Abortion Is Four Times Deadlier Than Childbirth

The Post-Abortion Review, 8(2), April-June 2000. ^ | April-June 2000. | David C. Reardon, Ph.D.

[Got a right to Life? . . Huh?]

New Study Shows Abortion Four Times More Dangerous Than Childbirth

Springfield, IL -- A recent government funded study in Finland shows that women who have abortions are approximately four times more likely to die in the following year than women who carry their pregnancies to term. In addition, women who carry to term are only half as likely to die as women who were not pregnant.

"This is an impeccable, record-based study," said David C. Reardon, Ph.D., who authored a review of the Finland study and other related studies in the latest issue of The Post-Abortion Review. "It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that abortion is not safer than childbirth."

Researchers from the statistical analysis unit of Finland's National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health examined death certificate records for all women of reproductive age (15-49) who died between 1987 and 1994 a total of 9,129 women. They then examined the national health care database to identify any pregnancy-related events for the women in the 12 months prior to their deaths.

The researchers found that compared to women who carried to term, women who aborted in the year prior to their deaths were 60 percent more likely to die of natural causes, seven times more likely to die of suicide, four times more likely to die of injuries related to accidents, and 14 times more likely to die from homicide. Researchers believe the higher rate of deaths related to accidents and homicide may be linked to higher rates of suicidal or risk-taking behavior.

"Even though this important study was published in the top Scandinavian obstetrics journal, it has been completely ignored by the American press," Reardon said. "Even worse, abortion counselors continue to lie to American women. They are telling women that abortion is safer than childbirth, when this and other irrefutable studies prove exactly the opposite. The entire body of medical literature clearly shows that abortion contributes to a decline in women's physical and mental health. Women aren't hearing this. Nor are they being told that giving birth actually contributes to women's overall health, not only in comparison to those who abort but also in comparison to women who have not been pregnant."

Reardon believes that abortion providers are collaborating with population control zealots to conceal the risks of abortion in order to advance their own financial and social engineering agendas. "If they were really pro-choice, they would want women to know about abortion's true risks," he said. "Instead, they are offering women a bundle of half-truths and complete fabrications."

A link to a full text copy of The Post-Abortion Review article can be found at:

http://www.afterabortion.org/PAR/V8/n2/finland.html

[Got a right to Life? . . Huh?]

Many in the pro-abortion crowd won't like this study. It seems that our American press has done a good job of hiding this study and others like it. If you doubt the validity of this study, read the fully documented version at the link.

http://www.afterabortion.org/PAR/V8/n2/finland.html

I think that you will have to copy the link to the address line on your browser. I haven't mastered the correct html code to make it functional. Help spread the word.

[lavaroise]

"This is an impeccable, record-based study," said David C. Reardon, Ph.D., who authored a review of the Finland study and other related studies in the latest issue of The Post-Abortion Review. "It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that abortion is not safer than childbirth."

I knew or we knew all that... never mind. It's a woman's choice, right? Healing social problems by killing, now how is that a novel idea to find a vaccine! Just kill the sick person.

[Norb2569]

For the baby, abortion is a billion times more deadly than childbirth!

[Colosis]

At conception many hundreds of genetic characteristics of both parents combine to form the genetic profile of the developing human being, some of the characteristics are, the colour of the hair, the colour of the eye, the colour of the skin, the way a person walks, the way they talk, etc. These genetic qualities may be altered by environment factors later in life. This is a profound event, which is often trivialised and even destroyed.

People who deny that human life does not begin at conception should state when life begins. It is certainly not at implantation, which is only the addition of nutrition to an already living and very complex organism.

[KQQL]

no one is listening anymore, even in a state like Va, pro-choice Warner defeated pro-life Earley.:(

[Khepera]

bump

[DWSUWF]

The leftist agenda driven 'media' presents itself, at every opportunity, as being dedicated to a particularly reciprocal notion of 'fairness'.

Reciprocal in the sense that the media often and regularly presents vignettes which suggest that 'fairness' can best be achieved by seizing 'something' from 'someone' and giving it to his 'victim'. In this way OUTCOMES FOR BOTH PARTIES ARE EQUALIZED, the evil 'oppressors' are thus made to reciprocate, to 'give back to the people' (as they say, ad nauseum) and Baby Jesus smiles. (or baby mohammed, or Satan... whatever)

Yes, it's all just a load of Marxist horsesh!t... The entire pro-death movement is merely an arm of that coalition of leftist ideologies that seek to control, to break, to vandalize and to kill.

It doesn't do any good to attempt to educate the thralls on the left. They are lost sheep.

But you can tweak them...

I would suggest to the pro-deathers out there that abortion can be performed in a manner that is consistent with THEIR OWN PRINCIPLES of 'reciprocal fairness'.

