ENDEAVOUR FORUM NEWSLETTER No. 110, APRIL 2003

Home | Contact Us | Newsletters

A study published in the August edition of the Southern Medical Journal reveals that women who have abortions are at significantly higher risk of near and long term death than women who give birth.  This contradicts the widely accepted opinion that abortion is safer than childbirth.  Researchers examined death records linked to Medi-Cal payments for births and abortions for approximately 173,000 low income Californian women.  They discovered that women who had abortions were almost twice as likely to die in the following two years.  They also discovered that the elevated mortality rate of aborting women persisted over at least eight years.  Over the eight year period studied, women who aborted had a 154 percent higher risk of death from suicide, an 82 percent higher risk of death from accidents, and a 44 percent higher risk of death from natural cause, such as cardiovascular disease.  

This is the second large record based study to find elevated mortality rates among women following an abortion.   In 1997, a government funded study of maternal deaths in Finland sent a tremor of worry through family planning agencies when it revealed that in the first year following an abortion, aborting women were 252 percent more likely to die compared to women who delivered and 76 percent more likely to die compared to women who had not been pregnant.  Many of the extra deaths were due to suicide.  

The new study on a large sample of American women, confirms the trend found in Finland. In addition, where the Finland study was limited to a one year follow-up, the new study reveals higher mortality rates persist over at least eight years.

According to the study's lead author, David Reardon, Ph.D., director of the Elliot Institute based in Springfield, IL, the causes of death shifted during the period studied.  "During the first four years, higher rates of death from suicide and heightened risk taking behaviour were the most pronounced area of difference," he said. "In later years, deaths due to natural causes rose.  This may reflect longer term damage that increased rates of depression, anxiety, and self-neglect can inflict on women's cardiovascular and immune systems." 

New Approach Eliminates Uncertainties

Critics of abortion have long complained about the widely acknowledged inaccuracies of abortion mortality figures. There are no federal or state regulations requiring reporting of abortion complications.  Indeed, the international classification codes for identifying cause of death do not even provide a means for identifying surgical abortion as a cause of death. Even if there was a method for reporting abortion related deaths, the accuracy of such reports would still be limited by the judgment of coroners regarding the underlying cause of death. Deaths from suicide or protracted infections, for example, may be difficult to attribute to a specific underlying cause.  

"Government researchers in Finland paved the way out of this quagmire of uncertainty," Reardon said.  "By linking death certificates directly to payment records for births and abortions, we can finally get an accurate picture of what is really going on.  This is the first American study to use a uniform and objective standard for comparing deaths associated with abortion and birth." 

Asked if these findings will lead to general recognition that mortality rates associated with abortion are higher than those for childbirth, Reardon expressed a fear that the new findings will be ignored by family planning counselors. "Five years ago, when Finland published the one impeccable record-based study of death rates, the results were completely ignored by abortion advocates. If the results had been the opposite, they would have been shouted from the rooftops. But since the population control lobby is anxious to see abortion legalized in developing countries, they have a vested interest in promoting the myth that abortion is safer than childbirth, so the results were ignored." 

Reardon says that the various claims that abortion is six, twelve, or even twenty times safer than childbirth were all constructed by combining a "hodgepodge of studies" that rely on incomplete data. He says that these prior estimates are "at best, educated guesses.  At worst, they are examples of propaganda dressed up as science. In either case, these favourite estimates are deeply entrenched in family planning literature and have not been corrected in light of the Finland research. It is likely many abortion advocates will continue to hold to them despite our findings as well." 

Depression Over Abortion May Explain

Increased Suicide Rates

Reardon is especially concerned about the higher risk of deaths from suicides.  The Finland study revealed a seven fold increased rate of deaths from suicide among aborting women.  Suicide is a leading cause of death among young women. In an Elliot Institute survey of women complaining of post-abortion distress, 56 percent reported suicidal feelings and 28 percent actually attempted suicide, with over half of these attempting suicide more than once.  

The explanation for higher suicide rates, Reardon believes, can be found in another Elliot Institute study of 1076 women faced with unplanned pregnancies that was published earlier this year in the British Medical Journal.  It revealed that subsequent long-term clinical depression was more common among those who had abortions.  

Yet another Elliot Institute study published in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry this year revealed that aborting women are significantly more likely to require subsequent psychiatric treatments compared to delivering women.  This study examined Medi-Cal payments for outpatient psychiatric care over a four year period. Abortion was most strongly associated with subsequent treatments for neurotic depression, bipolar disorder, adjustment reactions, and schizophrenic disorders.  

