Frequently asked questions
ANSWERING COMMON PRO-LIFE QUESTIONS
For many people, abortion is more of an idea than a hard reality. Often the most stalwart abortion proponents know little about how many abortions are actually performed in the United States, or what the principle abortion methods are. Learning the facts can lead to a charge of heart about the morality of abortion.
There are many important legal issues surrounding abortion, and a great deal of misinformation among the public about such issues as what kinds of abortions are allowed by law and what pro-lifers can do to peacefully oppose abortion.
1) How many abortions are performed in Australia?
Each year, an estimated 90,000 abortions are performed in Australia, or one abortion for every 2.8 live births. This indicates that one in three Australian women will have an abortion in their life time.
According to statistics from the Department of Health and Aging, these figures are based on information and data from Medicare for Items 35643 and 16525 for first and second trimester abortions. These abortions are performed in doctors’ surgeries, private hospitals and private patients in public hospitals. Further statistics agreeing with these figures can be found through National Morbidity Casemix Data Set, which contains the figures for abortions performed in public hospitals.
It is very possible that the figure of 90,000 is somewhat understated as only South Australia, Western Australia, Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory have compulsory notification of induced abortion procedures. This figure also does not include abortions which were privately funded for the states that do not have compulsory notification (including New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland). If no Medicare claim was made and the abortion was not performed at a public hospital, they would not appear in either of the data sets.
Moreover, these figures do not include chemical abortions. The ‘morning after’ contraception pill, Prostinor-2, has been available in Australia by prescription from 1 July 2002 and over the counter since 1 January 2004. Although sales figures are confidential, sales have reportedly increased 60% in the 12 months since it became available over the counter.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, there were 1.21 million abortions performed in the United States in 2005, the most recent year for which data is available. This amounts to 3,315 abortions per day. The number of abortions performed in 2005 is slightly down from the number in 2004:
Total abortions in 2005: 1,206,200
Total abortions in 2004: 1,222,100
This is a decrease of almost 16,000 abortions from 2004 to 2005.
AIW NPSU: Grayson N, Hargreaves J & Sullivan E A 2005 www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/10206
Morning after pill sales up by 60% ABC News Online 11 January 2005
Abortion in Australia into the 21st Century www.nswrtl.org.au
Guttmacher Institute. July 2008. Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Is abortion legal in Australia?
Abortion is effectively available on demand in every State up to 20 weeks gestation, later in the ACT  and Victoria.
In New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, the Northern Territory and Tasmania, it is a criminal offence to unlawfully supply or administer with the intent to procure a miscarriage.
In NSW and Queensland, the definition of an unlawful abortion is determined by case law, based largely on the 1969 Menhennitt Ruling in the Victorian Supreme Court. This ruling held that an abortion will be lawful if necessary because there is the risk of serious danger to the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant woman from continuing the pregnancy, not ‘merely the normal dangers of pregnancy and childbirth’. Modern interpretations of this ruling include any kind of mental stress from continuing the pregnancy to be ‘serious danger’.
The South Australian, Western Australian, Northern Territory and Tasmanian legislation sets out provisions for a lawful or ‘legally justified’ abortion. These provisions provide limitations on the gestational age at which the abortion is lawful, and the nature of the necessary danger to the mother.
Abortion has been decriminalised in both the ACT and Victoria. The Victorian legislation allows for abortion on demand up until 24 weeks. It also provides for abortion until full term where two doctors testify that the abortion is appropriate, having regard for the woman’s current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) How accessible is abortion in Australia?
Abortions are available at most public hospitals and at private hospitals and clinics across Australia. These facilities are easily located via the Internet or Yellow pages. Many of the private facilities offer same-day service with no referral necessary and no cooling off period. Women with private health cover can access abortion with no out-of-pocket expenses, and public patients can be bulk-billed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) What do Australians think of abortion?
In 2004, the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute undertook a major study aimed at chronicling Australian’s attitudes towards abortion. Telephone interviews were conducted with a random and stratified sample of 1200 adult Australians in the early December of 2004. The samples were proportionately representative of each state and territory’s population, age and gender, and capital and non-capital city of Australia.
The findings, detailed in the executive summary of this study, were thus:
- While 75% of Australians believe access to abortion gives women control over their lives, 94% think all the alternatives should be seriously considered before exercising this option.
- 99% of the community believe that women contemplating an abortion should have access to counseling. Of these, 78% believe women should have counseling and 21% believe that the counseling should be voluntary. Among those who are strongly pro-abortion, 72% say counseling should be provided and 27% say it should be voluntary.
- 98% think women should be advised of any health risks involved in having an abortion before choosing an abortion.
- 86% (including 85% of those strongly in favor of abortion on demand) thought that such information giving and counseling should be available from someone independent of the abortion provider.
- Despite some moves to shut down public dialogue on abortion, 71% of Australians support greater public discussion.
