Credit: Screen grab
Pro-Choice Feminist Gynecologist Suggests She Misplaced Deceased Son’s Ashes

Pro-Choice Feminist Gynecologist Suggests She Misplaced Deceased Son’s Ashes

A feminist gynecologist and New York Times columnist responded with outrage Tuesday to a Supreme Court decision upholding Indiana’s restrictions on fetal remains – and things quickly got sad and weird.

In a series of tweets, Dr. Jen Gunter shared that the ruling is personal for her because her son died when he was less than 6 months old. She said that requiring fetuses be buried or cremated is “cruel” and imposes financial and emotional costs on the woman.

Gunter – who has made a name for herself with indelicate takes on women’s health issues – added that “fuckers” like Vice President Mike Pence, who signed the Indiana law in question as governor in 2016, don’t really care about the sanctity of fetal remains.

Gunter’s Twitter protest then took a dark turn. First, she confessed to stashing her deceased baby’s ashes in the back of a closet.

“Why can’t people send their remains to the same place other specimens go if that is their wish?” she demanded. “My son’s ashes are in the back my closet. How is that ‘respectful?'”

In a follow up tweet, Gunter admitted that she wasn’t even sure the ashes were in her closet. She may very well have misplaced them when she moved, she said.

“In fact maybe I lost my son’s ashes? Who knows,” Gunter said. “I stashed them in a closet in Colorado. Then packed them when I moved (I hope) and then I *think* I unpacked them and put them out of site again.”

Gunter’s bizarre argument seemed to be that her inability to keep track of her son’s remains was proof of the futility of the Indiana law.

“How is that a respectful treatment of human remains @VP?” she asked, challenging Pence to account for her behavior.

Abortion politics gone wild

Gunter spoke out amid an escalating national row over abortion. As a series of Republican-controlled statehouses have passed restrictions on the procedure, Democrats in blue states have moved to introduce abortion protections.

The legislative back-and-forth has been fueled by uncertainty regarding the fate of Roe v. Wade, a 1973 Supreme Court ruling guaranteeing access to abortion. Many on both the left and right anticipate that the decision could be undermined or even overturned as the Supreme Court moves rightward.

Tuesday’s case was the current court’s first opportunity to weigh in on state laws limiting the legality of abortion, and the justices struck a compromise.

They upheld the part of the law requiring disposal of fetal remains, reversing a lower court decision. But they declined to weigh in on another provision that would have prohibited abortions motivated by concerns about the fetus’ gender, race or disabilities like Down syndrome.

The justices agreed not to weigh in on “discriminatory abortions” for the time being. But in a statement accompanying the decision, Justice Clarence Thomas made clear that he opposes such procedures, which he compared to eugenics.

He also warned that the court would have to address the question eventually.

“Although the court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever,” he said. “Having created the constitutional right to an abortion, this Court is dutybound to address its scope.”

Pence sounded a similar note on Tuesday. “Countries across the globe prohibit selective abortion — and the United States should do the same,” his office said.

Cover image: Jen Gunter. (Screen grab)

Follow Us

Do Not Sell My Personal Information