If Only Abortionists Could Marry

cmr ^ | January 7, 2010 | matthew archbold

[NYer]

Experts have noticed the problem. There's a shortage of people willing to step up and do the job. And because of that, the limited number of those who have joined are stretched thinner and have to work harder. Experts have noticed that their average age is climbing rapidly. And they've noticed that many of our best and brightest young people aren't interested in joining.

While I could be talking about priests, actually liberals are worried about the graying of abortionists. Poor things.

All I can think is that if only they let abortionists marry, none of this would happen.

Amanda Marcotte writes that pro-aborts must:

Address the shortage of abortion providers. We all know the drill: the average age of an abortion provider in this country is soaring upwards, and many doctors who deserve to retire and spend their days playing golf stay in the business because there's so many women who need abortions and so few people to provide them. Few counties have abortion providers, and many women have to travel hundreds, sometimes thousands of miles to get one. And it's because younger doctors don't want to perform abortions. They don't have any memories of the horrors of septic abortions (unlike many older doctors), and the harassment they face if they join up seems like too much trouble.

The problem is complex, but not unfixable. We should lobby for stronger protections for abortion clinic workers, so that fear doesn't drive would-be providers away. More importantly, we need to find a way to get people with the right attitudes and the right skills into the business. Programs encouraging bright, young pro-choice people into medical school to train as ob-gyns who perform abortions is a good start. Pushing medical schools not only to teach the procedures for abortion, but also to highlight the dangers of self-abortion would also help. Perhaps a scholarship program for medical students who train to be abortion providers, or a debt forgiveness program for those doctors that provide abortion? There are endless possibilities, and we should undertake them.

Can you imagine that there are people out there who believe there aren't enough abortions taking place? Yeah, that's the problem in America.

To me, it says something positive about America that the number of abortionists is dwindling. I think it has something to do with technological advancements that allow us all to see what's inside the womb. The ol' "blob of tissue" argument doesn't really work anymore.

But if this graying of abortionists continues watch for some government intervention to entice young doctors into becoming abortionists. Because what good is federal funding of abortion without abortionists?

And we must always remember. Babies are the enemy.

[BenKenobi]

Yeah, it’s close to about a third. Shocking numbers.

[BenKenobi]

[quote]
Carrying a pregnancy to full term carries much higher risks for women under the age of 20. One (1) in every 400,000 women dies from an abortion whereas 12 out of 100,000 (48 times greater) die from carrying a pregnancy full term.
[/quote]

Ok, so let’s see.

CDC says that overall maternal mortality is 11 out of 100,000. So there’s really no difference between women under 20, and the rest of the population.

Where reported death rate is around 1 percent for each abortion, this only covers about 6 percent of the overall deaths associated from abortion. What this means is that the rate is not realy 1 in 100,000, but much closer to 20 out of 100,000.

If there are 1 million abortions, every year about 200 women die from abortion or abortion related complications.

If the pregnancy is continued, risk of injury or serious illness is 100 times greater than with an abortion.

Where do they get these stats? Wonder what the risk of injury or serious illness is for the baby in an abortion!!!!! Not that they would care. Playing on the fears of young women so they can make money off the killing of the innocent . . . Disgusting beyond belief!!!

[Mrs. Don-o]

"If the pregnancy is continued, risk of injury or serious illness is 100 times greater than with an abortion." I don't have time right now to look up the stats, but on the face of it, this is fallacious for two reasons:

• deaths/illnesses during pregnancy or immediately after childbirth are not at all deaths/illnesses "caused by pregnancy or childbirth." I have known, personally, several Ob/Gyns who told me that they had never in their long careers seen a woman die during pregnancy or childbirth, though they acknowledged that it sometimes happens (though it's statistically rare); one (Dr. Jose Espinosa) told me that any doctor who says an abortion is "necessary" to prevent a pregnant woman's death "is admitting he is either unwilling or unable to practice modern obstetrics."

• the legitimate statistical comparison would be, not "all pregnancies/childbirths vs all pregnancy/childbirth deaths," but broken down into categories, in terms of condition, comparing:
  • women with diabetes
  • women with hypertension
  • women who smoke, etc.

In other words, the question is whether women are dying "from the pregnancy" or dying "of underlying conditions" who might have died with with or without a pregnancy.

One of our local high-risk pregnancy specialists (Dr. Brenda Crowder) pointed out to me that women with "underlying conditions" might very well have a higher survival rate because of the pregnancy, in the sense that a pregnant woman is highly motivated to have frequent monitoring, to cease harmful habits (e.g. smmoking), to eat better, and generally take care of herself.

Dr. Crowder also points out that the well-being factors for pregnant moms and babies don't naturally compete; they naturally coincide. Anything that hurts one, will hurt both; anything that benefits one, will benefit both; "You can't embrace an unborn child without embracing the woman whose body already embraces him."