- Whilst the majority of Australians believe that a woman contemplating an abortion should seek advice from more than one source, such as a health professional independent from the abortion provider, a friend, relative or professional counselling service, 58% were unable to name an organization or even a type of organization which would provide such assistance. In reality the percentage is higher since many of the responses named organizations that don’t in fact provide these services.
Sources:‘Give Women Choice: Australia Speaks on Abortion’ – Southern Cross Bioethics Institute, 26 April 2005, www.bioethics.org.au ‘Abortion in Australia into the 21st Century – NSW Right To Life, www.nswrtl.org.au
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) What are the reasons given for abortion?
South Australia is the only Australian State to collect information detailing the reasons women seek abortion. 5,417 abortions were sought in South Australia in 2002. The reasons given were as follows:
Mental Health 97.5%
Abnormality of Fetus 2.1%
A specified medical condition accounted 0.35%
Pre-existing psychiatric disorder 0.05%
Assault on person 0%
The mental health category lists that some women were influenced by varied and sometimes difficult circumstances – study and work, finances, domestic violence and abuse – difficulties which should be addressed by our government and our society in order to support pregnant women.
In 2004, The Australian Institute of Family Studies reported that “Australians in their primary child-baring years want to have children, yet are worried about their financial capacity to support a family.” It is interesting to note that a number of abortions were performed on women in stable relationships, who had ‘completed’ their families or for economic reasons, the South Australian records showing 32.2% of abortions were sought by married women, or those in de facto relationships.
In 2001, the ABS Year Book stated that “…abortion is being used as a form of contraception…”
Sources: Committee Appointed to Examine/Report On Abortions
Notified in SA 33rd Annual Report 2002. Australian Institute of
Family Studies, Research Report No 11, 2004,
www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/resreport11/conclusion Australian
Bureau of Statistics 2001 Yearbook, No 83 p176, ABS Canberra,
ABS Catalogue No 1301.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) How does Australia compare with the rest of the world?
In 1996, Australia’s abortion figures were estimated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics to be 95,200 and were used in a study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute to ascertain abortion rates in their report, ‘Abortion Rates Vary Enormously by Country’.
Australia’s 22.2 per 1000 women was the 37th country listed, but when taking into account the developed countries, Australia comes third on the list, just behind USA and Turkey, making it one of the highest induced abortion rates in the developed world.
Sources: Sharing Responsibility: Women, Society & Abortion
Worldwide 1999, Alan Guttmacher Institute
www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sharing.pdf Australian Social Trends
1998 Family – Family Formation – Family Planning Report:
Australian Bureau of Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) Is abortion ever necessary to save a woman’s life?
Abortion is never necessary to save a woman’s life. Four hundred and eighty physicians have signed a public declaration stating: “I agree that there is never a situation in the law or in the ethical practice of medicine where a preborn child’s life need be intentionally destroyed by procured abortion for the purpose of saving the life of the mother.”
Source: American Life League. Declaration: Protecting the Life of the
Mother. http://all.org/article.php?id=10682.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8) What are the various methods of abortion in Australia?
Eight abortion methods are practiced in Australia:
Suction (Vacuum) Aspiration
Dilation and Curettage (D&C)
Intracardiac Injection Abortion
Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)
Dilation and Extraction (D&X or Partial-Birth Abortion)
Instillation (Saline) Abortion
Prostaglandin Abortion
Chemical (Medical) Abortion
To find out more about these procedures, see pictorial evidence and witness footage depicting a live abortion, navigate to the Abortion Procedures section.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9) What is partial-birth abortion and is it legal in Australia?
Partial-birth abortion is a late-term abortion procedure and in the state of Victoria, all that is needed to procure a partial-birth abortion is the signature of two doctors – who can be abortionists. (See ‘Abortion Procedures’ for more details.)
In 1992, the National Abortion Federation sponsored a presentation by abortionist Martin Haskell entitled, "Dilation and Extraction for Late Second Trimester Abortion." In the presentation, Haskell graphically described the partial-birth abortion technique, known in the medical community as dilation and extraction (D + X).
The initial step in performing a partial-birth abortion involves two days of dilating the mother's cervix. Afterward, the abortionist uses an ultrasound probe to locate the lower extremities of the unborn baby. He then works large grasping forceps through the mother's vaginal and cervical canals and into her uterus.
The abortionist grasps a leg of the infant with the forceps and pulls the leg into the mother's vagina. "With a lower extremity in the vagina, the surgeon uses his fingers to deliver the opposite lower extremity, then the torso, the shoulders and the upper extremities. The skull lodges at the internal cervical os," Haskell explained.
While clutching the baby's shoulders, Haskell continued, the abortionist then "takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors. . . . He carefully advances the tip, curve down, along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger. . . .
The surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull. Having safely entered the skull, he then spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening. The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he applies traction to the foetus, removing it completely from the patient."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10) Is it legal for pro-lifers to pray outside an abortion facility?
