Post Abortion Syndrome
Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.) has recently introduced HR 1457, the Post-Abortion Depression Research and Care Act of 2007.H.R. 1457: Post-Abortion Depression Research and Care Act of 2007 (GovTrack.us)
This bill has already created uproar with Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups. The studies cited in the "findings" section will read like heresy as it cites evidence of "severe and long-term effects" of abortion on women, including depression, eating disorders, suicide attempts, intense grief, emotional numbness, rage, sexual dysfunction, and relationship difficulties.
"Women who aborted a first pregnancy are four times more likely to report substance abuse compared to those who suffered a natural loss of their first pregnancy," the legislative text reads, "and they are five times more likely . . . than women who carried to term."
This bill uses data and statistics obtained from multiple studies but primarily from a study released in 2006 by David Fergusson, a researcher from New Zealand who calls himself a pro-choice atheist.
Fergusson's findings correlate with many other pro-life researchers at the Elliot Institute and elsewhere. HR 1457 currently has 16 Republican co-sponsors and seeks to have the National Institutes of Health study for the first time the physical and emotional health consequences of abortion, and to issue Health and Human Services--funded grants for the purpose. LifeSite Special Report - Abortion Causes Mental Disorders: New Zealand Study May Require Doctors To Do Fewer Abortions
As most can imagine, this politically incorrect stance has faced tremendous opposition and criticism.
But if the pro-abortion side denies these results, why do their groups offer support services for something they say doesn’t occur? Exhale Exhale: an after-abortion counselling hotline is one such group and it offers post-abortion healing even though they claim abortion does no harm. The group even offers E-cards with statements like. "I think you're strong, smart, thoughtful, and caring," "I think you did the right thing." Another card reads, "There are no words to express my sympathy for your loss. As you grieve, remember that you are loved." Another card invokes God: "The promise of God is to be with us through all of life's transitions. God will never leave you or forsake you. May you find comfort in God's constant love."
There seems to be some mixed messages from this group as well as others on the pro-abortion side including Peace After Abortion. They deny the existence of Post-Abortion Syndrome and attribute abortion fallout to preexisting causes. When that doesn’t satisfy them they blame the negative abortion reactions to such causes like a repressive religious upbringing, an unsupportive boyfriend, or negative societal views of abortion.
It appears studies are only valid to these groups when it supports their ideas but readily refuted when it contradicts them. Their abortion experiences somehow trump all of those women who have been harmed by abortion.
Where this Bill goes from here is unknown, but with the democratic controlled congress, it is unlikely to progress far.
This bill has already created uproar with Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups. The studies cited in the "findings" section will read like heresy as it cites evidence of "severe and long-term effects" of abortion on women, including depression, eating disorders, suicide attempts, intense grief, emotional numbness, rage, sexual dysfunction, and relationship difficulties.
"Women who aborted a first pregnancy are four times more likely to report substance abuse compared to those who suffered a natural loss of their first pregnancy," the legislative text reads, "and they are five times more likely . . . than women who carried to term."
This bill uses data and statistics obtained from multiple studies but primarily from a study released in 2006 by David Fergusson, a researcher from New Zealand who calls himself a pro-choice atheist.
Fergusson's findings correlate with many other pro-life researchers at the Elliot Institute and elsewhere. HR 1457 currently has 16 Republican co-sponsors and seeks to have the National Institutes of Health study for the first time the physical and emotional health consequences of abortion, and to issue Health and Human Services--funded grants for the purpose. LifeSite Special Report - Abortion Causes Mental Disorders: New Zealand Study May Require Doctors To Do Fewer Abortions
As most can imagine, this politically incorrect stance has faced tremendous opposition and criticism.
But if the pro-abortion side denies these results, why do their groups offer support services for something they say doesn’t occur? Exhale Exhale: an after-abortion counselling hotline is one such group and it offers post-abortion healing even though they claim abortion does no harm. The group even offers E-cards with statements like. "I think you're strong, smart, thoughtful, and caring," "I think you did the right thing." Another card reads, "There are no words to express my sympathy for your loss. As you grieve, remember that you are loved." Another card invokes God: "The promise of God is to be with us through all of life's transitions. God will never leave you or forsake you. May you find comfort in God's constant love."
There seems to be some mixed messages from this group as well as others on the pro-abortion side including Peace After Abortion. They deny the existence of Post-Abortion Syndrome and attribute abortion fallout to preexisting causes. When that doesn’t satisfy them they blame the negative abortion reactions to such causes like a repressive religious upbringing, an unsupportive boyfriend, or negative societal views of abortion.
