'Anguish of abortion is worse than miscarriage'
(Filed: 12/12/2005)

Women who have an abortion can suffer mental distress, anxiety, guilt and shame at least five years afterwards, researchers say today.

A study in Norway compared a group of 40 women who had suffered a miscarriage with 80 women who had an abortion, questioning them 10 days, six months, two years and five years after the event.

Although women who had a miscarriage suffered more mental distress up to six months after losing their baby, women who had an abortion experienced more mental distress at the two- and five-year intervals.

The study, by the University of Oslo, published in the journal BMC Medicine, measured the extent of intrusive thoughts, feelings and flashbacks about the end of pregnancy. The researchers also assessed how much women avoided thinking or talking about the event.

They found that after 10 days 47.5 per cent of women who had miscarried suffered from mental distress compared with 30 per cent of the abortion group. The proportion of women who had a miscarriage suffering distress fell to 22.5 per cent at six months and 2.6 per cent at two years and five years.

However, levels of distress remained high in the abortion group, falling to 25.7 per cent at six months and 18 per cent at two years but rising to 20 per cent at five years. The women in the abortion group also had high levels of anxiety, guilt, shame and relief.

Anna Pringle, from the pro-life charity Life, said the research confirmed that abortion can cause "massive" emotional suffering. "We believe it is time that the Government acknowledges the fact that abortion carries with it psychological risks that can affect women long after the actual event," she said.

Richard Warren, from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, said it showed the need for continuing counselling and the importance of family planning. But a spokesman for the Family Planning Association said: "There is no evidence to suggest that abortion directly causes psychological trauma.

"Women can experience mixed feelings after an abortion such as relief or sadness. These are natural reactions and few women experience long-term problems."

The Illogic of the Left

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard opening arguments in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, the first abortion-related case before the Court in five years. Already, the left is up in arms:

During arguments yesterday in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, reports the San Francisco Chronicle, Roberts looked for a way to preserve New Hampshire's right to require the notifying of parents at least 48 hours in advance if their daughter seeks to end an unwanted pregnancy:

Roberts focused on the tiny number of cases that might arise where a teenage girl's health might be at risk without immediate access to an abortion. "The problem arises only in an emergency situation," Roberts said. "The vast majority of cases don't involve an emergency situation." He asked the lawyer representing Planned Parenthood, "Why challenge the act as a whole when the objection is so narrow?"

Oh, why indeed? Because a female's basic right to choose what happens with her own body is at stake, maybe?

Lets examine that last statement. Does current law support the view that all female's have a basic right to choose what happens with her own body? If a 15-year-old wants to have sex with a 25-year-old, what does the law say? That is statutory rape, because society has determined that a 15-year-old is incapable of giving consent because she is too immature. The law also says that a girl cannot have a tatoo or her ears pierced without parental permission. Why don't the usual suspects sue that that "violates her right to choose"?

Further, does anyone believe that it is unconstitutional for states to set laws concerning smoking or drinking for minors? But, why can't they do what they want with their own bodies? Why is there an age limit to star in a pornographic film? Indeed, why are there age limits to working at all? Aren't child labor laws a violation of a child's right to do what she wants with her own body?

More directly, what about medical procedures? Why don't they try to enact laws barring notifying parents if their children goes to the emergency room? Doesn't that "violate their privacy"? Why can't a 15-year-old get plastic surgery without notifying her parents?

These examples show that this is not an abortion issue so much as a parental rights issue. Ruling in favor of the New Hampshire law would not set a precedent against Roe. Why can't they acknowledge that abortion is a choice, yes, but one with powerful emotions and pressures that a 16-year-old is not capable of handling. The law doesn't recognize an absolute right to do to your body whatever you want, especially if you are a minor.

Recall also that the New Hampshire law doesn't require parental consent, but simply notification (and a 48 hour waiting period). And a judge can waive that notification.

Now consider the situation personally. A girl is having sex (probably illegally (see statuatory rape laws) and probably without her parents' knowledge.) Yet, someone provides her with a ride and the money to have the abortion. And that someone is not her parent. Since the law has decided that minor's are incapable of consent, who is actually making the choice? That would be the man, covering up the evidence of his using of the girl, the evidence of his crime. Is it any wonder that the most pro-abortion demographic is 18-25-year-old males? The woman is left empty and in pain (literally) and alone, while the man's life continues on without problem. This is feminism?

Most strikingly, and hypocrically, the ACLU argues that minors should not be tried as adults because they do not fully understand the moral implications of life and death decisions. Teens who murder are not treated the same as adults who murder because their immaturity diminishes their moral judgment.

Then why does the ACLU not believe that the immaturity of a 14-year-old pregnant girl diminishes her capacity to make good decisions? Magically, this girl is fully qualified to decide for herself. If a 15-year-old boy shoots someone, it is because he is immature and was pressured by his friends, etc. If a 15-year-old girl has an abortion, it is because she is immature and resisted all outside pressure. Does that make any sense?