The Recipe for Disaster in The Recipe

There is a second theme in Armin Wiebe’s play the Recipe that I wanted to address. This is the abortion attempted by Sadie and contemplated by Oata. Sadie’s at least seems only casually and quickly considered and completed.

This reminds me of the fact that the landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in Roe v. Wade, on abortion rights in America. That decision gave constitutional protection to a woman’s rights to an abortion in that country in every state. Many now forget that when that decision was rendered it was not unpopular and was not even widely criticized. Many took it for granted.

Over the decades since, the evangelical Christian movement in particular has marshalled lots of opposition to that decision. Now the Supreme Court in a fairly recent case, amidst huge controversy, reversed itself, to remove that woman’s right. Instead it said, state governments could decide whether or not abortions would be permitted in states.

In the play, Sade, one of the “loves” of Yasch Siemens chooses that option without a lot of thought and without opposition from anyone else, including Yasch. Oata, his other lover, seriously contemplates having one as well in her dark night of the soul. Yasch does not seem engaged by the enterprise. Pug Peters seems oblivious. Perhaps he is just an airhead. Yasch is just confused by his attraction to both women, for very different reasons. No one pays attention to the foetus.  No one pays attention to Yasch or Pug on this subject. Their opinions are not solicited. They are not needed. No medical, police or religious authorities are consulted. Sadie just does it. Other than Oata, no one even seems to wrestle with the decision.

I was amused that Oata got the “recipe” for the abortion from an old recipe of her grandmother in a book that to me looked like the Mennonite Treasury of Recipes. I never saw it there. The recipe seemed pretty simple. We have been told there was such a recipe. Is it that easy to abort a foetus? If so, why all the fuss and muss?

I actually believe the mother should have the right to make such a decision. But I know many disagree with me, particularly in the Mennonite community. But I found it interesting that the play devoted so little attention to this aspect of the decision which has become so hugely polarizing since the Roe decision. Why was that?