THE NATION : POLITICS : Surgeon General Fight Opens Front in Continuing War Over Abortion

The nomination of Dr. Henry W. Foster Jr., President Bill Clinton’s choice for Surgeon General, is in trouble. It is in trouble for only one reason: abortion. Over the course of a 38-year career, Foster delivered 10,000 babies. He founded a nationally recognized program to curb teen-age pregnancy. And, yes, he performed abortions.

Last week, the distinguished doctor, in an effort to save his nomination, was forced to detail on national television just how many abortions he performed--was it fewer than a dozen, as he originally thought; or closer to 39, as a later review of decades of practice suggested.

This debate is a disgrace. It shouldn’t matter how many abortions Foster performed. He is a gynecologist. Abortion is legal. It is a patient’s choice.

This is a witch hunt, and the real target is women’s rights. Twenty years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Roe vs. Wade making abortion legal, it has become increasingly difficult and dangerous to have an abortion in America. The religious right may have lost the battle in the courts, but they are fighting it out on the streets--and they’re winning.

The current attack on Foster may hurt the Republicans politically--by exposing their dependence on the religious right. It may end up helping the President politically--by giving him a popular fight to take to the Republicans. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) doesn’t need this fight--it doesn’t further his “contract with America”; it doesn’t help him with the middle class; in short, it doesn’t make much sense for the GOP in traditional partisan terms.

But it makes perfect sense as part of the religious right’s guerrilla war against abortion. This is how they win. Foster is today’s foil. Even if he is ultimately confirmed, the damage is done.

A constitutional right to choose abortion doesn’t mean much if you can’t find a doctor who’ll perform one. No doctor should be required to perform abortions if it conflicts with his or her beliefs. But you shouldn’t have to be a hero--or a martyr--to be a gynecologist. You shouldn’t have to give up hopes of public service when you perform your first abortion.

The message being sent by the attack on Foster is unmistakable. Doctors beware. Performing abortions may expose you to political indignity and humiliation. It is dangerous to your career, as well as your health. Depending on the number you perform, and the circumstances, providing women a medical service that is protected by the Constitution may disqualify you from serving your country.

It is the last message that responsible leaders should be sending.

In 83% of America’s counties, there are already no clinics or hospitals willing to perform abortions. Second-trimester abortions are even harder to come by--even if the mother is seriously ill, or the fetus could not survive. The number of hospitals offering abortions dropped 50% from 1977 to 1988. In 1976, more than 25% of residency programs in obstetrics and gynecology required that doctors learn to perform abortions. In 1992, only 12% of the programs trained doctors to do first-trimester abortions, and only 7% trained them to do second-trimester abortions.

One-third of the programs in this country train doctors to provide reproductive care without even being offered the option of learning how to perform abortions.

Last year, 20,000 medical students received a mailing attacking those who provide abortions. “What would you do if you found yourself in a room with Hitler, Mussolini and an abortionist and you had a gun with only two bullets?” the mailing asked. “Shoot the abortionist twice” was the answer. The following week, a doctor was fatally shot outside a Florida clinic.

A few of the students who received the mailing were so angered by it that they formed a national organization aimed at reversing the decline in the number of doctors willing to perform abortions. Who knows how many others read the mailing, and decided not to expose themselves, or their families, to that risk.

Bulletproof vests have become a routine item in the budgets of abortion clinics. The costs of security push up the costs of abortion. The routine harassment drives doctors away and forces patients to go through hell just to get in the door. In a recent study by the Fund for a Feminist Majority, more than one-fourth of the nation’s abortion clinics reported receiving death threats. There are not enough federal marshals to protect them.

Foster’s nomination should have been easy. There is a national consensus that teen-age pregnancy is a major threat to our future. Foster has been a pioneer in efforts to curb teen-age parenthood. His program, founded in 1988, stresses abstinence. It was one of George Bush’s points of light. Until the anti-abortion forces started up, Foster had the support of both his home state’s Republican senators--including one who is himself a physician.

If the anti-abortion forces can do this to Foster, if they can put him on the defensive, force him to defend quotes out of context, embroil him in a fight over just how many abortions he performed and why, they can destroy anybody.

This is not about White House process. The numbers are a red herring. What principled difference does it make whether Foster performed 12 abortions or 39 or 99? Sen. Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-Kan.) may be mad at the White House for initially misinforming her on a controversial topic, but that hardly goes to the merits of this nomination.

Senators who claim to be withholding judgment because of White House sloppiness about numbers are giving intimidation a good name. Most doctors don’t keep tallies of the number of abortions they’ve performed--or at least they didn’t, until now. The complaints about process are the refuge of cowards unwilling to stand up to the religious right.

This fight cannot be ducked. Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said, “They should have taken the finest doctor they could find in the country, someone near retirement without any controversy. It’s not like this is the only doctor in the world.” Maybe not. But Foster is a distinguished doctor, and no one has raised any serious objection to his qualifications other than his track record on abortion. It is time for the majority in this country that supports Roe vs. Wade to stand up to those who would turn that constitutional right into a hollow promise. If not now, when?