Since all three of the recently published Elliot Institute studies control for prior psychiatric state, Reardon says the differences between aborting and delivering women cannot be explained simply on differences in prior psychological health.  "We have been looking at large samples of women who are similar in socioeconomic and psychological profiles," he said.  "Abortion is clearly associated with a worsening of mental health and higher mortality rates.  By contrast, giving birth appears to protect mental health and lower mortality rates. The latter is especially evident in the Finland studies." 

More Outreach, Counseling & Research Recommended

Reardon believes the results these recent studies underscore a key message of a new book,  “Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion”, released this May, which he co-authored with Dr. Theresa Burke, an expert in post-abortion counseling: "We need to expand outreach and referrals into post-abortion counseling programs," he said.  "There are many women who have great difficulty coping with the emotional stress following an abortion.  Without help, and especially the understanding of loved ones, they will be more vulnerable to self-destructive behavior and other psychological disorders." 

Public interest in the health effects of abortion was last raised in 1989 when Surgeon General C. Everett Koop reviewed the research on abortion at the request of President Ronald Reagan.  Koop concluded that all the studies done up to that point were so methodologically flawed that no firm conclusions could be drawn about abortion's risks or benefits. In a letter to the outgoing president, Koop recommended that a major federally funded longitudinal study of abortion health risks was the only way to secure definitive answers.  His proposal for a major study died in the Democrat-controlled Congress, however, when abortion advocates argued that the appeal for such research was politically motivated and a waste of taxpayer dollars.  

Reardon hopes the results of recent studies will rekindle the effort to make the investigation of abortion's health effects a priority of the government's National Institutes of Health.  "The government has ignored this problem for decades, largely at the behest of population control groups which are more concerned about protecting abortion than protecting women," Reardon said. "I believe women deserve better.  They deserve to know the true relative risk associated with abortion.  If the government had acted on Koop's recommendation, we would have had definitive answers by now."            # # #

Citation and link to full original article: Reardon DC, Ney PG , Scheuren FJ, Cougle JR, Coleman PK, Strahan T. "Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low income women."  Southern Medical Journal, August 2002, 95(8):834-841. 

For additional information and commentary on the Finland mortality and other studies related to abortion mortality, see the previously published review articles in The Post-Abortion Review, Volume 8 Number 2.  Press Contacts:  Elliot Institute (217) 525-8202. The Elliot Institute  was founded in 1988 to perform original research and education on the impact of abortion on women, men, siblings and society. http://www.afterabortion.org/. 

SYDNEY’S OPIUM DEN

Sydney's heroin injecting room has been compared to an Asian  opium den by an international  drugs control body campaigning for its closure.  The United Nations  International Narcotics  Control Board  (INCB) condemned the NSW Government for allowing illegal drugs in the  inner-city  Kings Cross injecting room.

"To provide a venue for an illegal activity is a shot for drug traffickers and is against all  international convention", said board member Professor Hamid Ghodse,  speaking  as the INCB's  annual report was released in February 2003.  “We are very saddened the government provides a venue  for illegal drugs.  It's similar to the opium dens of the early 20th century.   It's odd that we closed the opium dens and now we have injecting rooms".

The INCB would continue to negotiate with Australian authorities and the NSW Government to  try to close the room "as soon as possible to come into line with international convention."

It is more than odd that the NSW Labor Party Government which is generally most enthusiastic about   the UN   (e.g. the Convention on Women, and   the UN's decision-making  role in  Iraq) should  ignore the UN's International Narcotics Control Board  and international convention on drugs.

Northern Territory.

Anti-drugs campaigner and Family Council of Victoria member,  Warwick Murphy reports: "On  the 14th of May 2002, drug user and drug law reform activists stormed the NT Legislative  Assembly to protest against the draconian drug house legislation that was being pushed through the NT's only House of parliament. Nine  activists were charged and are currently in the middle of a hearing in the Darwin  Magistrate's Court. The activists face a maximum of 3 years in gaol.

After months of fighting for it, and nearly half a dozen rejected applications, Magistrate Dick Wallace has allowed the defendants to make a copy of the Hansard video that is being used as evidence.

The "Network Against Prohibition" (NAP)  has  announced  that copies of this video  are now for sale!!!    All proceeds of the sales of the video will go to the NAP “Mob” fighting fund.  (Cost is $20 plus postage). 

Warwick’s comment: "The courts are obviously not a deterrent to these guys at all. Now they  are making money out of their behaviour. Let’s hope this is not a precedent for other criminals. If this goes ahead  we may end up with  video rental stores having special sections just for criminals"  -      Babette Francis

Member Organisation, World Council for Life and Family

NGO in Special Consultative Status with ECOSOC of the UN