Pro-lifers are permitted by law to counsel on the public sidewalk outside aborturies and give information to women going in to the clinic. This includes the right to pray on a public sidewalk. However, one is not permitted to block the sidewalk in the process of exercising
this right.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11) Is it legal to talk to abortion-bound women outside abortion facilities?
As long as one remains on public property and does not block the public right-of-way, it is perfectly legal to talk to a woman going into an abortion facility, to her companion, or to anyone else. It is not permissible to go onto private property in order to communicate, unless specifically invited there by someone with the authority to make the invitation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12) Is it legal to display graphic abortion pictures in public?
The public display of graphic images of abortion isa form of freedom of expression and is permitted by law. The fact that a message may be unwelcome to some viewers or listeners does not abrogate the right to proclaim the message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13) When should pro-life activists call the police?
If pro-lifers ever feel threatened or in danger due to the actions of any person, they should call the police - for two critical reasons. First, the pro-life activists should not hesitate to protect their own safety. Second, individuals who use force or threaten to use force may be guilty of assault or battery, and if they are not confronted by the police this time, they may feel emboldened to threaten or harm other pro-lifers in the future.
“Assault” is defined as placing a person in reasonable apprehension of being struck or pushed, through words or gestures. “Battery” is the willful or intentional touching of a person against that person’s will by another person, or by an object or substance put in motion by another person. An offensive touching can constitute a battery even if it does not cause injury, and could not reasonably be expected to cause injury. It is also appropriate to call the police if it is readily
apparent that a woman or girl is being coerced to go into the abortion clinic by someone accompanying her.
Larson, Aaron, Esq. 2003. Assault and Battery. Expert Law. http://www.
expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/assault_battery.htm.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14) May police put a stop to pro-life activity simply because someone complains?
Peaceful, legal exercise of the freedom of speech is not dependent on the attitude or response of those who see or hear the message. Police may receive complaints from the public during a pro-life demonstration, but it is the duty of the police to protect the pro-lifers’ First Amendment rights and to explain these rights to those who are complaining.
There are, however, situations in which the police may be appropriately exercising their duty to protect the safety of the public by restricting to some extent the location of a demonstration or the way in which it is organized. When such “time, place and manner” restrictions are imposed, it must be clear that law enforcement’s duty to ensure public safety overrides any rights of the demonstrators. Since this is a judgment call on the part of a police officer, it will necessarily be subjective.
Source: Brejcha, Thomas, Esq., and Terry Hodges. Law and Order. Pro-Life
Action League. Compact disc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15) If police attempt to restrict peaceful pro-life activities, should the activists comply?
It is advisable to comply with police directives, even when one is certain those directives violate
pro-lifers’ freedom of expression. Such violations can be more effectively challenged afterwards in court. Receiving a citation or being arrested adds to the legal difficulty of obtaining justice later.
Source: Brejcha, Thomas, Esq., and Terry Hodges. Law and Order. Pro-Life
Action League. Compact disc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANSWERING COMMON ANTI-LIFE ARGUMENTS
In talking about abortion with people who are pro-abortion, you will encounter many different arguments against the pro-life side. Some of these arguments are directed to the abortion issue itself, while others focus more on the perceived hypocrisy or insensitivity of pro-lifers.
Offered here are brief responses to the most common pro-choice arguments, summing up the
key points to raise in response to each. Click on a hyperlink title to go to the detailed answer.
1) A fetus isn’t really a human being.
“Fetus” is a Latin term meaning ‘little one’, used to describe a stage of development, just like ‘infant’ or ‘adult’. A fetus conceived by human parents, and growing according to the instructions in its own genetic code of 46 human chromosomes, its by definition human.
Human life is a continuum, beginning with the newly conceived zygote, moving through the stages of embryo and fetus on through to adult. Although a fetus doesn’t look like an adult yet, neither does a newborn baby. A human fetus is no less human simply because it is smaller and more delicate.
For that matter, neither is an embryo less human, though it looks quite strange to our eyes, even in comparison to a fetus. Still, it is our duty to recognize the common humanity of all stages of development.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Why should a woman have to give birth to an unwanted child?
While there are unwanted pregnancies, there truly are no unwanted children. Even if a pregnant woman does not want to raise the child growing in her womb, someone else does. There are many more couples seeking to adopt than children available for adoption.
But even if a child were ‘unwanted’, it would still be wrong to kill that child for not being wanted – just as it would be wrong to kill a child already born if her mother decided she no longer wanted her.
Moreover, no woman really wants to have an abortion. An unwanted abortion is no solution to an unwanted pregnancy.
3) How can you tell women what they can and can’t do with their bodies?
While it is certainly true that a woman’s body is greatly impacted by pregnancy, it is not true that abortion is simply a matter of her choosing to do something with her body. The fetus growing within her womb is a separate person with its own distinct genetic makeup. Abortion does not remove some part of the woman’s body; it destroys the body of a separate, unique individual.
