I personally think it was very stupid to alienate him if you truly want the best for Denise and all 3 of her kids. He is backed into a corner and that could bring out the worst in him. I think the compassionate thing would have been to give prior notice or how about try to include Buzz in this all along, especially after the Dr. had that initial meeting and was suspicious of abuse. Reaching out to Buzz, only after making Denise aware of the value in that, should have been the order of things, especially given the fact that she was not willing to expose the severity of the abuse herself.
So now we get a look into Denise’s personal life and to meet the infamous “Buzz”.
Here’s the conundrum that immediately occurred to me: Why would an abused woman like Denise want to come on a show like this to broadcast her abusive relationship to the entire world? Having known abused women, this seems like exactly the opposite of how they typically behave.
I understand that the producers wanted to include the notion of abuse in the conversation. And I understand why–because abortion is often a “choice” that’s forced upon a woman by a man.
As it is, the scenario with Denise seems fairly contrived, but I am trying to withhold judgment until I see how the series plays out. Perhaps the producers have something up their sleeves here.
I think that denise went on the show not just for “free health care” but for someone to be a voice for her, for her to silently gain advocates without calling up the local women’s shelters. Maybe she see this shows as her “way out” of her abusive relationship.
There is a reason that successful movies are story driven. Sometimes real life is harsher and more surprising than a show.
It makes sense that a producer would show up at her home. After hearing about what a wonderful family she has, wouldn’t you want to show that to the world and give more info about their relationship?
Abortion clinics do not send people over or for that matter tell the authorities even in cases when they suspect it is a minor in that been abused.
The acting is great.
I thought this episode really reveiled how Denise truly lives her life behind this false imagine of their “perfect family”. I could understand why she would be afraid to tell Buzz and the reason for wanting to be on this show. He wants to control every part of his life as well as the ones around him. I believe Denise ins’t sure about her decision to terminate the pregnacy or not because who would want to bring a child into a world of abuse, unhappiness, and sadness? On the other hand, a baby would bring so much joy and happiness to her life and as hard as it may be, she DOES have the choice to leave Buzz.
I feel so bad for women who have ever and are still living in abusive relationships. Im glad Denise and Buzz are apart of the show. It creates awareness not only on the topic of abortion but for abuse and doesn’t try to hold back. Although this is just a scripted show, I believe it rings true to so many different situations. Denise is so much more that just another pregnant woman trying to decide what to do. She’s a symbol of life and love.
Great job BUMP+! You keep me wanting more!
That was quite interesting. I’m not so sure I think it was a smart move on the part of the ‘producers’ to show up at the home of Denise like that. Surely with the suspicion of abuse that already exists, there would have been some forethought to the possibility that Buzz might not know. The home visit was a definite violation of Denise’s privacy and has most assuredly put her at greater risk.
I agree with Lisa Sparhawk – not so sure I like the direction this is going in. I understand the intent to give a broader view into the lives of these girls – but in “real life” the abortion clinic wouldn’t show up on your door step. The people aiding these women in making their choices offer their support based on the pieces they put together while the women are at appointments.
Perhaps, if the effort was meant to show viewers a peak into Denise’s life (to provide us with more information regarding her behaviour), produces could have had camera’s in her home in the “fly on the wall” sort of way. Sending the producers was quite silly and too confrontational.
Where you are going has left me completely saddened. Yellow Line, you said you were wanting to stimulate open conversation about the topic of abortion. Instead, you have reduced this program to an emotinal soap opera, for what looks like, ratings.
You are creating a prejudice against men,(Buzz your acting was good), and are becoming hurtful to the women who need to deal with, (and be helped with), the right and wrong of the abortion issue.
If the choices are truly up to us, then stop it, re-edit, and get on track with that which will help, and not just infame.
What happened to your moral compass?
No one is trying to demonize men in this show. I have known men like both Buzz and Jason. And we still have not met John, so we don’t know what sort of man he is, except he seems to have a strong faith and a deep love for Katie (no demon there, do you think?).
These are scenarios where, as we have seen in the comments, people often consider abortion as a default: Denise because ’she does not want to bring another child into an abusive home’; and Hailey seems to have considered abortion as a birth control method and ’she doesn’t want to sacrifice her career’.
I hope that Buzz will surprise us and take the news better than we think he might. But, having known abusive men, I fear the worst. Denise can not imagine life without Buzz, until someone convinces her that she does not have to endure what he hands her for that ‘one magic moment’. She keeps saying that no one touches her kids….
Jason seems to be just clueless about the pregnancy issues. He has a strong attachment to Hailey, and wants to help her succeed in her goals in life. He just seems to think that he can only do that by controlling her.
From what Katie has said about John, I think we might see an entirely different side of men when we meet him. Then people will be crying about contrived reactions, too.
The producers know that they cannot please everyone. I do not think they lost their moral compass, just presenting some very difficult situations. I was surprised when they made surprise visits to the home, but it IS a ‘reality show’. Reality shows often take some chances that we wonder about-often invading people’s privacy in a big way. The shows so often have a ‘hidden agenda’. These people are not meant to represent clinic workers at all.