13.01.2005
No return to back-street abortion
Mike Leigh (director), Vera Drake, general release
Mike Leigh's newly released film Vera Drake has been hailed as a masterpiece and described as his finest work. It won the Golden Lion Prize in Venice and an Oscar is expected in recognition of the superb performance of Imelda Staunton, who plays Vera. Certainly it is both moving and thought-provoking. Leigh has produced a powerful cinematic experience that is at the same time a hard-hitting polemic against those who want to push women back to the dark days of back-street abortions. Set in post-war working class Britain, the story focuses on an apparently unremarkable middle-aged woman. Vera Drake lives with her husband Stan and two grown-up children in a tiny, dimly lit, north London flat - the two-bar electric fire, the lumpy sofa and the dowdy colours, as well as the beautifully drawn characters, pull you into the atmosphere of the time. You are in a sitting room in miserable, ration-ridden Britain, as the family sit and swap brief snippets about their day. The shadow of World War II still hangs over their lives and is acknowledged but not discussed. Each deals with their own private thoughts and reflections. There is a quiet stoicism to Vera and her family, but their taciturnity quite obviously hides a great deal. In fact, given the period, it is not surprising that her family know nothing of her secret life. They simply see her as a devoted wife and mother, a dutiful daughter to their ailing grandmother, kind neighbour and hardworking cleaner for well-to-do families. The other Vera is a back-street abortionist - though abortion is a word that she cannot bring herself to use. Instead she sees herself as "helping young girls out" - a task she performs for no payment. A bag of instruments is hidden in a wardrobe that she takes along to the flats of those who seek her help. Her childhood friend Lily arranges for Vera to carry out the terminations - in fact Lily is a hard-nosed black marketeer who is also making a very tidy sum out of these women. Naively Vera does not suspect anything, but believes she and Lily are united in providing a helping hand to those who cannot cope. Vera turns up with her bag and administers the treatment - a syringe is used to wash the womb out with carbolic soap disinfectant and boiling water and bring on the bleeding - in a businesslike manner. She does not discuss reasons or enquire into circumstances. In fact she appears uncomfortable with or uninterested in the emotional plight of the terrified women, as they await the effects. She advises them to "have a nice cup of tea" and to expect to get a pain "down below" in a day or two - to which they should respond by going to the toilet, when everything will "come away". She takes off her housecoat and packs her bag before heading off, with the woman left to face her fate. It transpires that she has been 'helping girls out' for over 20 years and has never had any problems. She is confident that she causes no harm, only good. Indeed, when things do go wrong and a girl nearly dies, the girl's mother who arranged the abortion is very reluctant to give any information to the police. It is only when she herself is threatened with prosecution that she informs on Vera. As far as she and other working class women are concerned, Vera and those like her perform a necessary task and need to be defended. Despite the pain and the risk. We see the bedrooms of women with worn out faces and large families who cannot afford another child. We see those of young unmarried girls who face both an unwanted baby as well as unbearable social stigma. Women did whatever was necessary - as they continue to do today in parts of the world where abortion remains illegal or subject to oppressive restrictions. Through the character of Vera Drake and the gentle drabness of her life, Leigh shows the social reality of abortion as an integral, though secret part of the lives of so many working class women. "Helping out young girls" is as normal to Vera as cooking the family dinner, cleaning the brass fireplaces of her rich employers or making those interminable cups of tea. She does not seem to contemplate the criminality of her actions. Indeed as she accepts her next assignment from Lily, she seems to exhibit a certain quiet pride in her ability to play such a necessary and important social role. One does wonder a little, however, why she risked her liberty for no financial reward. The detective inspector wonders the same during questioning at the police station. He asks if she had got "into trouble" as a young girl. Had she herself needed the services of an abortionist? But now the situation was very different. Distraught that she had almost caused the death of the girl, she becomes immersed in deep shame and fear. She can only sob and is unable to speak. We are left no wiser as to her altruism. I am sure it was not such an unusual phenomenon for women to help each other