constitutes a monumental attack on the basic tenet on which our country was founded. SJ Res 110 would deny the existence of certain inalienable, fundamental rights to which every individual is entitled. The nature of these rights is by definition permanent, and precludes any alteration effected by the changing whims, and the political expendiencies which foster them, of any transient legislative body. If enacted, SJ Res 110 will be the only existing amendment that operates to retract personal liberties that were once guaranteed; all others have altered the Constitution in order to effect an extension of individual rights.

The "Human Life Federalism Amendment" also contradicts the Constitution's Supremacy clause by initiating the ability of a state law to take precedence over a federal law when the state law is the more restrictive. Historically, federal statute prevails when conflicting with state law. Yet under SJ Res 110, the supremacy of the state law is not constant; it does not apply if the federal law is more stringent. Thus a state choosing to permit abortion could have its desire abrogated by federal statute.

When reviewed, the intent of the so-called "Human Life Federalism Amendment" is clear: its goal is to outlaw abortion. SJ Res 110 can in no way be construed as a compromise. The most effective and justifiable compromise on this issue is already in existence, and respects the divergent convictions of the American people. Under the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade ruling, no one is forced to have an abortion, no doctor is forced to perform an abortion, and no medical facility is forced to provide abortion services. As Professor Lawrence Tribe of Harvard University has effectively stated, "private choice can be most plausibly defended as our Constitution's way of reconciling the irreconcilable without embroiling Church and State in one another's affairs".

Finally, making abortion illegal would exacerbate the tremendous problem of unwanted pregnancy. The Center for Population Options feels that the passage of SJ Res 110 will condemn children to be barn of children and women to subject themselves to unskilled physicians in unsanitary conditions, In both cases, the health and the lives of women will be at stake. Irreversib le poverty cycles will result from teenage parents forced to drop out of school who will have resultant low income potential and must rely on welfare programs. In no way can a constitutional amendment eradicate the compelling circumstances that lead women to terminate their pregnancies; in no way can it provide infallible contraceptives or perfect human behavior. No constitutional amendment will prevent abortion it can only stop those that are legal and safe.

For all the reasons offered in this statement, the Center for Population Options feels that abortion should remain a matter of personal choice.

STATEMENT TO THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTE, January 12,1982

Eleven years ago I signed the death warrant for my unborn son or daughter. I was twenty-one years old and had, to say the least, been living a very irresponsible life-style. I was given, only one answer to the problem of my untimely pregnancy: that of abortion. The money was placed in my hand, the arrangements made and I. traveled by bus to a legal abortion clinic in New York city. The clinic was sterile, cold and adequately professional. I was examined by a physician, signed a release form and waited for my turn in line. There was no counseling or explanation of the procedure to be used, let alone the possibility of danger to my physical health.

Since I was over four months pregnant at that time and the type of abortion performed on me was auction and curretage,not all of the baby was removed from ny utarus. I began to run a fever after my return home, was hospitalised, underwent a Dand C operation and I hemorraged for almost a month along with a weight loss of twenty-five pounds. I managed to somehow completely bury the whole incident for almost six years.

At the time that my abortion experience surfaced, I was married and had two beautiful children. I was watching a 700 Club special in which they presented time lapse photography of the development of the child form conception to birth. Following this, the procedures of abortion and what each one does to the child. It is extremely difficult to explain to you what happened in my heart and mind at that time but it was as if the weight of the whole world came crashing down on my shoulders. At first, I was stunned. Then I felt stupid about my ignorance of what the word abortion actually meant. I could not put it all into perspective; I knew that I was responsible for killing my child.

There were two factors that helped me maintain my sanity. The first was the knowledge that my children depended on me and I had to keep going- I couldn't afford to escape into myself. The second was the fact that I had a developing trust in God and I knew that somehow I could find forgiveness from Him. The hope of forgiveness eventually turned into a reality. Forgiving myself was the most difficult and living with the memory of my act, every day, for the rest of my life, has not been easy, either.

I share these facts with you not to induce pity nor to escape from my responsibility for my own actions. In the years that have followed, I have been able to help other women through what has happened to me. That is why I am so involved with 'Women Exploited', a group that was formed in 1975 to help women who have had abortions and regret them.

Since I founded the Tidewater chapter of WB in May, 1981,I have worked and counseled with many women that the tradgedy of abortion has touched. I become more convinced with each new contact, that there must have to be a way to stop this atrocity in our nation. It is inconosivable to me that 1.5 million babies can be murdered in this country and that we, as a nation do not scream out to stop it.

I receive letters from all over the country and Canada from women who want to be heard. They cannot understand why they were not counseled by abortion clinics, Planned Parenthood, and Family Planning organisations. They cannot understand why there is not a more comprehensive educational program at work in our schools to teach and alert young people to the dangers of abortion and what happens to the new life in the process. They cannot understand why it is that pre-abortion representatives are allowed in various school systems and prolife people are not.

I cannot be convinced that the abortion controversy will ever end. I believe that the government and our lawmakers must intervene and change the laws before it is too late. So many lives have already been lost and so many women's lives had irreversible damage done to them- I must, in good faith and conscience, support the Hatch Ammendment. I pray that this will be the first of many positive steps taken to stop the mass slaughter of the unborn in this nation.

May God bless and grant wisdom. to you all.

To Life, Vicki L.. McMillan 1068 Bland St.

Norfolk, Va. 23513

Vieni L. McMillan

January 12, 1982

Director, Women Exploited
Tidewater, Virginia Chapter

The National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) is a non-profit membership organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. devoted to the improvement and expansion of the delivery of family planning and reproductive health care services throughout the United States. It is the largest organization in the nation composed of providers and consumers of family planning and reproductive health care services. Our members are committed to establishing and maintaining reproductive health care as a high priority preventive health care service in this country.

NFPRHA believes that comprehensive reproductive health services, education and counseling, including abortion, should be available to all individuals regardless of their economic status. We believe that it is of primary importance that the needs and rights of all persons seeking family planning and reproductive health care services, education and counseling be met with sensitivity and concern for their physical and mental well-being. Finally, we believe that reproductive freedom is one of the most fundamental human and civil rights.

NFPRHA recognizes its responsibility to uphold this right, basic to all, and must actively oppose any erosion of reproductive freedom and any restriction of access to comprehensive family planning and reproductive health care services.

Therefore, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, along with a sizeable majority of Americans, strongly opposes the consideration and passage by the Congress of the United States of S.J. Res. 110, which would overturn the 1973 Supreme Court rulings and provide Congress and state legislatures authority "to restrict and prohibit abortions;" S. 158, which would establish that "human life shall be deemed to exist from conception;" all other proposals to constrict the availability of abortion and other reproductive health care; and all proposals to define the point at which "human life" begins. Such a definition is impossible to legislate, since there is no consensus among religious leaders, scientists, philosophers, ethicists, medical professionals, politicians or any other segment of our society as to when "human life" begins.

Any of the proposals would, if enacted, severely restrict reproductive freedom in this country. Abortion would, or could, become a federal or state crime, in contradiction to the fundamental right proclaimed by the Supreme Court in its 1973 rulings in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. Various contraceptive and prenatal practices and methods could also be outlawed. In addition, such proposals present a host of other not-completely-understood, but potentially far-reaching, ramifications in the areas of medicine, law, economics and ethics.

Thus, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, representing those who are most directly involved with the provision and receipt of family planning and reproductive health care services those who are most likely to be affected by the passage of a "human life amendment" or "human life statute" urges the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, and the entire United States Congress to reject all proposals that would seek to limit reproductive freedom, as S.J. Res. 110, S. 158, and other similar bills and Constitutional amendments would do.