Posted on 02/24/2006 6:58:15 AM PST by Mr. Silverback
Professor David Fergusson, director of the Christchurch Health and Development Study in New Zealand, is firmly pro-choice. But I suspect the good professor might understand if I point out that, lately, he’s been getting a little taste of what it’s like to be pro-life.
Fergusson and two colleagues, L. John Horwood and Elizabeth Ridder, conducted a study on abortion and mental health. And they didn’t find what they expected to find. Their report states, “Those having an abortion [under age 25] had elevated rates of subsequent mental health problems including depression, anxiety, suicidal behaviours and substance use disorders.” Their report goes on to say, “The findings suggest that abortion in young women may be associated with increased risks of mental health problems.”
Talk about irony. We’re used to hearing about the “mental health” aspects of abortion, of course—but usually, we’re being told that a woman’s mental health is in danger if she doesn’t have an abortion. At the very least, this new study forces pro-choicers to question the all-too-common assumption, an assumption that now is putting young women in danger.
Not that most pro-choicers want to hear this, of course—and particularly not now, with the Supreme Court just having agreed to hear an appeal of the partial-birth abortion ban case, where the issue turns on exceptions about the mother’s health. This is why I said that Dr. Fergusson is learning something about what it’s like to be pro-life. This well-regarded researcher and his team normally have no trouble at all getting their work published. But in this case they had to go to four different journals before they could find one that would publish their study. Fergusson has told interviewers that he knows it’s because his findings are too “controversial”—so controversial that New Zealand’s Abortion Supervisory Committee warned him against publishing his work, not for scientific reasons, but for political ones.
Well, Fergusson himself dislikes the idea that pro-lifers will use his work, and he knows that his research could have a devastating effect on the abortion movement in his country. In New Zealand, as the Herald explained, “Every abortion requires two ‘certifying consultants’ to approve it on certain grounds, usually that a woman’s mental health would be [otherwise] endangered.” You can see what the implications would be if the greater “mental health” risk turns out to be having the abortion.
My hat is off to Dr. Fergusson. Despite the controversy, and despite the fact that his results disagreed with his own beliefs, Fergusson was determined to publish them anyway. And he told the Herald, “It verges on scandalous that a surgical procedure that is performed on over one in 10 women has been so poorly researched and evaluated, given the debates about the psychological consequences of abortion.”
That, my friends, is a true professional and a true scientist speaking. It’s people like this who give science a good name. He’s not willing to ignore the elephant in the middle of the room just because no one else wants to talk about it. Instead, he insists on getting the truth out in the open. And that’s what science ought to be all about—not just in New Zealand, but here.
Go to the source document and you'll find a link to the study text. I haven't read it yet, but it would not surprise me if Fergusson controlled for it.
Nicely put.
My daughter told me this evening that she and my granddaughters were riding in the car when they heard a news story about North Dakota passing legislation against abortion.
My 6 year old granddaughter lets loose with "Hey, hey, ho, ho, Roe v Wade has got to go."
Seh accompanied us to the March for Life this year and she says she got that from the "big kids" there.
Big smile on Grandpa and Grandmas face.
Wonderful post, BTW. Glad to have you in The Family.
Thanks for the heads up.
The abstinence speaker Pam Stensel says much the same thing. She not only talks about the general discipline and self-worth aspect, she also makes a very good point about how the pattern of sexual purity/promisuity before marriage can set the pattern of faithfulness during marriage. For example, the guy who slept around with every girl in high school doesn't have the emotional resources and skills to draw on when he's on a business trip and some hottie makes a pass at him.
Would a unbalanced person be more or less affected emotionally by an abortion than a "normal" person? What's your best guess?
What's your point? If the guy is sloppy and his stuff doesn't stand up, why didn't he have trouble getting published before he came up with a result inconvenient to the abortion industry in his country? Why did he get published in any peer reviewed journal at all?
Here's the study. Let us know what's wrong with it.
Big smile on mine, too. Thanks for sharing.
Teen, see post 46. Jwalsh, sorry for the friendly fire earlier, I mistook you for someone else.
You have misinterpreted my comment. The peril of peer review is bucking the dogma. I'm on your side.
Women who get screwed too much ARE loose women.
Think of the etymology of the word "loose" as in this joke:
Q. What's the German word for "virgin" ?
A. Gutenteit
Cheers!
Have you ever heard that trauma is cumlative? If that is true (and I think it is) every hit adds to the imbalance.
So, then we don't need to control for preexisting emotional conditions to find that abortion is harmful for emotional health.
Well, I looked at the paper and the methodology. I didn't read it all. However they did find a cluster of childhood factors that correlate. They indicate an atmosphere that would not make one expect one to be ready to make good decisions. My thinking is that having an abortion is an extreme outcome that indicates a string of weaknesses or inabilities to make good decisions. Maybe I see it that way partly because I was a teen before the pill when dating was a contest between girls who drew the line and boys who used every trick to push the envelope. Back then the consequences were so awesome that very few failed. Unfortunately, the consequences are still dire, but many don't have the tools they need because the attitude that kids will have sex, anyway is negligent imho.
Yeah, I know. Sorry for the friendly fire.
Aren't you making an argument that more emotional harm would come to such girls if they had an abortion? I don't see why controling for prior behavior is necessary.
Thanks for the ping!
"... whereas license and reckless abandon don't work out ...." Ah, but license and wreckless abandon DO make for government dependent sheeple and that's the ultimate goal of the democrap party and the societal engineers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.