out, but perhaps none as selflessly as Vera. Leigh contrasts the situation of the working class to those with money and contacts. A daughter in one of the rich households that Vera cleans is raped and needs an abortion. She seeks out a family friend, who tells her she will have to pretend to a history of madness and feign suicidal feelings. Eventually, after questioning by medical and psychiatric doctors and parting with 100 guineas in cash, she is admitted to a clinic. Despite the obvious inequality Leigh treats this character with sensitivity - the girl has to lie and suffer intrusive questioning at a time when she is in obvious emotional pain following the rape. It is somewhat analogous to the current situation, where the law means that women who need an abortion have to see two doctors to have it certified as medically or psychologically necessary. When Vera's secret comes out, she is traumatised. She finds herself in the Old Bailey, trembling and crying uncontrollably - a pathetic figure in striking contrast to her old capable self. Her family are devastated and face vilification, as she is sent off to Holloway to serve a lengthy sentence. The absurdity of sending this decent woman to prison is palpable. Leigh has created a hero of a back-street abortionist. Unsurprisingly not all the media are impressed with the film and its contents. The Daily Telegraph reviewer, Sukhdev Sandhu, complains that Leigh makes abortion look easy. Also there is a problem with Vera herself - "she is simply not a very interesting character "¦ [This] means the film lacks the drama of ideas or of her wrestling with her beliefs, either before or after she gets caught; she just bobs from door to door with the bouncy cheer of someone collecting for harvest festival" (January 6). Obviously Vera's simple belief that she is just doing her bit to help these women out is not to the liking of the Telegraph. It is only a few months since this paper expended a great deal of effort in setting up a 'sting operation' aimed at criminalising the British Pregnancy Advisory Service for referring women who cannot get late abortions in Britain to services abroad. For them the abortionist is akin to the medieval witch. Likewise the Daily Mail is upset. Its editors have dug up a retired midwife, Jennifer Worth, to 'correct' the picture painted by Leigh. She informs the readers that it was unheard of for somebody to perform an abortion for free - if "a woman died after an illegal termination, the abortionist would be charged with manslaughter. It was a very risky business and nobody would do it 'just to help out'" (Daily Mail January 7). Mrs Worth goes on to inadvertently support Leigh's condemnation of back-street abortion - "there were single girls "¦ who'd got themselves in trouble. There was a terrible stigma attached to illegitimacy then." She concludes her interview by stating that when "abortion was legalised it immediately brought an end to terrible suffering and often death". The Daily Mail is thereby forced to admit the appalling situation of women when abortion was illegal, while at the same time still attempting to portray abortionists as evil. Finally, from the left Socialist Worker gives a glowing review (January 8). The writer, Andrea Butcher, focuses on the politics of the film - not least the difficulties for working class women, as opposed to the rich. She makes pertinent and important points, stressing that we should not be complacent about abortion rights today. She refers to the situation in the United States, Portugal and Ireland - and discusses the impact of the 'global gag' imposed by Bush to prevent funding to family planning services providing abortion and contraceptive services in underdeveloped countries. The web version has a link to another article, 'Harsh facts that show how a woman's right to choose is still under attack'. For all the sincerity of the writer you cannot help but notice the hypocrisy of her leadership. Those of us who called for Respect to adopt clear policies mandating its candidates to support a woman's right to choose were condemned. We were told by Candy Udwin, on behalf of the Socialist Workers Party, at a women's meeting in September that there was nothing to worry about - there was no threat to abortion rights. Speaking at the October Respect conference, Lindsey German refused to contemplate the idea that there should be a party line on the question. And now they change their tune! The SWP needs to decide if it is genuinely on the side of a woman's right to choose or whether it is just another shibboleth to be ditched when needed for the sake of pathetic electoral deals with reactionaries. It is a women's right to choose which is of course the question at the centre of Leigh's film. He effectively shifts the focus away from the foetus and onto the lives of women. He humanises the vilified. It is a beautiful portrayal of the most normal and deeply personal of human dilemmas. Anne Mc Shane
Worker