That said, the truth is that pro-lifers cannot ‘force’ a woman to choose life for her baby. Abortion is legal, and even it if wasn’t, illegal abortion would still be an option. That is why we seek instead to inform women about the consequences of abortion and do what we can to help her choose life for her unborn child.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) Shouldn’t abortion be legal in cases of rape or incest?
There are two answers to this objection. First, a child conceived through rape or incest does not deserve the death penalty for his or her father’s crime. Second, research shows that the victim of either crime is likely to suffer more if she resorts to abortion.
One large-scale study of pregnant rape victims found that approximately 70 percent chose to give birth. Many sexual assault victims see giving birth as a selfless, loving act that helps bring healing from the horrific experience of the rape itself.
Women who abort children conceived through rape often report that they didn’t feel that they had any other choice, since everyone around them assumed that they would not want to give birth to the rapist’s baby.
The case against abortion for pregnant victims of incest is even stronger. Incest victims hardly ever voluntarily consent to an abortion. Rather than viewing the pregnancy as unwanted, the victim of incest is more likely to see the pregnancy as a way to get out of the incestuous relationship because it exposes the abusive sexual activity that family members are either unaware of or unwilling to acknowledge. The pregnancy poses a threat to the perpetrator, who frequently attempts to coerce his incest victim to have an unwanted abortion.
The idea that the violent act of abortion is beneficial to victims of rape and incest is simply unfounded. On the contrary, evidence shows that abortion in such cases compounds the unspeakable pain that victims experience.
Moreover, given that one-third of one percent of abortions are performed under such circumstances, we might ask why this question is so frequently raised. Do these extremely rare cases justify tolerating the other 99.67% of abortions?
Would those who raise this objection really be willing to ban abortion if exceptions were made for rape and incest?
Sources:
Johnston, Wm. Robert. Reasons Given For Having Abortions In The
United States. http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.
html
Mahkorn, “Pregnancy and Sexual Assault,” The Psychological Aspects of
Abortion, eds. Mall and Watts (Washington, D.C., University Publications
of America, 1979) 55-69.
Maloof, “The Consequences of Incest: Giving and Taking Life” The Psychological
Aspects of Abortion, eds. Mall and Watts (Washington, D.C.,
University Publications of America, 1979) 84-85.
Reardon, David, PhD, Julie Makimaa, and Amy Sobie. 2000. Victims
and Victors: Speaking Out About Their Pregnancies, Abortions, and
Children Resulting from Sexual Assault. Battle Creek. Acorn Publishing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) Abortion opponents are violent—they bomb clinics and attack women!
Despite some highly publicized cases, violence perpetrated by abortion opponents is extremely rare. All major pro-life organizations, including Youth For Life, have official policies condemning the use of violence, and no cases of violence directed at abortion-bound women by pro-life activists have ever been substantiated, despite the rhetoric from some abortion advocates.
The few individuals who have bombed abortion facilities were not part of the mainstream pro-life movement, and in some cases have even admitted they were more motivated by a desire for fame than concern for the plight of unborn children.
In fact, there have been more reported acts of violence perpetrated against pro-lifers than committed by them. Just as it would be unfair to characterize all pro-choice people as violent because of a few criminals, it is unfair to say that pro-lifers are violent because of a few fringe figures.
On the contrary, pro-life activism demands patience and peace, which is why the pro-life movement is the most peaceful protest movement in history.
Sources:
Clowes, Brian. 2008, June 30. Abortion Violence. http://abortionviolence.com.
Ertelt, Steven. 2003, September 3. Paul Hill’s Violence Won’t be Missed by the
Pro-Life Movement. LifeNews.com. http://www.lifenews.com/nat97.html.
Graham, Tim. 2004, March 10. Fading Fear Factor: Are Rosaries Attacking
Ovaries? National Review Online. http://www.nationalreview.
com/comment/graham200403100905.asp.
LaRue, Jan. 2005, April 14. Don’t Call Rudolph ‘Pro-Life’. Concerned
Women For America Legal Studies. http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.
asp?id=7916&department=LEGAL&categoryid=life.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) What if there’s something ‘wrong’ with the baby?
While none of us would prefer to live life with a disability if we had the choice, we cannot say that the lives of disabled people have no value. In fact, the disability can become a source of tremendous personal growth and meaning. The parents of disabled children often report that their lives are blessed by the experience of caring for a disabled child, and those children grow up to value their own lives.
Moreover, women often face severe physical and emotional trauma after an abortion. This trauma is not lessened simply because she knows the baby would have been disabled. See Hard Cases for further information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) Men can’t get pregnant, so they shouldn’t tell women what to do.
The pro-life movement is often characterized as an effort by men to control women’s bodies. But in fact, studies show that women are actually more pro-life than men. Perhaps they recognize that abortion often serves the selfish interests of men rather than the real needs of women.
The experience of pro-life counselors and the testimony of women who have spoken out about their abortions show that men are more likely to push women into abortions they do not want than to try to force them not to have an abortion. But we never hear abortion advocates speaking out against this kind of influence of men over women.