It appears studies are only valid to these groups when it supports their ideas but readily refuted when it contradicts them. Their abortion experiences somehow trump all of those women who have been harmed by abortion.
Where this Bill goes from here is unknown, but with the democratic controlled congress, it is unlikely to progress far.
Labels: abortion, legislation
posted by Anonymous at 6:10 AM
17 Comments:
Regarding: "It appears studies are only valid to these groups when it supports their ideas but readily refuted when it contradicts them."
I am sure that a good "Creationist' would never engage in such selective use of data.
As always, there are consequences with our actions. That being said, we still need choices.
I'd be happy to discuss creation science with you and I will plan to blog on that another time.
Creationist are not hindered and biased by the naturalistic viewpoint of evolution and therefore have a broader and more open-minded epistemology. We accept the reality of a supernatural realm much more readily.
"We accept the reality of a supernatural realm much more readily."
"Accepting" the unverifiable seems out of place on a blog ostensibly devoted to a pursuit that itself has evolved according to the scientific method. Alas, the power of self-delusion truly springs eternal, even if nothing else does.
NAC,
Science can only prove things about the physical world.
It cannot prove something about the nonphysical world because it is not equipped to do.
Love, hate, happiness, motive and dozens of other things we all acknowledge exist cannot be "proven" scientifically.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence
I just love when extremists(from any side)say that they are free of bias. And make no mistake, you are an extremist. I may have "gray" thoughts in most areas but this ain't one of 'em.
But that's cool. It takes all kinds and I like reading, hearing, and sometimes debating with all kinds. It's how I learn. The strange thing is, the more I learn, the more I learn that I don't know.
This is so ridiculous. It's just another example of "researchers" assigning a cause-effect explanation to a set of coincidental statistics. I am a Christian and am very, very pro-life. It makes us all look bad when true facts are manipulated unnecessarily to support our position. Doc, I’m embarrassed that you didn’t see past the trees on this one...
OF COURSE there are preexisting circumstances that would likely lead to the enumerated outcomes, with or without the inclusion of abortion. How many physically healthy, emotionally stable, educated, happily married (or single and financially secure), adult women do you think have abortions?
Believe it or not, families still turn their daughters out for getting pregnant. It happens a lot more than you might expect. Go take a poll at St. Elizabeth’s Home for Unwed Mothers or at ChildPlace and see how many of those girls are there by choice versus how many are there because, otherwise, they’d be homeless. I've known a number of young women in my relatively short life who have had abortions (some forced by their "Christian" parents, ironically enough), not because they wanted to, but because they felt they had no other option. And yes, they did suffer. How sad and lonely must it be for a girl to know that she has so little support, and that the people she loves most would place conditions on loving her back?
Eating disorder = “I need to be perfect so someone will love me.” Sexual dysfunction = “I will have sex because it makes me feel like someone loves me.” Depression = “I do not feel like anyone sees, understands, or loves me, and I am overwhelmingly isolated.” Substance abuse = “It doesn’t hurt so bad when I do this…” Suicide attempt = “Is anyone paying attention?” Relationship difficulties = “I don’t even know what a healthy relationship looks like, and wouldn’t recognize real love if it wiped away my tears and kissed me on the mouth.”
A lifetime of conditional love would do that to a person.
Abortion is a symptom of the illness, not the cause. If pro-lifers (especially churches) would put as much money and energy into offering alternatives to abortion as they put into fighting over rhetoric, maybe the problem would start to resolve itself. Overturning Roe v. Wade is an impractical goal, and does not address the real issue. It’s a band-aid. We can waste our time trying to make abortion illegal, or we can change our vision and pray for it to become obsolete. The desire of our hearts should be that, given the option, women would always choose life.
Anon 6:44,
You are exactly right.
It should not be a surprise that abortion negatively impacts a woman in many ways. Whether or not they want to admit it, I think most people intuitively realize this fact without the aid of a study. That's probably why most comments were not on the topic of the original post.
HB, Creationism has nothing to do with this post. Why are you unable to let the cheap shot go? Your response does not advance your argument; it only confuses the conversation of the day.
Anonymous,
I do not disagree with you. Abortion does have consequences both short term and long term. There are many women who have it done and may or may not suffer the consequences.
It is similar to many war vets who return with PTSD. Not all of them have problems but the experience changes them all in some ways.
Pro-abortionists do not readily admit and some never do that abortion does have a price to these women.
Families do make poor choices and we as a society do not make it easier for these girls. There should be easier and more readily available choices other than abortion for these girls.
