In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Because Illegalization Makes Abortion Go Away

Jill

Oh, that’s right, it doesn’t.

According to a study (2002-2004), `Unwanted Pregnancy and Post-abortion Complications in Pakistan,’ conducted by the Population Council of Pakistan, the estimated national abortion rate is 29 per 1,000 women in the reproductive age-group.

That’s pretty close to the U.S. abortion rate. The Netherlands, by contrast, where abortion and contraceptives are legal and widely available, has a rate that’s around 6 per 1,000 women in reproductive age.

According to the study, 23 per cent of the women who resort to unsafe abortions by unskilled health providers (since most reputed doctors and hospitals will not offer abortion facilities) are later hospitalised for complications.

Complications from septic abortions are a leading cause of maternal deaths. The findings also point to the vast unmet need for family planning services. Most abortions are carried out to prevent unwanted births.

Read the whole article. It’s too hard for me to pick out the important parts, because it’s all so notable.

20 thoughts on Because Illegalization Makes Abortion Go Away

  1. Good article.

    Over at Alas, one of the commenters made the interesting point that the important number as far as the right-to-lifers are concerned is not # of abortions per 1000 women of reproductive age, but rather # of abortions per 1000 pregnancies. I.e. he was arguing that women in the Netherlands have low abotion rates because their pregancy rates are so low. Does anybody know of a study that has looked at that kind of number?

  2. Interesting stance for a pro-lifer to take, eh? Dead fetuses to protect women’s choices and increase the quality of life for both women and children: evil. Dead fetuses to increase the number of living children to a number that is only arguably necessary: morally responsible.

  3. I will also submit, more broadly, that no law has ever stopped an unwanted human behavior from occuring.

    Rape is illegal, yet ask 1/4 of the female population if it occurs.
    Murder is illegal (unless it is supported by the state)
    discrimination is illegal – tell that to anyone and watch them laugh, of course this is everywhere.

    If abortions are illegal, they will still be performed, one way or another, at deadly costs – whether you like it or not. History has shown us this already.

  4. Re: Tapetum-

    The Netherlands has a very low abortion rate even when taken into account the number of pregnancies. This table is old, but it still shows that in the mid-80s, women in the Netherlands had 9 abortions per 100 known pregnancies; the U.S., by contrast, had 29.7.

    If anyone else has more current stats, jump in. I suspect they’re pretty similar, though.

  5. Yup.

    I think that the point referenced in comments was that, Sure, the Netherlands has a lower proportion of abortions to pregnancies, but only because of an anti-procreation culture that has resulted in a reproduction rate far below replacement. In other words, it’s better to have lots of abortions and lots of babies like Ecuador, instead of fewer aborted fetuses but a smaller, happier population. Pro-choice family-planning policies, no matter how responsible, will eventually result in the extinction of the human race.

    Like I said, disturbingly utilitarian and relativist, no?

  6. Pro-choice family-planning policies, no matter how responsible, will eventually result in the extinction of the human race.

    sadly, the anti-abortionists think exactly that…but I always wonder where they are after the children are born…would they take all those otherwise-aborted-babies into their homes and raise them? I think that is one of the top five reasons I can’t stand the anti-abortion fundies…tehy don’t see beyond their very narrow-minded cause into the long term effects on, not only the society as a whole, but also those very lives they “saved”

  7. Kyle – just wondering but do you think we should decriminalize rape/murder?

    Re: illegalization
    Actually, if you read about abortion law, many European countries restrict abortion more than the US does. In Austria, France, Italy, Poland and Portugal, abortion is legal only during the first trimester with few exceptions. Ireland allows an exception only for the mother’s life, Switzerland and Britain for her health.

  8. Lauren, I would say Pakistan has a measurably different culture than the United States, and I do NOT want to be so quick to compare the two IF there can be other circumstances contributing to those frightening statistics. Needless to say, though, I agree with Kyle’s assessment.

    Kate, I don’t see how the “decriminalizing rape/murder” statement is relevant as anything more than a cheap shot.

    Rape is illegal, yet ask 1/4 of the female population if it occurs.