The pro-life movement calls on men to take responsibility for the children they have helped to conceive. The men who are active in the pro-life movement are responding to the call to step up and be advocates for women and children.
Finally, no one would try to impose this principle - that only those directly affected by an issue should have any say about it - to any other social justice movement. It was not only slaves, former slaves and former slave owners who spoke out for emancipation. It was not only black Americans who fought for civil rights. Nor should it be only women, today, who speak out against abortion.
Source: Gallup, George. 2004. The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 2003.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8) Why do you think the fetus is more important than the woman?
Neither life—that of an unborn child or that of her mother—is more important than the other’s.
On the contrary, both lives are of equal value, and both deserve to be protected by the laws of our society.
9) Why are you opposed to abortion if it’s legal?
Just because something is legal doesn’t mean it is right. Everything Hitler did in Nazi Germany was legal. At one time, slavery was legal in the United States. Slavery did not become wrong when it was abolished after the Civil War—slavery was always wrong. The injustice of slavery ended in large measure thanks to people like William Lloyd Garrison, Fredrick Douglass and Harriet Tubman, who spoke out against the unjust laws that kept millions of American blacks enslaved.
Likewise, the pro-life movement is speaking out against the unjust—but legal—killing of unborn human beings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10) Can’t you be personally opposed to abortion, but still think it should be legal?
Many people who are personally opposed to abortion - who consider abortion to be the unjust killing of a human being - still believe that abortion should be legal. They say that it’s impossible to stop abortion, so we need to keep abortion legal to reduce the risks associated with abortion. However, history does not support this analysis.
Between 1972 (the year before Roe v. Wade legalized abortion throughout the United States) and 1979, that nation’s abortion rate skyrocketed. But when Poland made abortion illegal in 1993, its abortion rate plummeted.
The law is a powerful teacher, influencing people’s attitudes towards right and wrong. We cannot assume that if abortion were made illegal, the abortion rate would remain steady, with similar numbers of women seeking illegal abortions. The evidence above suggests the contrary.
Those who wish to make abortion rare must seek to make it illegal. That would not end all abortions, but it would dramatically reduce Australia’s abortion rate.
Source: Willke, John, MD and Barbara Willke. 2003. Abortion: Questions
& Answers. Cincinnati: Hayes Publishing Company.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11) If you make abortion illegal, women will die.
It is impossible to know how many illegal abortions were performed prior to 1973 in the United States, since they were not reported. Still, we have a fairly accurate picture of how many women died from illegal abortions in America.
A woman who was seriously injured as a result of abortion would go to another physician for care; if she died, that physician would accurately report her cause of death as abortion.
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, after penicillin became available the number of deaths from abortion stabilized in the 1950s to about 250 per year. By 1966, when abortion was still illegal in all 50 states, abortion deaths had dropped to half that number. In 1972, the year before the Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide, only 39 women died - fewer than one per state.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics data on causes of death 1906-1996 shows that the maternal death rate from abortion fell significantly, from a rate of approximately 100 deaths every year in the 1930s, to one death in 1969, the year prior to the first legal abortion clinic opening in Australia.
The improvements in Australia were due to the introduction of antibiotics in the 1940s to fight infection, to subsequent improvements in antibiotics, and to ongoing medical advances, such as improved surgical procedures, blood transfusions, improved emergency facilities and anaesthetics.
However, unfortunately women are still dying from abortion. Life Dynamics has documented the deaths of 347 women from so-called “safe, legal abortion.”
Sources:
Calderone, Mary S., MD 1960. Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem.
American Journal of Public Health 50, no. 7 ( July). p. 949.
Life Dynamics Inc. The Blackmun Wall. http://www.lifedynamics.net/Prolife_
Group/Pro-choice_Women/.
Willke, John, MD and Barbara Willke. 2003. Abortion: Questions &
Answers. Cincinnati: Hayes Publishing Company
Van Gend, Dr David, ‘Backyard Distortions: Putting Abortion Campaign in Perspective,
Australian Bureau of Statistics Data.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12) Why don’t you care about babies once they’re born?
The pro-life movement cares very much about babies, both before and after they’re born. That is why  we have established a nationwide support system of pregnancy resource centers (PRCs) devoted to providing emotional and material support for women facing both untimely pregnancy and the demands of being a new parent.
Research shows abortion has increased rates of child abuse and other violent acts. Thus, decreasing the number of abortions means that fewer children will be abused.
Sources:
Abortion Recovery Counseling. 2005. New Study Links Abortion To
Increased Risk of Child Abuse. http://www.abortionrecoverycounseling.
com/Page7.html.
Coleman, Priscilla K., PhD, Charles D.Maxey, Vincent M. Rue, PhD, and
Catherine T. Coyle, RN, PhD. 2005. Associations Between Voluntary And
Involuntary Forms of Perintal Loss And Child Maltreatment Among Low-
Income Mothers. Acta Paediatrica 94: 10.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13) Why don’t you stop trying to impose your religion on others?