[Faith]

Great post, Mrs. D. I thank you for your thoughts. Just wondering if there could be a legal challenge (such as filing a complaint) regarding this statement through the Ohio Health Department. It does not seem right that this clinic should be allowed to use such scare tactics to generate business. Any comments would be appreciated.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Hmm, legal complaint, it's an interesting idea. If I were going to do that, the first step would be a find an expert willing to analyze the stats and to file and/or testify. Where to find one? I'd ask Dr. David Reardon; another good bet would be to try the Ohio Right to Life organization, Christian Medical Assn, and/or Doctors for Life.

[Faith]

Thanks so much for giving me some direction. I’m going to pursue this.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Keep in mind that the "raw numbers" could very well be correct, but the interpretation is unscientific or, especially, the assumptions about causality are inaccurate.

You've surely heard the jokes about this:

You're 850% more likely to die in a hospital than in a whorehouse: therefore hospitals should be banned. Or:

• Fact: drop worms in a glass of beer, 60% will die;
• Fact: drop worms in a glass of whiskey, 90% will die
• Fact: drop worms in a dish of nice moist dirt, 99%+ will live.
• Conclusion: drink more of alcohol, it'll get rid of your worms.

There's actually a book out there--- I read it when I was in High School --- called How to Lie With Statistics!

[Faith]

Good points you make. My concern is that these young women are lied to at the abortion clinic and honestly believe their lives may be in danger if they don’t abort. (I’m talking primarily about the teenagers.) Then they go back to their girlfriends and convince the next one who becomes pregnant to abort because she may die. And the scenario is repeated and repeated. It is sickening to think about the damage-—the loss of life-—the lives full of regret that result from these tactics of deception.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Well, the underlying lie (if I can put it that way) is that pregnancy is some kind of pathological condition: to be prevented if possible, to be eradicated if prevention didn't work, etc. etc. Actually the female body is beautifully well-equipped for pregnancy, which is a normal healthy condition.

Here's an interesting article about how pregnancy reduces the risk factors for some medical conditions.

To be clear, pregnancy elevates some risk factors as well (e.g. deep vein thrombosis), but often these are conditions are multicausal (e.g. poor nutrition, poor exercise, smoking) and when you eliminate the other causes, any alleged negative pregnancy effect disappears.

On the other hand, just by googling "pregnancy protective effect" in about 10 minutes I found articles examining the beneficial effect of pregnancy in preventing breast and uterine cancer, alleviating multiple sclerosis, and stengthening the immune response; somebody (!) ought to do a survey of the literature and put together a comprehensive study on this!

Not that teenages commonly make decisions based on statistical analysis. (Sigh.) They are easily manipulated by the abortion profiteers. And by the junk-sex culture. There are so many avenues we have to pursue to help our young people (and not just the young ones!) recover their right minds.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Well, the underlying lie (if I can put it that way) is that pregnancy is some kind of pathological condition: to be prevented if possible, to be eradicated if prevention didn't work, etc. etc. Actually the female body is beautifully well-equipped for pregnancy, which is a normal healthy condition.

Here's an interesting article about how pregnancy reduces the risk factors for some medical conditions.

To be clear, pregnancy elevates some risk factors as well (e.g. deep vein thrombosis), but often these are conditions are multicausal (e.g. poor nutrition, poor exercise, smoking) and when you eliminate the other causes, any alleged negative pregnancy effect disappears.

On the other hand, just by googling "pregnancy protective effect" in about 10 minutes I found articles examining the beneficial effect of pregnancy in preventing breast and uterine cancer, alleviating multiple sclerosis, and stengthening the immune response; somebody (!) ought to do a survey of the literature and put together a comprehensive study on this!

Not that teenages commonly make decisions based on statistical analysis. (Sigh.) They are easily manipulated by the abortion profiteers. And by the junk-sex culture. There are so many avenues we have to pursue to help our young people (and not just the young ones!) recover their right minds.

[Faith]

Your comments are very helpful. It is a crime that Planned Parenthood and the entire abortion profiteering industry misleads our youth and women of all ages. Thanks again for all you do in defense of the unborn.

[wagglebee]

Pinged from Terri Dailies

[Mrs. Don-o]

Oh gosh! Read this:

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=35144

Like we were just saying...

[Faith]

. . . the “choice” they fight for is not reproductive freedom but legalized child-killing.

Bottom line right there. Print it. Read it and weep. May God have mercy upon us and the precious babies.

[exDemMom]

When a girl has an abortion, she increases the danger of both fetal and maternal death in future pregnancies.

I wonder if that is accounted for in those statistics claiming that abortion is safer for the mother than childbirth?

[fatima]

I talked with two abortionist.Well three,one was reformed but would not let me film him or audio him.Follow the money guy who was reformed ,I cursed him and he cursed me.Bottom line is money.