Replies

I read the article you linked, which is a rather old article (we may know more now, or maybe we don't). You will find that while, in absolute terms, pregnancy by rape is rare, the article shows that it is mostly the percentage as you would expect from ANY form of sex.

The article does not suggest that forcible rape is a contraceptive. It just points out that women don't get pregnant that easily or often, and that stress itself is a factor. As he says in the article, the average couple who is TRYING to get pregnant takes 10 months.

The only part of his article that suggests the forced rape would limit pregnancy is this section:

Even if she conceives, the miscarriage rate is higher than in a more normal pregnancy. If she loses 20% of 600, there are 450 left. Finally, we must factor in one of the most important reasons why a rape victim rarely gets pregnant, and that is psychic trauma. Every woman is aware that stress and emotional factors can alter her menstrual cycle. To get pregnant and stay pregnant, a woman’s body must produce a very sophisticated mix of hormones. Hormone production is controlled by a part of the brain which is easily influenced by emotions. There’s no greater emotional trauma that can be experienced by a woman than an assault rape. This can radically upset her possibility of ovulation, fertilization, implantation and even nurturing of a pregnancy. So what further percentage reduction in pregnancy will this cause? No one really knows, but this factor certainly cuts the last figure by at least 50%, and probably more, leaving a final figure of 225 women pregnant each year, a number that closely matches the 200 found in clinical studies.

Oddly, his argument is in part that the body under stress will self-abort the child. And of course, women who are raped have long doubled up on birth control pills, which in high doses could cause a self-abortion; today we also have the morning-after pill which does the same. Self-abortion would lower the chance for a doctor-performed abortion, but is hardly a useful argument when we are saying abortion is murder.

And in any case, his suggestion is a 50% reduction for stress, which hardly makes it much more rare. He also is in "rhetorical" mode at this point, not citing peer-reviewed studies of scientific information, just giving his own opinion. If the woman ovulated before the rape (which is the most likely case for getting pregnant, you don't get pregnant nearly so easily if you have sex before ovulation), the trauma couldn't stop that ovulation.

Lastly, we consider drugged (pills or alcohol) sex as forcible rape as well, but it wouldn't have the trauma of a physical assault. The argument, in short, is a losing argument on many levels, including scientific.

The worst part is that "rare" is meaningless. If it was OK to abort a child from a forcible rape, it should be legal, whether there are a million babies, or only 1 baby. In fact, arguing that it is very rare would be the kind of thing you'd say if you wanted to ALLOW abortion for rape.

The CORRECT argument is that we don't kill innocent human beings for the crimes of others, and that with proper care and counseling, carrying a baby to term is a better choice for all than commiting a second crime because of the first crime.