A person does not have to believe in God to be pro-life. Science shows us that the unborn child is a genetically unique and separate person from his or her mother, even though dependent on the mother for survival. Research has also shown us that abortion hurts women (and men as well) and puts women at greater risk for a number of diseases.
For these reasons independent from religion, many non-religious individuals have been persuaded to join the pro-life movement.
Though the injustice of abortion can be clearly established without depending on religious arguments, religious faith plays an important role in inspiring people to take an active part in confronting that injustice. In other words, pro-lifers do not oppose abortion simply because their religion tells them to; rather, recognizing that abortion is wrong, their faith compels them to do something to right that wrong.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14) Why don’t you hand out contraceptives if you really want to reduce abortion?
On its face, it seems reasonable that if it is possible to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies by means of contraception, then it is also possible to reduce the number of abortions. But in practice this strategy does not work, due to several factors.
First, while contraceptives do reduce the chances that pregnancy will result from an individual sexual act, the widespread use of contraceptives increases risky sexual behavior overall. This is demonstrated by the dramatic increase in the number of sexually transmitted diseases and illegitimate births over the past four decades, even as contraception has become more and more widely available.
Next, we must realize that contraceptives often fail. Over half of the women who seek abortions each year in America report that they were using a contraceptive at the time they became pregnant. Of the nearly 12 million women on the birth control pill, eight to nine percent become pregnant each year, which means nearly a million pregnancies occur annually from Pill failure alone.
Another critical factor in why contraception is no solution for the problem of abortion is that the long-term use of contraceptives may predispose women to seek abortion when those contraceptives fail. Contraception severely weakens the link between a couple’s sexual activity and any responsibility to make a lifelong commitment or raise a family together. Pregnancy is no longer seen as a natural consequence of sex, but a negative side effect.
Moreover, the practice of repeatedly taking action - through the use of contraceptives – against the possibility of pregnancy may make it easier to take action - through abortion - to end a pregnancy when it occurs.
Those who continue to insist that contraception is the answer should explain why sexually transmitted diseases, illegitimate births, and abortion are endemic in Australian society today, despite the fact that contraceptives are so easily available, widely promoted in our schools, and heavily advertised in the media.
Promoting ever greater use of contraceptives will not work to reduce the number of abortions. Rather, we must work to change societal attitudes towards sex and reconnect sex with its proper context of marriage and family.
Sources:
Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 2003, April 30. Contraception less
reliable than you might think. http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/
s843232.htm.
Guttmacher Institute. 2008, July. Facts on Induced Abortion in the United
States. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15) Why do you want to throw women in jail if they have abortions?
The pro-life movement does not want to put women in jail for having abortions. Pro-lifers consider women to be victimized by abortion, whether it is legal or illegal. Laws against abortion would impose penalties on the abortionist, not the woman.
According to the pro-choice writer Rachel Benson Gold, when abortion was still illegal, “women were rarely convicted for having an abortion; instead, the threat of prosecution often was used to encourage them to testify against the provider.” Likewise, in countries with laws restricting abortion today, penalties are imposed on the abortion practitioner, not the woman.
In fact, it was early feminists like Susan B. Anthony in the United States who fought to criminalize abortion in the 19th century. They recognized that abortion exploited and harmed women, so they called for new laws that would prevent doctors and other practitioners from performing abortions. If the law of the land on abortion were to change in the future, it would again be the abortion practitioners who would face penalties—not the women on whom they performed abortions.
Sources:
Benson Gold, Rachel. 2003, March. Lessons from Before Roe: Will Past be
Prologue? The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy 6, No 1. http://www.
guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/06/1/gr060108.html#box.
Priests For Life. The Founders of Women’s Movement All Opposed Abortion.
http://www.priestsforlife.org/articles/femquotes.html.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16) Why are you opposed to abortion when it helps women so much?
Although abortion advocates claim that abortion is necessary for women’s well-being, in fact abortion seriously harms the women who choose it.
Women deserve better than abortion. Abortion increases a woman’s risk of developing
breast, cervical, ovarian, and liver cancers. Subsequent pregnancies are more likely to involve complications including placenta previa, premature labor, or ectopic pregnancy. Moreover, abortion is the fifth leading cause of maternal death in the United States, despite significant levels of underreporting.
Women are also psychologically harmed by abortion. Post-abortive women have higher rates of drug and alcohol abuse. They have higher rates of suicidal thoughts and attempt suicide more often. They are more likely to abuse their current children and to get divorced. Post-abortive women are more likely than the general population to seek counseling or hospitalization for depression.
Thousands of women who have experienced the negative impact of abortion in their lives have
begun to speak out through programs like the Silent No More Awareness Campaign and Broken Branches. They are sharing their stories of how abortion has harmed them on websites like SilentNoMore.com and at AfterAbortion.org.
.
Sources:
Deveber Institute. Summary Of Women’s Health After Abortion. http://
www.deveber.org/drupal/summary-womens-health-after-abortion.
