Anti-Abortion Campaign

In an effort to publicize a little-known refund option that allows students to claim the a portion of their University Health Services (UHS) fee allotted to elective abortions, an anti-abortion campus group flooded the Houses with literature about the policy.

During the week before spring break, members of Harvard Right to Life (HRL) distributed refund forms and letters in mailboxes and under students' doors.

According to HRL Secretary Bronwen C. McShea '02, the campaign was meant to allow students to object formally to their money being used to fund abortions.

"UHS has been derelict in its duty to inform the student body about its policy in a clear, forthright manner," she said. "Students...should be told up-front about it."

In past years, the refund has been negligible--between two and three dollars, according to HRL Vice President Robert J. Ortiz '00.

But McShea said she felt a responsibility to inform students of the UHS refund policy, regardless of the amount of the refund.

"Until UHS sees fit to remedy this situation, it is going to continue to fall on the shoulders of concerned students to pick up the slack."

Ortiz organized a smaller refund campaign last year just in Pforzheimer House, where he lives. He said about 30 people requested a refund as a result of his efforts.

This year's more widespread campaign, however, has brought abortion to the forefront of dining hall discussion.

Lowell House resident Toby C. Berkman '02 said he was not personally offended by the campaign, but he said he thought it was unnecessary.

"If you're strongly against abortion than that's your opinion," he said. "[The refund opportunity] is just a purely symbolic gesture."

Still, Pavan K. Bendapudi '02 said he does not support the refund policy and thinks the UHS fee should be indivisible.

"I think everyone should pay the same fees," he said. "I disagree with the contention that people should be able to choose where their money goes."

But McShea said she does not believe that abortion should be treated like other routine medical procedures that are funded by the UHS dues.

"This argument, of course, is the crux of the disagreement between those who believe abortion is a right and those who believe abortion is murder," she said.

Shauna L. Shames '01, former co-chair of Students for Choice, also disagreed with the HRL campaign.

"We find it objectionable," she said.

Shames said she questions the precedent that HRL is setting with its campaign.

"A variety of people have a religious objection to one or another medical practice, but should [for example] Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists be allowed to receive refunds from people who get blood transfusions?" Shames asked.

McShea said she thought the campaign had met its goals by at least raising awareness of the UHS refund policy.