Archived Opinion

A modest proposal to eliminate abortions

A modest proposal to eliminate abortions

I have a modest proposal to solve the abortion dilemma, but first we need to understand the background. 

All six of the so-called “conservative” Supreme Court justices are current or former members of the Federalist Society, founded in 1982 by right-wing lawyers who desire to eliminate any right not explicitly stated in the Constitution. This not only subjugates women, but also opens the flood gates to take away many of what we tend to consider our rights. The “right” to privacy, to marry whom you chose, access to contraception and school integration could all be eliminated using the same arguments for striking down the Roe vs. Wade precedent. 

In the emotionally-charged reaction to the abortion issue, these larger implications of the Court’s majority position are likely to be overlooked. Almost no “right” is explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. There is no explicit right to private ownership of guns. The meaning of bearing arms as part of a militia is dependent on the interpretation of the Supreme Court. What the Court gives, the Court can take away. 

Also, let’s be clear, the anti-abortion movement never was and is not all about the “sanctity” of human life. It is based on politics and power related to women. The so-called “pro-life” proponents have never shown interest in life post-birth. The United States has the highest maternal death rate in the developed world. One of the most life-threatening things a woman can do in the U.S. is taking a pregnancy to term. Likewise, the anti-abortion movement doesn’t care about babies. The U.S. has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the world. Of 36 developed countries only three have higher infant mortality rates than the U.S. To my knowledge, no anti-abortion leader or movement has championed either maternal health or childcare. Once you are born, there seems to be no “sanctity” of life. 

The states trying to outdo each other in passing the most restrictive pregnancy laws tend to be the same states who kill adults via capital punishment. If human life is so sacred, what gives the government the right to decide whether someone should be killed? 

Mother Nature is the most prolific abortionist that laws cannot stop. About 15% of known pregnancies end in a miscarriage. Given that many miscarriages occur before the woman realizes she is pregnant, the natural abortion rate is probably closer to 20% — one in five conceptions. 

Related Items

On a positive note, I have a modest proposal that would eliminate the need for abortions performed by people. Since the Supreme Court ruling makes it clear that the government can take charge of a person’s body when pregnancy would be involved, the simple solution is to require every post-puberty male to have a reversable vasectomy. 

Medical science has reached the stage where a valve could be inserted into the vas deferens instead of cutting the tube and removing a section as is done with a permanent vasectomy. Thus, the reversable vasectomy would eliminate all teen pregnancies and “accidents” among adults. When a man and his partner wished to have children, he would simply have the valve opened during the time they wished to conceive children. As a hedge, sperm could be stored prior to the reversable vasectomy as an additional precaution. 

Having had a vasectomy decades ago, I can attest to the fact that the procedure done by a properly trained surgeon is virtually painless. There is the admonition to abstain from strenuous physical activities for a few days. A vasectomy has no effect on sexual performance. In fact, without the worry of pregnancy, partners might enjoy a more fulfilling relationship. 

I am sure the men of the United States (especially those in the anti-abortion movement) would be more than willing to step up for a reversable vasectomy given the peace of mind it would afford. Additionally, it would save women from having deal with the abortion question. 

(Dr. Norm Hoffman is a semi-retired clinical psychologist living in Waynesville.  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .) 

Leave a comment


  • Who would have thought that Lucille was an anti-Semite? Truly shocking. /s

    posted by Tyler

    Monday, 07/11/2022

  • The author is simply another hard leftist for whom facts are meaningless. One example: "There is no explicit right to private ownership of guns" That statement is patently false. Read the second amendment. It does not get anymore explicit, or absolute, than the language there.

    Anotehr bit of foolishness: "If human life is so sacred, what gives the government the right to decide whether someone should be killed?" Take the life of another human being in anything but self defense places you at risk of having your life terminated. When the person has been charged, tried and convicted by jury of their peers, then death may be applied. The criminal themselves determine that the state has a right to kill them in retribution for their crime.

    The good head shrinker is just another hard leftist who could not care less about anything except his own uninformed, sick opinion.

    posted by Quartermaster

    Sunday, 07/10/2022

  • So having a baby is one of the most dangerous things a woman can do? As opposed to what - skydiving? mountain biking? getting drunk and driving? That's the most absurd statement I've ever heard. Liberals never cease to amaze me.

    The rest of this article was equally ludicrous, and the vasectomy mandate is ridiculous. Liberals think if they deal the sex card or race card they can say anything and the public will believe it. Well Norm, only your ilk will even give this article the time of day. I've given it too much of mine. Bye!

    posted by Patti

    Saturday, 07/09/2022

  • Women should just start closing up their legs or use contraception. There's plenty to choose from.

    posted by Hal Stroham

    Saturday, 07/09/2022

  • You don't know me Mary Curry but I know that I live rent free in your head 24 x 7 and that always brings a smile to my face. You and your liberal pals are against true American ideals and at the end of the day, your leftist side is going to lose and lose big!

    posted by Lucille Josephs

    Friday, 07/08/2022

  • Very well written. Women will likely die due to the recent Supreme Court ruling; Mothers, sisters, daughters. There's clearly nothing "pro-life" here. It's Pro-Death.

    posted by Jimmy Hare

    Thursday, 07/07/2022

  • Brilliant, Dr. Hoffman!

    Ironic as your "modest proposal" is, if states actually were to require reversible vasectomies, they are nothing compared to a nine-to fourteen-year-old girl having to carry to term a fetus implanted by a relative (incestuous rape) or someone else (rape): physicians know that girls' organs are severely damaged by rape and childbirth.

    And imagine having to look at the face of your rapist every time you look at a child you shouldn't have had--to see that vile face for the rest of your life. That is unspeakable child abuse (of the mother) and hell for the poor child, if it lives.

    It's a pity that the anti-Semitic, racist Ms. Josephs, below, skipped class when Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" was taught; or perhaps she was home-schooled by someone equally lacking in a classics education, so she never heard of it. (I said "racist" because after I wrote a letter (last year or 2020) about the racism I saw in Selma as a teen, and later, she commented that I should be on the side of my "own kind," meaning whites.

    posted by Mary Curry

    Thursday, 07/07/2022

  • Brilliant, Dr. Hoffman!

    posted by Mary Curry

    Thursday, 07/07/2022

  • Excellent! Let’s do it!

    posted by Helen Geltman

    Thursday, 07/07/2022

  • Another member of God's so called 'Chosen People' regurgitating his twisted ideas and philosophy. What a piece of work.

    posted by Lucille Josephs

    Wednesday, 07/06/2022

Smokey Mountain News Logo
Go to top
Payment Information


At our inception 20 years ago, we chose to be different. Unlike other news organizations, we made the decision to provide in-depth, regional reporting free to anyone who wanted access to it. We don’t plan to change that model. Support from our readers will help us maintain and strengthen the editorial independence that is crucial to our mission to help make Western North Carolina a better place to call home. If you are able, please support The Smoky Mountain News.

The Smoky Mountain News is a wholly private corporation. Reader contributions support the journalistic mission of SMN to remain independent. Your support of SMN does not constitute a charitable donation. If you have a question about contributing to SMN, please contact us.