It is an indisputable fact that abortions which are performed with dynamite are utterly reciprocal, and thus eminently 'fair'.

Of course, the baby butchers would object to this protocol...

It would interfere with their lucrative, and illegal, traffic in the body parts of the children they murder.

[backhoe]

There's more:

REVEALING OF ABORTION-BREAST CANCER LINK IS AIM OF SUIT ...
... REVEALING OF ABORTION-BREAST CANCER LINK IS AIM OF SUIT AGAINST PLANNED PARENTHOOD
Culture/Society Breaking News News Keywords: ABORTION, BREAST CANCER ...

Abortion-breast cancer link still ignored [Free Republic]
FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum" ... ABORTION AND BREAST CANCER: SOME FACTS
YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN YEARS AGO. The Biological Hypothesis. ...

[Robert A Cook PE]

Marked. Thanks.

[DonQ]

Considering that a good many of the deaths were accident and homicide, it is probable that the difference between women who gave birth and the women who had abortions was because those who gave birth were, of necessity, spending a lot more time at home taking care of the baby, while the ones who had abortions were going out on their normal activities, which exposed them to the hazards outside the home, including accidents and homicide. Maybe they should compare women who had abortions with women of the same age and marital/economic status who simply didn't get pregnant.

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

women who aborted in the year prior to their deaths were 60 percent more likely to die of natural causes, seven times more likely to die of suicide, four times more likely to die of injuries related to accidents, and 14 times more likely to die from homicide.

I guess this speaks volumes about the character of women who seek abortions.

[AppyPappy]

seven times more likely to die of suicide

[FITZ]

which exposed them to the hazards outside the home, including accidents and homicide.

Women who obtain abortions are more likely to be getting picked up in bars and having sex with strangers.

[ConservativeNJdad]

Maybe people who don't respect life tend to hang out with other people who don't respect life.

[BikerNYC]

Researchers believe the higher rate of deaths related to accidents and homicide may be linked to higher rates of suicidal or risk-taking behavior.

Such risk taking tendencies would be present in some women whether or not they have an abortion, no? So how does having an abortion lead to those deaths?

[Free the USA]

Thought you might want to comment on a study that does not try to eliminate other contributing factors.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Absoultely not ....

I've NOT seen the original numbers, nor their particular statistical analysis, but what is the ONLY allowed way to include such a conclusion in a study like this is to find the number of women (in the population at large) who have NOT had deliberate "mother of convenience" abortions - and then get their rate of suicide and accidental "deliberate" deaths. (It's very easy to do, given a little bit of time and money).

Then you get the number of women who've had "medically essential (for the life of the mother)" or "incidental/natural/spontaneous" abortions, plus those who've had regular childbirth - and compare all for comparable age, health, and income.

Then, you look at the results: Do women who have "convenience abortions" kill themselves more often than women who disdn't have "convenience" abortions? - Do women who have had natural abortions lkill themselves more often than women who have deliberate abortions? Do women who have had no pregnancies kill themselves more often than women who have children?

At each question, the numbers will tell you (to within a given level of assurance) whether the difference is simple random chance, only a 5% chance there is a correlation (that there is link in the behaivor) ... a 50% chance of correlation a 95% chance, etc. ... etc.

Nope - If you don't like the answer: Recognize the truth. Don't try to hide behind a pretence that the numbers are wrong (like liberals often do!) ....

Abortions kills a newly-forming life......and is AGAINST every instinct of life and nuturing that EVERY woman, every animal, every plant has had for the past 3,000,000,000 years.

Either evolution and survival of the species are wrong, or abortion is wrong.

No intelligent species, no sub-human species, no living species deliberately kills its own babies ... not for "convenience" and "to keep my pretty figure" of the mother.

[BikerNYC]

Nope - If you don't like the answer: Recognize the truth. Don't try to hide behind a pretence that the numbers are wrong (like liberals often do!) ....

Huh? Was that particular line directed at me? 'Cause I don't know what the numbers are to hide behind. I just asked a question.

[GovernmentShrinker]

More junk science. Women who get pregnant when they don't want to have a baby are statistically more likely to be careless and impulsive, and already have a bleak outlook for their future. Let's see a study comparing women with UNWANTED pregnancies who had and didn't have abortions. 'Til then this "study" is about a compelling as the gun-grabbers "studies" that show that if you have a gun in your home, it's X times more likely to injure or kill a family member than a criminal (can't remember how many times they claim it is -- I don't bother memorizing their numbers -- too silly).

[JWinNC]

ALL:

Post #19 is correct. The study is irrelvent. It may show correlations, but it does not explain causations. It's a weak argument against abortion too.

What happens when the pro-abortionists site "studies" that show "benefits" of abortions? Those are junk too.

The only thing anyone needs to know about abortion is simple:

Abortion Kills a Human Life.

Peace,
JWinNC