Elliot Institute. A List of Major Physical Sequelae Related To Abortion.
http://www.afterabortion.org/physica.html.
Ring-Cassidy, Elizabeth and Ian Gentles. 2003. Maternal Mortality. In
Women’s Health After Abortion: The Medical And Psychological Evidence.
Deveber Institute: Toronto. http://www.deveber.org/text/chapters/Chap6.pdf.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17) Isn’t abortion safer than childbirth?
Abortion advocates often claim that abortion is much safer than childbirth. However, this claim does not stand up to a close examination of the evidence.
The official medical term that this claim is based on, “maternal mortality,” includes deaths from abortion, so the claim that abortion deaths are much lower than “maternal mortality” really says nothing. Moreover, “maternal mortality” includes deaths from hemorrhages, blood clots, ectopic pregnancies, infections, complications from high blood pressure or diabetes and more—not just from childbirth itself.
No accurate accounting of abortion deaths exists. Some studies show that 4% of all maternal mortality is due to abortion while others show 8%. Anecdotal evidence reveals substantial underreporting.
For example, Dr. John C. Willke writes that a prolife physician friend did not report a girl’s cause of death as abortion because “that family has suffered enough and I’m not going to add to their woes by revealing that she had an abortion.”
Because the records of live births and stillbirths are public, it is easy to correlate deaths related to childbirth. Any woman who dies within one year of giving birth is automatically considered a maternal death for record-keeping purposes. But records from abortions are private. This means that unless a woman’s family reports that she had an abortion or somehow a coroner determines that she had an abortion, her death will not be included in the statistics for maternal mortality or abortion death.
Sources:
Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. 2007, February. Maternal Mortality and Related Concepts.
Vital Health and Statistics 3, No 33. www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/
sr_03/sr03_033.pdf.
Elliot Institute. A List Of Major Physical Sequelae Related To Abortion.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/effect_of_abortion.asp.
Khan, Khalid S., PhD, Daniel Wojdyla, Lale Say, MD, A. Metin Gülmezoglu,
MD, Paul F. A. Van Look, MD. 2006. WHO Analysis of Causes
of Maternal Death: A Systematic Review. The Lancet. 367: 1066-1074.
Willke, J.C., MD. Abortion v. Child Birth: Which Is Safer? Life Issues
Institute. http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/2006/Apr06_Abortion-
Childbirth.htm.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18) If you’re really pro-life, why don’t you oppose the death penalty?
Many pro-lifers question whether a society that allows the legal killing of more than a million unborn children each year can retain the moral authority to impose the penalty of death. However, the death penalty cannot be considered morally equivalent to abortion.
Abortion is a far more serious threat to human life than the death penalty. For every execution performed in the United States, there are more than 22,000 abortions. Moreover, the basic principles behind these two forms of legalized killing are fundamentally different.
Behind legal abortion is the principle that the life of the unborn child does not have intrinsic value, and therefore the state may withdraw protection from that life. Behind the death penalty is the principle that the life of the convicted criminal has so much value that to take that life constitutes the ultimate penalty society can impose.
Therefore, there is no inherent contradiction between opposing abortion and supporting the death penalty in principle. But there is a clear contradiction between opposing the execution of human beings guilty of heinous crimes and supporting the abortion of innocent unborn human beings.
Sources:
Amnesty International 2006. Death Penalty Statistics. www.amnestyusa.
org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGACT500122007.
Guttmacher Institute. 2008, July. Facts on Induced Abortion in the United
States. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19) Don’t we need abortion to prevent overpopulation?
Overpopulation is not a problem in Australia. According to the CIA World Factbook, the Australian fertility rate is 1.78 children per couple - “replacement” level—the number of births needed to keep population steady. In other words, the Australian-born population is stagnating.
Most European and Asian nations are well below the replacement rate. These nations will soon face a shortage of people of working age, with too few workers to support the elderly in their retirement. Even in developing nations, fertility rates have begun to steadily decline.
There is more than enough space on earth for the world’s population. In fact, every person in the world could comfortably live within the landmass of the state of Texas in America. The real problem is resource consumption, as developed nations consume resources at an alarming rate. While one solution to this problem might be to limit the number of people allowed to live on earth, a better solution would be to responsibly limit our consumption of the earth’s resources.
Sources:
CIA World Factbook.2008. Rank Order-Total Fertility Rate. https://www.
cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html.
Mosher, Steven. Did you know? http://lifeissues.net/writers/mos/pri_
01texas.html.
Population Research Institute. FAQ’s. http://pop.org/main.cfm?EID=802.
United Nations Population Division. 2005, February 25. Press Release
Pop/918. http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/pop918.doc.htm.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20) Do you want to return to the days of “back alley” and “coat hanger” abortions?
The idea of widespread and dangerous “back alley” abortions prior to the nationwide legalization of abortion in America in 1973 is not supported by the facts.
The medical director of Planned Parenthood wrote in 1960 that “90% of illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians.” Likewise, the “coat hanger abortion” is a myth.
