TIME Magazine Cover Story on Abortion Tells Only Part of the Story

Illinois Family Institute ^ | March 4, 2007 | Daniel T. Zanoza

[Daniel T. Zanoza]

There is probably no more contentious issue facing American society than abortion. Indeed only the civil rights debate in the 1960's and the birth pangs of a young nation divided by the shame of slavery in the mid-1800's can match the emotional controversy driven by the subject of abortion in the 21st century.

But with all its potential for heated controversy, abortion is probably the topic receiving the least attention by the American mainstream media. Certainly it is discussed in a political sense. Is this candidate for or against abortion? Will the individual seeking office receive support from the opposing grassroots factions?

However, there is little dialogue over the act of abortion itself. What determines life? What happens to a baby during the act of abortion? What are the physical and psychological dangers to women? Subjects like these are rarely, if ever, addressed in the dominant media--and for good reason. If the public were given answers to some of these questions, undoubtedly, there would be more Americans who believe the procedure should be outlawed-- and many in a media dominated by the Left know this.

For evidence, we need look no further than the debate over partial-birth abortion. The public was fully educated about the barbarity of the procedure. Hence, polling data clearly stated that over 80% of Americans thought partial-birth abortion should not be legal.

That is why, at first glance, the Feb. 26th cover story in Time magazine, titled "The Grassroots Abortion War" by Nancy Gibbs seemed to go where no other mainstream journalists have gone before. But, upon closer inspection, Gibbs' article falls into the same traps and plays the same game the dominant media has played in its coverage of abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court decision, titled Roe v. Wade, first legalized the practice in 1973.

The article gives only passing reference to issues including women's mental health after having an abortion, the link between abortion and breast cancer, the failure by research organizations to address the physical affects abortion has on a woman, etc.

Therefore, it is necessary to hear from some of the people who have documented the effects of abortion on women and provide counseling after the fact. Any in-depth article about the work being done in Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs), which was the focus of Gibbs' piece, is incomplete without a comprehensive look at all the issues.

It is clear the greatest problem pro-abortionists have with CPCs is that they do not offer abortions. This is a fundamental failure by those who support abortion rights to understand that, to millions of people, abortion is not a political issue. Those who call themselves pro-life, do so on moral grounds, believing all life is valuable and the unborn have rights. Therefore, though CPCs fail to offer abortions, they serve what some might say is a higher calling.

* * * * * *

The following information was provided for IFI by CareNet Pregnancy Services of DuPage:

Pregnancy centers provide accurate information on all pregnancy options while offering compassionate support to women experiencing an unplanned pregnancy. The role of counseling is not to manipulate women, but to help them identify obstacles to continuing their pregnancy. Referrals and assistance can then be offered to help women overcome these obstacles. Emotional support and encouragement is provided by trained counselors. "Sometimes a woman needs a friend, a counselor to come alongside her and tell her, 'You can do it. You can parent your baby'," said Tracy Kerr, counselor at CareNet Pregnancy Services of DuPage. CareNet centers offer ultrasound services which are supervised by a qualified physician and performed by medical personnel.

Parenting programs and material goods offered by many pregnancy centers assist a woman before and after her baby is born. At CareNet Pregnancy Services of DuPage, parenting programs are offered several times a month in both English and Spanish. Attendees learn parenting and life skills and receive diapers, baby food, and other supplies. Mentoring services are available as well as support from local churches through a program called "Adopt-A-Mom." Annually, over 2,400 family members participate in CareNet's parenting programs and tens of thousands of dollars in material goods are provided to moms in need. CareNet Pregnancy Services of DuPage also has an established abstinence education program reaching over 9,000 teens in area public and private schools and churches. Many pregnancy centers are an integral part of their communities, meeting needs that no other local agency addresses.

"CareNet Pregnancy Services of DuPage has been serving our community for over 25 years," said Barbara Singer, Executive Director. "Through years of service, CareNet has earned the respect of the DuPage County community and is overwhelmingly supported by community leaders, area churches and families. As a CareNet pregnancy ministry we work hard to offer a superior product and maintain the highest standards of integrity. The majority of women coming to us have been referred by other women who have been nurtured and cared for by our counselors and we think that speaks well of CareNet's staff and volunteers."

For more information on the ministry of CareNet Pregnancy Services of DuPage, visit their website at: www.carenetdupage.com

* * * * * *

More than once, the TIME cover story suggests information given to women via CPCs might have to be taken with a grain of salt. But, according to Brent Rooney, a Canadian researcher and statistician, the data offered by CPCs to its clients is based on fact.