    Oh hell no, tell me that statement is an overblown statistic or has something in it to account for dramatization of stats or claims or selection of data or what not. That’s ridiculous. I HOPE that my gender had more civilization than that.

    Note, that I am the sort that believes in castration of rapists.

  10. Ohnoes, what I find interesting is that in Pakistan abortion is legally permitted only to save a woman’s life or protect her physical health. Compared to the United States in which abortion and contraceptives are available on demand to anyone with money and access, I think this says a lot.

  11. That we should find some way to be like the Netherlands, if they are only 6/1000. I hate to nitpick, but calling Pakistani abortion illegalization ineffective because our abortion rates are equal to theirs… well, then we have to also call LEGALIZATION ineffective because we still have so many more than the Netherlands.

  14. Ohnoes, as Jeanne says at Lauren’s last link: “The world’s lowest abortion rates are in countries where the social safety net is strong, even though abortion is perfectly legal. Abortion rates are clearly tied to economic and social policies. I would add a third possible factor, however: I wouldn’t expect to see any improvement in the abortion numbers if we continue to follow the Bush path of substituting “just say no” to sex lectures for contraception.”

  15. The writers adding their own stabs at “Bush’s bully pulpit” policies suggests a certain amount of vindictiveness, I have to point out, but that seems actually quite sound. Those of lower economic status are more likely to have abortions (Either by simply being too poor to support the child, or by being more likely to engage in relationships that are not… well, ideal.), so the OBVIOUS idea is to engage in more socialistic policies. A solution that I’m not comfortable with, but helping the poor is something nobody can disagree with, so I’m down with that.

    The bully pulpit meme is cute and probably has some truth to it, but then we have to go on to assume that telling people not to do things has the opposite effect. I.E. Not to have sex, drink, do drugs, kill, be intolerant/racist/sexist, what have you, etc. Then what are we supposed to do?

  16. Ahem, helping the poor through whatever means we can muster that don’t compromise economic policies that I feel would be more beneficial to the country than certain others.

    I think, however, it is quite unfair to say that “abortions went down during Clinton.” Drawing a direct line from Clinton’s election to having an IMMEDIATE, DIRECT, and CAUSAL relationship with abortion rates, that does not fly with me. Did women say “Hmmm, that Clinton is so nice and not harsh at all, I think I will keep this baby to term!” Or “That nasty, mean Mr. Bush is quite clearly destroying the economy and telling me not to have sex, like I’ll listen to a woman-hating Republican.” PLEASE.

    And I’m not entirely sure that Clinton set up the “social safety net” so fast that women felt that they needed fewer abortions. I’m used to processes and cycles that the current President doesn’t usually cause but gets blamed for.

  17. Clinton’s election to having an IMMEDIATE, DIRECT, and CAUSAL relationship with abortion rates

    The difference is that we had a great economy and precedents set to nurture and grow that great economy. Think beyond the names.

  19. OHNOES – I’m sorry I didn’t mean to offend you and I hope I didn’t wrongfully interpret Kyle’s comment. What I thought he said is that “abortion happens even if it’s against the law, so therefore it should be legal because it would happen criminalization or none” (which is true: in the pre-Roe era, rich women went to other countries and poor women went to back alleys) and then said “rape happens even if it’s against the law …” (which is also unfortunately true) so I wasn’t sure what he was angling at.
    And I never said anything about distorted statistics or cherry-picking data.

  20. Kate, tis alright. And the quote after that was Kyle’s quote, I was talking to him about cherry-picking because 1/4th of all women having been raped is just too ludicrously large for me to accept.

    Lauren, so President Bush singlehandedly changed all sex education in the country? Or Clinton, the instant he walked into office, turned the economy to good?

    I know I SHOULD think beyond the names, but Bush’s name is already plastered all over the articles’ mention of Bush’s “bully pulpit” sex ed. Economy was good in the Clinton years most likely because of the business cycle, but we are not economists, I’m fairly sure, so that is probably beyond our scope. I really think the articles are trying to say “Pro-life eeevil Republican president = more abortions.”

Comments are currently closed.