In his 1979 book, Aborting America, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, co-founder of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL) mentions one coat hanger abortion. However, Nathanson, who is now committedly pro-life, has publicly confessed to fabricating evidence in order to get abortion legalized. There is no hard evidence to support the performance of a single coat hanger abortion.
NARAL claimed that 1,000,000 illegal abortions were performed yearly, though they believed the actual number to be about 100,000. They claimed that 10,000 women died each year from illegal abortions, knowing that the actual number was a mere fraction of this.
However, during the period of 1994-96 there were three direct deaths resulting from ‘safe, legal’ induced abortion in Australia. One of these deaths was caused from hemorrhage due to a perforated uterus, one from septicemia and one for no identified reason. There were no direct maternal deaths from abortion in the latest period of measurement, 1997-1999.
These records do not take into account deaths which may be linked to the abortion but haven’t directly resulted from the procedure – for example suicide due to abortion induced depression.
Improved maternal mortality rates had everything to do with the introduction of antibiotics and on-going medical advances and nothing to do with the elimination of the need for so called ‘backyard abortions’.
Moreover, a study by STAKES, the statistical analysis unit of Finland’s National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health looked at the data on women who had died within a year of their last pregnancy. The study found that women who had had an abortion were 3.5 times more likely to die within a year than women who had carried their baby to term, and seven times more likely to die of suicide.
Sources:
Calderone, Mary S., MD 1960. Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem.
American Journal of Public Health 50, no. 7 ( July). p. 949.
Nathanson, Bernard. Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist. http://www.
aboutabortions.com/Confess.html.
Nathanson, Bernard. 2002. National Abortion Rights Action League
Founder Reminisces. http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/remembernaral.
htm.
Willke, John, MD and Barbara Willke. 2003. Abortion: Questions &
Answers. Cincinnati: Hayes Publishing Company.
Report on Maternal Deaths in Australia 1994, Australian Institute of Health and
Welfare 21 Sept 2001 www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/7069
Maternal Deaths in Australia 1997-1999 series no 1 Australian Institute of Health
And Welfare 12 August 2004 www.npsu.unsw.edu.au/md1high.htm
Gissler, M, Kauppila R, Merilainen, J, Toukomaa H, Hemminki E. Pregnancy:
Associated Deaths in Finland1987-199 4 -definition problems and benefits of
record linkage. Acta Obstetricia at Gynaecological Scandinavia 76:651-657(1997).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21) How many children have you adopted? There are too many unwanted children now!
There are many more couples seeking to adopt babies than there are babies available for adoption.
Since the year 1928 when adoption legislation was first introduced, over 64,000 people have been adopted in Victoria. In 2005-2006, however, only 17 babies were placed for adoption. There has been a continuing decline since the 1980s, and we have had to increase our overseas adoptions. This decrease in the number of adoptions wasn’t because there are is a lack of families wanting to adopt. The State Government of Victoria, Department of Human Services cites the cause as thus:
- The widespread availability of pregnancy terminations
- Increasingly tolerant community attitudes towards exnuptual births and single parenthood
- Improved contraception
In Australia as a whole during 2004-2005 there were 585 adoptions of children, and increase of 17% from 502 adoptions in 2003-04. However, 434 (74%) of these adoptions were not within Australia, but were intercountry adoptions. Only 11%, or 65 of these adoptions were local, and 15%, or 86 were ‘known’ child adoptions.
Each year approximately 40,000 babies are given up for adoption in the United States and 129,000 children in foster care are eligible for adoption, versus approximately 600,000 couples actively seeking to adopt children.
Sources:
http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/cws/aa04-05/aa04-05.pdf
http://www.cyf.vic.gov.au/adoption-permanent-care/more-resources/resource-kit/statistics
U.S. Department of Health And Human Services CDC. 2002. Adoption
Experiences of Women and Men and Demand for Children to Adopt by
Women 18–44 Years of Age in the United States, 2002. Vital And Health
Statistics 23. No. 27. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_027.pdf
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for
Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families,
Children’s Bureau. 2008. The AFCARS Report: Preliminary FY 2006
Estimates as of January 2008. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report14.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22) Why do pro-lifers show the evidence of aborted children?
Why do we even publish such ugly pictures? For the same reason that people publish pictures of Nazi concentration camps. For the same reason that television stations used to broadcast pictures of napalm victims in Vietnam. Because these pictures are accurate depictions of what is going on 50 million times a year across the world. Because they are the evidence that a child did exist, a child who was brutally murdered and violated.
Part of the message of these pictures is this: before you decide your position on abortion, know what abortion does! If you decide to support the pro-choice position, you should know that this is what you are in favor of allowing women to choose, and doctors to execute.
Even if abortion were neat and clean, quick and painless, it would still be a horror, for any killing of an innocent human being is a horror. The ghastly methods depicted in these pictures add to the horror; and contemplating the results of abortions helps us to grasp the horror of any abortion.
|