"Is an Induced Abortion (IA) in the health interests of a woman and her FUTURE offspring? If 'you' are skeptical of the information presented by Crisis Pregnancy Centers, let's rely on some objective information provided by Planned Parenthood of Australia, via the consent form PPA provided online in 2006. Here are four of the 'dozen' IA risks admitted to by this form. (I printed a copy on 12 October 2006 and have sworn an affidavit that I did indeed print if off the PPA web site and attached a copy of same to the affidavit): [The link is here http://websites.golden-orb.com/plannedparenthood/100158.php, but PPA may delete this self-incriminating document at any time.]

- "Depression of mood disturbance, suicide" - "Infection ..." - "Incompetent cervix" - "uterine adhesions ...."

Suicide is a serious risk for a young woman and published studies lend strong support that IAs multiply suicide risk by 2-4 times that of women with zero prior IAs. If young 'Alice' 'desired' to double her risk of having a future 'wanted' baby being premature (under 37.0 weeks' gestation), 'Alice' could hardly do better than by having an "Incompetent cervix", "uterine adhesions" (scar tissue in the womb), and "Infection" (of the reproductive tract). The National Academy of Science, via a 2006 book by Stanford Professor Dr. Richard Behrman recognizes "Prior first trimester induced abortion" as a preterm birth risk factor. CPCs thus appear to be pro-SCIENCE and their opponents anti-SCIENCE.

'Incompetent cervix' is medical jargon for a very weak cervix (the 'gate' to the womb). Since only pregnancies that are FULL-TERM (over 37 weeks' gestation), are breast cancer protective, 'ICE' (Incompetent Cervix) is clearly a breast cancer risk for young childless women. Childless women also have double the risk of a deadly form of cancer, OVARIAN CANCER, according to a review of the evidence in 1992 by Alice Whittemore et al.

The overwhelming evidence supporting the APB (Abortion Preterm Birth) risk was first presented in a May 2003 review article in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, with authors Brent Rooney and Dr. Byron C. Calhoun.

Though sometimes technical in nature, Rooney points to the risks associated with abortion. As you can see, there are reams of information not presented within the Time magazine article which can be just as important to women seeking to learn all they can before making an important decision about their pregnancy.

Brent Rooney can be contacted via e-mail: stopcancer@yahoo.com

* * * * * *

Gibbs continued her pattern by not addressing the evidence that abortion has been linked to breast cancer. CPCs would be remiss--and some believe criminally negligent--if such data were not given to clients. Many feel abortion providers like Planned Parenthood have failed to inform women about such risk factors to the point of criminality.

"If Time Magazine would read the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) website, they would discover that the agency recognizes one of two breast cancer risks associated with abortion," explains Karen Malec, President of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. She continues:

The NCI admits that increased childbearing, starting at an early age, and increased duration of breastfeeding reduce risk. Almost all of the childless woman's breast tissue consists of cancer vulnerable Type 1 and 2 lobules. A lobule is a unit of breast tissue that contains a milk duct and some milk producing glands. The only way for her to mature her breast tissue into cancer-resistant Type 4 lobules is by having a full term pregnancy. In that way, she dramatically decreases the number of places in her breasts where cancers are likely to develop. The longer she waits to have her first baby, the longer her breast tissue remains cancer vulnerable. Therefore, it's irrefutable that the young woman who has an abortion has a higher breast cancer risk than the young woman who has a baby.

The Time magazine piece downplays the abortion/breast cancer link, citing opinions given by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and other research organizations. Malec's criticism of this rationale for leaving out critical data when informing women about abortion risks is clear and to the point:

Although women in the U.S. use abortion to delay their first births, the NCI officials lack the political courage to tell women that their abortions are causing them to forfeit the protective effect of childbearing. Scientists do not debate this risk. The only cancer risk that scientists debate is the question of an independent link. Does abortion leave the woman with more places in her breasts where cancers are known to develop? The evidence shows that it does.

Starting early in a normal pregnancy, her breasts increase in size and become sore. This happens because the level of estrogen (a hormone and a carcinogen) increases dramatically. Estrogen stimulates her cancer vulnerable Type 1 and 2 lobules to multiply. During the final months of pregnancy, she receives protection from the harmful effects of estrogen. Other hormones mature her breast tissue into cancer-resistant Type 3 and 4 lobules. By 40 weeks of pregnancy, 85% of her lobules are Type 4 lobules.

Women with connections to the abortion industry have infiltrated the cancer fundraising industry. These industries share interlocking directorates. According to several reports, at least two cancer groups - the American Cancer Society and the Susan G. Komen for the Cure - give funds to Planned Parenthood. By doing so, they are defeating their missions - to eradicate breast cancer. Planned Parenthood is the primary cause of the breast cancer epidemic. Planned Parenthood sells women abortions and cancer-causing steroidal hormones - the pill, the patch, vaginal rings, injections, and implants.

