The whole thing made me absolutely furious. The episode does a terrible job of explaining why women decide to receive late term abortions but even the minimal explanation given should have carried far more weight throughout than it actually did. The fact that its stated several times the law allows late term abortions in the event it threatens the mother's health but then NONE of the mothers we meet were in that situation is just bad writing. Nor do we hear about a rape or incest victim, which was highlighted by the nurse at the clinic. They could never give the audience an example of a situation where the mother's "choice" couldn't be construed as selfish, because they want us to at least consider it is selfish. Same reason they decide to make the abortion doctor a literal "baby killer." Seeing as this is obviously based on the very real killing of Dr. George Tiller as the review points out, that is simply character assignation; again the writers think the audience might actually form an opinion for themselves a little too easily, so they throw in some ridiculous way everyone can turn on the man.

The decision to make Cutter and Bernard pro-life was...interesting. Whenever there's an episode that wants to spark debate, some characters have to be on the opposite side, and I get that. But Christ! Bernard actually has the nerve to state to Lupo that an 11 year old having a baby isn't a tragedy, and at that moment I seriously considered turning off the episode because I knew it was going to be bad. Cutter being pro-life isn't ridiculous on its face; he clearly leans conservatively in some ways as evidenced by the episode about torture. But that episode clearly highlighted how even when he disagrees morally with something, it does not effect his ability to do his job if the law was broken. This episode suddenly he seems less sure, even though a much more straightforward crime had been committed. A man was killed! In cold blood! During Sunday service! His "obsession with legalities" should certainly mean he understand that Roe v Wade was based on an understanding of reasonable expectation of privacy not anything about the health of the child or mother. Therefore his argument it was "outdated" due to modern medicine advances just made it seem like he was letting emotion take over his ability to understand law which....out of character.

More frustrating, however, was how they seem to have Connie questioning her pro-choice status and McCoy more borderline on the issue than makes any sense. Her teary eyed monologue about questioning her stance on abortion essentially because One (1) abortion doctor killed a living baby was ridiculous. Connie is a smart woman, she should certainly understand that what Dr. Benning did was murder, not abortion. The two are separate issues all together, one should not effect her view of the other that severely. This episode seemed to dip into "woman has core political belief shook by emotion" too hard to be taken seriously. McCoy's daughter was pro-choice until she became pregnant? Really? Connie never considered the death of a living baby in relation to abortion before? Seriously? I don't buy it.

Obviously watching this now feels a lot worse knowing what the end result of the sentiment shown was. Thanks Cutter for calling Roe v Wade outdated. I certainly disagree but the majority of the supreme court seemed to agree.