AGI releases statistics for 1995-96

NRLC Now Estimates Over 38 Million Abortions since Roe v. Wade Decision

By Randall K. O'Bannon, Ph.D.
NRL-ETF Director of Education and Research

Releasing its first comprehensive abortion statistics in nearly four and a half years, the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) has confirmed earlier government reports of an overall downward trend in the number of abortions performed annually in the U.S. in the past several years.

Abortion numbers published by AGI, though less frequent, are both higher and more reliable than those published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). AGI, a special research affiliate of Planned Parenthood, directly surveys abortion clinics. The CDC relies on data provided to it by state health agencies. (CDC figures were reported on in the December 10, 1998, issue of NRL News.)

The report, "Abortion Incidence and Services in the United States, 1995-1996," is authored by AGI Deputy Director of Research Stanley K. Henshaw. Published in the November/December issue of Family Planning Perspectives, it shows the number of abortions dropping substantially from 1990.

For 1995, AGI counted 1,363,680 abortions, its lowest figure since 1977, and a 15% drop from 1990 when AGI recorded 1,608,600 abortions, its highest total ever. In 1996, according to AGI, the number of abortions increased by just over 2,000, edging up to 1,365,730.

Combining all of AGI's abortion numbers reported since 1973 and extending the 1996 AGI abortion figure as an estimate for the number of annual abortions for 1997 and 1998, the total is 36,903,280 abortions through 1998.

However, AGI says that 3% of all abortions go unreported. Factoring that in and the total number increases to 38,010,378 abortions since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

The latest AGI report also spotlights the dwindling number of abortionists in the U.S. In 1982, according to Guttmacher, there were 2,908 "abortion providers." In 1996 there were just 2,042 - - a drop of nearly 30%. Declines have been greatest in hospitals (50%) and private physicians (34%).

Henshaw suggests that this drop in the number of abortionists and the accompanying shift to mega-clinics (those performing a thousand or more abortions a year), a figure which has held steady from 1982 to 1996 at about 440, may be due to "high costs of small-scale abortion provision" and "possibly" anti-abortion

sentiment discouraging somehospitals or private physicians from performing abortions. Yet the report fails to note other significant factors that may be involved. These include growing physician discomfort with abortion and the general lack of respect abortionists encounter among their medical peers, which causes many to leave or stay out of the abortion business. (See New York Times, 1/8/90, Washington Post, 1/22/95.) The report also offers evidence of a decreased demand for abortion. For instance, the abortion rate (the number of abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age) dropped from 28.8 in 1982 to 22.9 in 1996, according to AGI. Likewise the abortion ratio (defined by AGI as the number of abortions per 100 pregnancies that end in either an abortion or a live birth) dropped from 30 in 1982 to 26.1 in 1996. While Henshaw presents his statistics in such a way as to imply that declining abortion numbers, rates, and ratios are a function of a declining number of abortionists, or "reduced access," he never fully explores the equally plausible interpretation suggested by the data - - that there may be fewer abortionists because of a reduced demand for abortion.

It should also be noted that it was during this same time period that NRLC was successful in getting substantive parental involvement and "right to know" legislation passed in several states (22 and 14, respectively), as well as legislation instituting waiting periods and limits on taxpayer funding of abortions. The national campaign to stop partial-birth abortion has also been extremely effective in raising overall public consciousness regarding the humanity of the unborn child, certainly contributing to the decline. Moreover, the influence of thousands of right to life chapters and crisis pregnancy center and the distribution of millions of pieces of educational literature also surely contributed to the overall reduction in demand for abortion.

It is interesting to note that the slight increase in the number of abortions seen from 1995 to 1996 corresponds with the testing of the two-drug chemical abortion technique known as RU 486 conducted in the U.S. from October 1995 to Labor Day 1996. This was not lost on Henshaw. He writes,

The availability of these methods [RU 486 and methotrexate, another chemical abortion method that came into use about the same time] may have encouraged more physicians to provide abortions, may have increased the number of women seeking abortions or simply may have replaced surgical services.

While there were just over 2,100 chemical abortions performed during the 1995-1996 RU 486 trials, a great many more women may have been drawn into the clinics by the promise of easy, safe abortions (despite the publicity, RU 486 abortions are neither safe nor easy), inflating the numbers for 1996.

Henshaw notes, "Early medical abortion [i.e., chemical abortions] has the potential to expand the availability of abortion services in areas without surgical abortion providers."

A 1997 survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation bears Henshaw out. According to the Kaiser survey, 54% of obstetrician/gynecologists said they were "very" or "somewhat" likely to prescribe RU 486 for their patients seeking abortions. Ominously, this included 45% of those ob/gyns who were not currently performing abortions. High percentages of family practice physicians (45%) and physician assistants (54%) also expressed interest in offering RU 486 if it obtains final government approval.

However, pro-lifers have made a difference. The numbers show that. But the abortion lobby is anxious to expand business and revitalize the industry with promises of "new and improved" abortion techniques.

Our answer? The truth. Make sure people continue to hear the truth about abortion and especially about the new chemical abortion techniques (they're unsafe, painful, messy, protracted, and they still kill unborn babies)1 and we should see the numbers drop again.

FOOTNOTE:

1. For detailed information on chemical abortions, contact the NRL Educational Trust Fund and ask for the factsheet "RU 486: Risks and Dangers."