Grasshopper is also correct in the statement
"Whether or not they want to admit it, I think most people intuitively realize this fact without the aid of a study. That's probably why most comments were not on the topic of the original post."
This is one of the fallacies in logical arguments and it is repeatedly demonstrated on numerous posts.
Ok. Let me rephrase, because maybe I didn't exactly make myself clear.
The relationship between abortion and the various "personal issues" as discussed in the original post is not necessarily cause and effect, and it does a disservice to those young women and to the pro-life cause to assume otherwise. Not to mention the fact that it's just bad logic. Don't get me wrong, I don't think anyone comes home from the clinic and is excited about her experience. Quite the opposite, I would imagine. But the emotional or physical effects would dissipate over time as related to the event itself. If there are issues that linger, they're more likely to be related to other things.
Women who experience natural miscarriages or other complications during pregnancy that end badly suffer from the same kind of emotional trauma (even guilt, as irrational as it may sound)...but not forever.
anonymous,
you are making conclusions not supported with studies or facts but your opinion.
There is ample evidence linking breast cancer and aborting first pregnancies. It is not yet stated as cause and effect, but certainly statistically important.
This study is just another one that supports more pathology related to abortions.
No one is saying it is cause and effect in everyone, but it should be obvious that there are consequences. I disagree in that it hurts the pro-life cause. Getting more information out helps everyone make better decisions.
Although there has been many studies showing the link referred to, the NIH concluded that having an abortion or miscarriage does not increase a woman’s subsequent risk of developing breast cancer. A summary of their findings, titled Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop, can be found at http://www.cancer.gov/cancerinfo/ere-workshop-report.
There is no perfect study and science cannot prove these things with 100% certainty. There is bias on all sides of the issue, but there is also real consequences that are just as real.
Giving people information is important for them to make better informed decisions and therefore I would disagree that does a disservice as stated.
What? Opinions not based on fact? Which part of that do you think I made up...
My statements are actually based on rather thorough study. Unlike many, I like to learn as much as possible about a serious issue before presuming to engage in discussion or debate, and have the ability to understand and defend either side. Further, I can speak from relational experience regarding elective abortion, and personal experience on the subject of fetal demise and related physical and emotional complications thereof. I don’t know if you read the study in question, but I can tell you from both study AND experience why each “statistic” that they produced is incorrectly applied to this topic. I’m not saying I disagree with it because there aren’t consequences to our actions. Of course there are. I’m saying I disagree with it because it is incomplete. God love ‘em...their hearts were in the right place.
As an analogy, consider this: Does the sun come up every morning because we get out of bed? Or do we get out of bed because the sun comes up? Or do we get out of bed because we have things to do…and the sun also comes up.
This study wants to claim that the sun comes up because we get out of bed.
Check the American Cancer Society on the breast cancer thing. You won’t find it. Yet another example (canyoubelieveit!) of manipulated statistics. I remember hearing about this “fact” something like a decade ago...and then it was believed for a while that women who had miscarriages were at an equally heightened risk with those who had abortions. And yes, they did give it an explanation, saying that it stemmed from hormonal and tissue changes that occurred in the breast when the body was preparing for full-term pregnancy that terminated early for any reason.
I will say again that I am very pro-life. But I am not so desperate to indoctrinate others that I would be willing to disregard the importance of critical thinking. Widely disseminated wrong information is bad for everyone, regardless of the subject. This approach takes time and energy away from exacting an actual remedy, and yes that is harmful.
$
And about the disservice—
(1)Bad info/bad logic makes us look like we’re either stupid or lying.
(2)Bad info = one can never reach an educated decision. And we all have the right to make bad decisions...God knows sometimes we just can’t help ourselves.
(3)Bad info = more extreme bipartisanism, like we need more of THAT?
(4)Extreme bipartisanism = we start to care more about winning the argument than understanding the entirety of what is real and true.
(5)If we do not understand what is real and true, we cannot even begin to fix what is wrong.
For me. The movie, "Cider House Rules" makes sense. Why aren't Christians putting their money where there mouths are and sponsor more orphanages?
Seriously? You think a lack of orphanages is the problem?
Hmm.
Seriously? You think a lack of orphanages is the problem?
Hmm.
No, I don't think it's the problem. I think it's a solution. Like in the movie, the orphanage could provide services and choices whether it be delivery of the baby or abortion. Then if people who want children and can't, it provided a place for adoption. In my mind, it's a workable solution . Take it a step further and the orphanage could provide counseling for post abortion patients. If people would lay down their arms so to speak and come together I think we could really make a difference for women in these situations.
Post a Comment
<< Home