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

Want to lower the abortion rate?

Jill

Then give low-income women the means to prevent pregnancies they don’t want, and the means to support children they do.

New Guttmacher research finds that abortion rates declined among most groups of women between 2000 and 2008. However, one notable exception was poor women (those with family incomes less than 100% of the federal poverty level). Poor women accounted for 42% of all abortions in 2008, and their abortion rate increased 18% between 2000 and 2008, from 44.4 to 52.2 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44. In comparison, the national abortion rate for 2008 was 19.6 per 1,000, reflecting an 8% decline from a rate of 21.3 in 2000.

And yet the same people who claim to be “pro-life” and against abortion rights also tend to be against social services for low-income women and children, and contraception access for uninsured and underinsured women. Funny how that works.

14 thoughts on Want to lower the abortion rate?

  2. But how will we supplement all of those illegals with cheap American babies if we do all of this? Ask the important questions first, geez.

    /snark

  3. Look, Jill, once they’re born they’re God’s responsibility. Don’t you know anything? Besides, if they face lives of suffering and privation that just makes them more holy. Its like asceticism only we help them along using social engineering. Really the GOP and forced-birth movement ought to be getting a medal for making so many little Christians and helping them get into heaven! WWJD? Suffer! We’re just trying to make little Jesuses (pronounced GEE-zuhs because we’re Americans). Masochism builds character. As long as its someone else getting massed.

    /snark

  5. Jill,
    Have you read the Guttmacher Institute research on contraceptive use among women who have abortions?

    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.html

    Not having access to contraceptives is far below a number of other reasons including using contraceptives inconsistently, thinking they had a low chance of getting pregnant, having unexpected sex and having concerns about contraceptives.

    Only 12% of respondents who didn’t use contraceptives (which was less than half the women -54% used contraceptives but did so inconsistently) listed lacking access to contraceptives as a reason they didn’t use contraceptives.

    Why, when their own research shows other reasons for unplanned pregnancies as occurring much more frequently, does the Guttmacher Institute always act like a lack of access to contraceptives is #1 reason for unplanned pregnancies which end in abortion?

  6. JivinJ:
    Jill,
    Have you read the Guttmacher Institute research on contraceptive use among women who have abortions?

    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.html

    Not having access to contraceptives is far below a number of other reasons including using contraceptives inconsistently, thinking they had a low chance of getting pregnant, having unexpected sex and having concerns about contraceptives.

    Only 12% of respondents who didn’t use contraceptives (which was less than half the women -54% used contraceptives but did so inconsistently) listed lacking access to contraceptives as a reason they didn’t use contraceptives.

    Why, when their own research shows other reasons for unplanned pregnancies as occurring much more frequently, does the Guttmacher Institute always act like a lack of access to contraceptives is #1 reason for unplanned pregnancies which end in abortion?

    That link is from a study in 2001-2001, before the Bush years of abstinence education and the rollback of access.

  7. Shfree,
    Do you have any evidence that the federal government decreased the amount of money provided to family planning from 2000-2008?

    As far as I know, at least Planned Parenthood’s government funding increased during that period of time.

    Also, my post above should say “54% used contraceptives but many did so inconsistently”

  8. “Inconsistently” ->
    Not taking pills every other month and trying to not have sex those other times
    Not wearing a condom every time

    Perhaps a survey flaw? Inconsistently is a big area, and also more likely to happen to poor women. I’m able to take my BC every day at the same time no problem, whereever I am. Is everyone?

  10. Geek:
    “Inconsistently” ->
    Not taking pills every other month and trying to not have sex those other times
    Not wearing a condom every time

    Perhaps a survey flaw?Inconsistently is a big area, and also more likely to happen to poor women.I’m able to take my BC every day at the same time no problem, whereever I am.Is everyone?

    Yeah, they mention inconsistent use, but not any reasons for the inconsistency.. perhaps they were not using them correctly due to a lack of education? Can’t afford my pills this month, so I’m going to just stick with condoms and hope for the best and that one doesn’t break on me, since I don’t have back-up?

    The access issues do still come into play when BC is used but only inconsistently.

  11. JivinJ:
    Shfree,
    Do you have any evidence that the federal government decreased the amount of money provided to family planning from 2000-2008?

    As far as I know, at least Planned Parenthood’s government funding increased during that period of time.

    Also, my post above should say “54% used contraceptives but many did so inconsistently”

    They funneled insane amounts of money to the abstinence only education movement, which denied any accurate education regarding birth control options and proper use.

    And yes, Planned Parenthood was ultimately able to eke out funds for family planning. But they aren’t everywhere, and there is still a campaign of disinformation in our public schools regarding birth control that is a huge part of fueling the improper use of birth control.

    Plus, hormonal birth control is damn expensive, as is Plan B as a back up, quite frankly. Although I wish I would have had it back in the day, taking the megadose of vitamin C suuuuuucked.

  12. Certain trolls, ahem, have been trolling on posts about this elsewhere, too. If you ignore them they go away…or at least talk to themselves.

  13. It’s amazing that linking to and providing information from a pro-choice organization so quickly gets me labeled a troll.

    They funneled insane amounts of money to the abstinence only education movement, which denied any accurate education regarding birth control options and proper use.

    The Bush administration did give money to abstinence-only education but that in no way proves that women were more likely to get pregnant and have abortions because they couldn’t afford birth control, does it?

    There was no “rollback” in access was there?

  14. There was no “rollback” in access was there?

    Other than a crippling recession which disproportionately impacted poor women, organized campaigns to prevent organizations like Planned Parenthood from opening new locations and thus expanding access, and a state by state assault on birth control access through nosey pharmacists who don’t want to do their damned jobs, you mean?

Comments are currently closed.