I would like to correct a quote from Lisa Pierce's article on abortion vol 90 (Jan. 16). She quoted me as saying that I did not think the Supreme Court would not use the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act of 1989 to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

The complete quote was that the Supreme Court has had opportunities to overturn the abortion decision in the past and will have more opportunities to do so in the future.

She had asked if I was concerned about what would happen because of the injunction against certain provisions in the Abortion Control Act. What concerns me right now is not what may happen with the Supreme Court, but the fact that Pennsylvanians do not understand the true intent of the Abortion Control Act.

Although the anti-choice people try to portray this legislation as "moderate and reasonable," the true intent for the law is to make abortion illegal and unsafe in Pennsylvania. They want the government to intervene in families' personal and private decisions because they do not trust families to communicate by themselves without government intervention.

This legislation assumes that women cannot be trusted to make moral and ethical decisions about their own lives without the government telling them how to do so.

We want women to talk to their husbands and teenage girls to talk to their parents about these most personal decisions. And the fact is that most women do just that. But regardless of what happens within the family setting, we have no right to let the government tell us how to communicate, and when to do so.

Am I afraid the Supreme Court will overturn Roe vs. Wade? Yes of course I am. And what concerns me the most is that what Pennsylvanians believe is a "moderate and reasonable" piece of legislation will, in reality, be the legislation that the Supreme Court uses to make that decision.