The cancer groups claim that the funds are earmarked for cancer-related programs, but their gifts make it possible for Planned Parenthood to divert more funds to the abortion side of the business. A comparison of Planned Parenthood's annual reports for 2000-2001 and 2004-2005 show that breast health services declined during those years by nearly 15%, but abortions increased nearly 23%. If more women have abortions, then there will be more breast cancer victims and donors, and the breast cancer epidemic will be perpetuated.

For more information on the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer visit http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com

* * * * * *

Gibbs also fails to address the psychological impact abortion has on a woman. This is a subject which has been grossly under-reported by the press. But its importance cannot be denied.

"Quite honestly, they haven't seen the emotional carnage I have," said Elizabeth Verchio, Director, Victims of Choice. She explains further:

Sadly, where the emotional residue formerly manifested itself after a decade or longer, we are now seeing cases of depression and anxiety much earlier after a woman has an abortion. There is a need for greater study regarding this phenomenon. But it is happening. We're seeing it every day and it is something that cannot be denied.

Some might say the mental health of women is not important, but I do not share these beliefs. Denial of the problem will only make things worse and leave women without some place to turn. We at Victims of Choice can only serve a small number of the women needing post-abortion counseling. Unfortunately, as long as the so-called experts on the subject of women's health deny this reality, the problem will only get worse.

Victims of Choice can be contacted toll free at 1-888-267-3998.

******

The Time magazine article adds insult to injury concerning the issue of journalistic objectivity when Gibbs seems to turn to Planned Parenthood for the final word on everything to do with abortion. Critics of Planned Parenthood claim the organization's primary objective is to provide abortions and the bottom line is their driving force.

"It is truly amazing that Planned Parenthood has the nerve to present itself as an organization working to reduce unwanted pregnancies," said Carol Wright, former president and current Board member of Illinois Citizens for Life. She goes on:

Operating as a 'non-profit' organization, their profits for last year were over $60 million. One third of their income comes from providing abortion. In the past twenty years, their percentage of the total abortion business in this country has risen from 5% to 20%. For each adoption referral they commit 180 abortions.

Are we to believe that their 'comprehensive' sex education does anything other than lure our young people into sexual activity at younger and younger ages? Visit their website, especially the one geared to teens. Trust me, anything goes. They know that by providing teens with condoms and explicit sex instruction an inevitable need for abortion is in their future. And all of this is aided and abetted by millions of our tax dollars.

I challenge the statistic that childbirth is 12 times more likely to result in death than abortion. What country were they talking about? Not only are they comparing the full nine months of a pregnancy with the first few months when abortion normally takes place, they also neglect to mention that there is at least one death in every abortion.

Just what is the 'common ground' the abortion providers seek? Do they think that God made a mistake when he created some babies? Are some of them expendable if it is inconvenient for the woman at that time? Abortion truly hurts women and more and more of them are willing to step forward and state that obvious truth. God bless the loving Crisis Pregnancy Centers who are there for the women and for their innocent little babies.

For more information on Illinois Citizens for Life visit: www.pair.com/icl

* * * * * *

The above quotes were offered by individuals who look upon pregnancy and women's health in its entirety. These professionals see abortion as a simple, but tragic procedure. They deal with the complicated and life-changing impact abortion has on women. The Time magazine article, in reality, dealt with the subject from a political perspective. However, as previously stated, politics is not the driving motive behind those who fight for the sanctity of life. But playing the political game with any subject leaves those seeking truth wanting more.

[cgk]

Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping!

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...

[cgk]

FR discussion on the Time magazine article is here:

The Grassroots Abortion War (Protestants only)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1788644/posts

[CatQuilt]

Only Protestants can post on that thread.... ???

[cgk]

That was my first reaction too, when I saw the title of that thread. Posts #24 and #42 on that same thread explain it a little bit from the perspective of the original poster & the Religion Moderator.

I assume posting that same article in the general forum would be acceptable, as then anyone could say whatever they liked (within reason of course ).

[Palladin]

What is it with those "Protestant Only" threads?

It's donwright unfriendly, and I think it's a bad policy to have "exclusive" treads.

Reminds me of an old saying:

"They drew a circle that left me out; I drew a circle that took them in."

[Palladin]

"downright unfriendly"

It kind of smacks of Junior High mentality.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[SuziQ]

Oh, I see. This was designed to be some sort of hit piece on Crisis Pregnancy Centers. There was an article somewhere else last week about this. Did Planned Parenthood or NARAL send out a memo to journalists to dig something up on the Centers, and talk bad about them?