WEEKEND MEMOS

'Weekend memos' give our editorial writers a chance to express their own opinions, comment on topics they have been writing about, or take a lighter approach. The opinions in 'Memos' do not always follow the Enquirer's editorial positions.

In 30 years of debate over abortion in the United States, here comes the most intriguing chapter yet. Norma McCorvey, the "Roe" of Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion, has petitioned the federal courts to re-open the case and conduct an inquiry into scientific and anecdotal evidence she says shows abortion harms many women. The 1973 decision, says McCorvey, is based on fraudulent and incomplete information.

McCorvey, now in her 50s, was 21 when she became the "Jane Roe" plaintiff in the landmark case.

As a party to the original litigation, McCorvey can petition the court to re-open it based on a change in law or factual conditions that make the decision "no longer just," argues Allan E. Parker Jr., lead attorney for Texas-based Justice Foundation.

McCorvey lost round one last Friday, when a federal district court for Texas dismissed her request on its timing. "It is simply too late," 30 years after the fact, to revisit the judgment, wrote the trial court judge. An appeal is in the works.

McCorvey and 1,000-plus other women who've had abortions have filed affidavits with the court on how abortions have affected their lives. They're sobering reading (online see www.txif.org and www.operationoutcry.org).

McCorvey's legal team argues three changes the court should consider: A body of evidence now shows abortion's harmful effects on many women. The question of when life begins has been better answered by science. And, "Baby Moses" laws in 40 states provide alternatives to abortion by taking care of a child if the mother cannot.

Regardless of the legal outcome, the debate is beneficial. In 1973, both the Court and McCorvey could do nothing but speculate about the effects of abortion. Three decades later, much more is known about the health and psychological effects on women. We also know much more about the nature and methods of abortion procedures.

As long as abortion on demand is legal, the more informed everybody is about it, the better. Women making this "choice" especially need to know everything that's known.

Linda Cagnetti