January 27, 2011

Donate

Bookmark and Share

Please send me your comments!

Abortion and Mental Health
Part Two of Four

By Dave Andrusko

And the beat goes on. Another "study" purporting to show that having an abortion does not increase the chances of subsequent mental health problems. In fact, the latest, which appears in today's New England Journal of Medicine, allows reporters such as the Associated Press's Alicia Chang to write, "Having an abortion does not increase the risk of mental health problems, but having a baby does, one of the largest studies to compare the aftermath of both decisions suggests. The research by Danish scientists further debunks the notion that terminating a pregnancy can trigger mental illness and shows postpartum depression to be much more of a factor."

Over at Part Three, Professor Priscilla Coleman debunks the conclusions reached by researchers Munk-Olsen, Laursen, Pedersen, and colleagues in a study titled, "Induced First-Trimester Abortion and Risk of Mental Disorder." You'd never know it from either the study itself or news accounts, but there has been "a tidal wave of sound published data on the emotional consequences of abortion," as Dr. Coleman wrote last year. "Over 30 studies have been published in just the last five years and they add to a body of literature comprised of hundreds of studies published in major medicine and psychology journals throughout the world."

Just three points to keep in mind.

First, research was partially funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which supports pro-abortion organizations and their "projects." As Prof. Michael New noted today, "[T]his summer, an article in The New York Times Magazine indicated that two new programs designed to train and encourage young physicians to perform abortions were funded, in part, by the Susan Thompson Buffet Foundation" [www.nationalreview.com/corner/258205/more-misleading-research-about-mental-health-consequences-abortion-michael-j-new].

If NRLC funded a study, do you think it would be trumpeted as unbiased and even-handed?

Second, the go-to guy for comments was Robert Blum, "an expert on reproductive health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health." Oh, by the way, he just happens to be the former president of the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute.

Blume told NPR that "This is an extremely, extremely well done study," and that "There is no evidence that abortion predisposes a woman to psychiatric and mental health problems." Reporter Nancy Shute tells us that Blum "would like to say goodbye to the political buzz words." Blum adds definitively, "There is no post-abortion trauma, post-abortion syndrome, or anything of the like."

No way, no how. What a surprise.

Third, there are and will be recurrent waves of research, alleging there is no emotional aftermath to abortion. But resistance to this pretend consensus is growing and is not limited to pro-lifers. Let me offer the conclusion of an analysis Dr. Coleman wrote last year (http://www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/Nov10/nv111210part2.html)

"The evidence is accumulating despite socio-political agendas to keep the truth out of the academic journals and ultimately from women to insure that the big business of abortion continues unimpeded. …And I am not alone in my opinion that abortion has a devastating aftermath for women. These conclusions have been voiced by prominent researchers in Great Britain, Norway, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, the U.S., and elsewhere. As a group of researchers, who in 2008 had published nearly 50 peer-reviewed articles indicating abortion is associated with negative psychological outcomes, six colleagues and I sent a petition letter to the American Psychological Association (APA) criticizing their methods and conclusions as described in their Task Force Report on Abortion and Mental Health. It is noteworthy that Dr. Major chaired the task force.

"Any interpretation of the available research that does not acknowledge the strong evidence now available in the professional literature represents a conscious choice to ignore basic principles of scientific integrity. The human fallout to such a choice by the APA and like-minded colleagues is misinformed professionals, millions of women struggling in isolation to make sense of a past abortion, thousands who will seek an abortion today without the benefit of known risks, and millions who will make this often life altering decision tomorrow without the basic right of informed consent, which is routinely extended for all other elective surgeries in the U.S."

Please send your thoughts and comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.

Part Three
Part Four
Part One

www.nrlc.org