Posted on 02/11/2014 9:50:17 PM PST by Olog-hai
Women at a crisis pregnancy center in London have been told having terminations can make them more likely to sexually abuse children they may have later, an investigation has revealed.
An undercover reporter for the Daily Telegraph newspaper posed as a woman asking about the procedure and was told about various risks, including nightmares, seizures and tremors.
In secretly-filmed footage, an adviser who gave her name as Annabel said: “There’s also an increased statistical likelihood of child abuse.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at belfasttelegraph.co.uk ...
I’m am absolutely pro-life and that is about the most idiotic think I have ever heard.
If you are perverted enough to abort your child, you are pervert enough to be a pervert.
I could see it making you more violent, but sexually perverted? I cannot see that. It’s things like this that make people hate pro-lifers.
Exactly.
Correlation isn’t causation.
Were people more likely to get abortions because they were messed up, or were they messed up because of the abortion they got?
true
>> It’s things like this that make people hate pro-lifers.
You both feel the need to bond with the Choice crowd?
If it’s there really is a statistical correlation, then what is so idiotic about it? It seems to me, if the claim is true, then stating it is a non-issue. So, the only issue is if the claim is untrue. The article quotes one source to make that argument:
“The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists told the paper there was no scientific evidence to suggest an abortion could make women more likely to abuse a child.”
That sounds like a pretty pat answer to me, rather than the result of any actual research into the matter. I found it hard to believe that someone would say there is a statistical correlation if they hadn’t seen a study that talked about a statistical correlation, so I tried to find those studies. I found an interview with a Dr. Philip Ney, a child psychologist who has been doing research into this issue. He says:
“Sadly enough, statistically speaking and I have to say this very carefully, statistically speaking women who have had abortions are less likely to bond to their children, and therefore these children are more likely to be abused and neglected. Also, women who were abused and neglected as children are more likely to have abortions. And I can tell you that wherever I have said this, in whatever kind of an audience, people have become really quite upset, sometimes very angry. But I think I can say that having done the research now over a number of years and published a number of papers, that that is a statistically significant connection.”
http://www.priestsforlife.org/media/interviewney.htm
I also located another article here:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/PROLENC/ENCYC041.HTM
which has a section titled “The Mechanisms of Child Abuse” based on Dr. Ney’s research. That article cites the following studies by Ney:
Philip G. Ney, M.D., Head of the Department of Psychiatry at Royal Jubilee Hospital. “Abortion and Child Abuse: Which is Cause, Which is Effect?” Paper presented at a conference entitled “Psychological Aspects of Abortion.” sponsored on October 31 and November 1, 1978, by the Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University, Chicago, Illinois. Also see Philip G. Ney, M.D. “Is Elective Abortion a Cause of Child Abuse?” Sexual Medicine Today, June 1980. Reprinted in the Fall 1980 Human Life Review, pages 115 to 117.
What? I never said that I wasn’t pro-life. It’s adding fuel to their fire to make stupid claims without proof. Why help them in their crusade? We have enough to deal with when combatting their stupid claims for our side to indulge in the same type of behavior.
Statistics can imply all manner of upsetting or odd things regarding mass behavior, unless very carefully couched and explained. What this actually says is that emotionally damaged women are both more likely to have an abortion and to abuse their children sexually. Makes more sense, doesn’t it? At least it does to all but hardcore abortion promoters.
Stories like this one are not the reason for the hatred directed towards Pro-Lifers.
In all fairness, the clinic counselor said “abuse,” and it was the reporter who suggested “sexual abuse,” which seemed to confuse the counselor for a moment, but to which she then agreed.
I have read before that rates of physical abuse are higher among mothers who have had abortions, possibly because of the situation that led them to have the abortion (often an abusive boyfriend or some other dysfunctional family situation, such as incest leading to pregnancy) or possibly, as the counselor suggested, because abortion makes people more likely to no longer regard children as special and to be protected.
The interview was a set up and they were just looking for something they could say to make the counselors look weird.
Clearly you are not pro-life. You will take away every argument for the life of the unborn if you deem it controversial or “unfounded.”
Ahhh!! Make that a 100% risk....she's already had her child murdered!!!
People who “hate” prolifers don’t need a reason!!!!
What is abortion, if not the ultimate child abuse?
“What this actually says is that emotionally damaged women are both more likely to have an abortion and to abuse their children sexually. Makes more sense, doesn’t it?”
Sure, and of course, abortion tends to be an emotionally damaging experience.
How it is a “stupid claim”, if it is true and they can cite the studies to show that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.