![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/80\/2013\/06\/Obama-Facepalm1.jpg\")
<\/a>The New York Times article What Happens to Women Who Are Denied Abortion?<\/a>\u00a0is an interesting read. The conclusions drawn from it have been \u2014 so far \u2014 pretty awful.<\/p>\nThis is because, by and large, culture-warriors don\u2019t read. We subsume everything into a pre-ordained, pre-packaged worldview, and use even the most incomplete, unhelpful sociological data as a weapon and a trump card. This particular article, judging by its postings on Facebook, went into the \u201cSee, abortion is good for women!\u201d category, but in actual fact \u2014 and were we to muster up the balls to say that the quality of human existence is ultimately not judged by sociological standards \u2014 the article \u2014 quite accidentally \u2014 affirms the triumph of life over death, of difficult love over abortion, and puts a jewel in the crown of motherhood.<\/p>\n
The study compared women who\u00a0received\u00a0an abortion and women who went to\u00a0receive\u00a0an abortion but were turned away.<\/p>\n
\u201cWomen\u2019s depression and anxiety symptoms either remained steady or decreased over the two-year period after receiving an abortion,\u201d and\u2026\u201cinitial and subsequent levels of depressive symptoms were similar\u201d between those who received an abortion and those who were turned away.\u00a0Turnaways did, however, suffer from higher levels of anxiety, but six months out, there were no appreciable differences between the two groups.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This was used to make the assumption that the idea that \u201cwomen regret their abortions\u201d is wrong. But collecting women\u2019s reactions just after\u00a0receiving\u00a0an abortion does not merit this conclusion. If both the women who were denied abortions and the women who had abortions had come to the point in which they desired and deemed it \u201cOK\u201d to have an abortion, the initial, primary experience of not\u00a0receiving that abortion would be \u2014 all things considered equal \u2014 disappointment. The denied women were, well, denied<\/em>. The difficulty they sought to solve via abortion was not solved. The women who\u00a0received\u00a0an abortion, on the other hand, avoided a potential difficulty. This is consistent with previous research<\/a> that found that the overwhelming experience the majority of women of women felt in the first year after their abortion was one of \u201crelief.\u201d<\/p>\n
This indicates what we all know, that unintended pregnancy is difficult, that motherhood is difficult, that the situations of poverty that so often lead women to consider abortion in the first place are difficult, and insofar as not killing your child means you have to face those difficulties, then yes, of course \u201cturnaways did\u2026suffer from higher levels of anxiety,\u201d\u00a0but \u2014 and this is part of what I mean when I say that this article is accidentally life-affirming \u2014 \u201csix months out, there were no appreciable differences between the two groups.\u201d After a short amount of time, having an abortion will lead to no less anxiety than having an unintended pregnancy.<\/p>\n
But I have some major concerns with the article.<\/p>\n
In the first place, the study has\u00a0not been peer-reviewed. There is no public access to the paper to examine the claims. For the New York Times to sandwich a study that may not even be published into an emotional article is a little weird. Secondly, the bias of the study is obvious. It comes from the research group Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health <\/em>(ANSIRH), whose founding member states on their website<\/a> that she helped create the group because, \u201cI knew it was time to return to my first love, access to abortion care.\u201d (Now obviously this is fine if all the methodology checks out. My issue is the NYT\u2019s premature media ejaculation, which has created a situation in which their article will have it\u2019s emotional effect long, long before the study is published and we can decide whether our emotions were warranted.)<\/p>\n
Then I have an issue with looking at the 2-year aftermath of abortion and coming to some sort of general, \u201cabortion is good for women\u201d conclusion. For some women, there is immediate regret. For others, the fact of a \u201cproblem solved\u201d is enough to carry them through. But the fact of abortion is not something women deal with for 2 years. It is a lifetime struggle. Looking at initial relief does not appreciate the whole woman, in the entirety of her emotional and physical life. From Leslie, in Virginia<\/a>, who had an abortion:<\/p>\n
Looking back on the choices I made, I didn\u2019t realize the profound emotional impact the abortions would have on my life. \u00a0I buried them in the deep recesses of my soul, where they stayed for the next three decades. I moved on with life, feeling bogus and unworthy, but strained forward in my motherhood, marriage, career, and community involvement.<\/p>\n
Trying to validate my choices, I became a strong pro-abortion supporter and spent many years fighting to protect women\u2019s reproductive rights. I was an outspoken advocate for choice\u2026at times militant with anyone who\u00a0didn\u2019t\u00a0agree with my opinion. The radical feminist inside me angrily argued that it was only about a woman\u2019s right to choose.<\/p>\n
I even lobbied lawmakers in the Virginia General Assembly, helped organize the Republican Pro Choice Coalition of Virginia, worked as a Media adviser for a Pro Choice House of Delegate candidate, hosted events for Pro Choice candidates, and was one month away from becoming a Board member of the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood when my heart dramatically changed\u2026thank God!<\/p>\n
Nearly five years ago, a powerful message clearly came to me that I could no longer fight against the lives of the unborn. God\u2019s grace allowed me to see clearly that life is sacred. I began regretting my abortions and attended a Rachel\u2019s Vineyard Retreat for post-abortive men and women where I finally received the tremendous healing I so desperately needed. \u00a0I learned to forgive myself and give dignity to the precious lives I took.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This is obviously an anecdote, but it helps me clarify what I mean. Abortion is not a two year issue. It may, as was the case with Lesli, a 35-year issue. The article brushes off the idea that the effects of abortion on women should be studied over a long period of time by saying:<\/p>\n
In the National Right to Life\u2019s five-part response to preliminary findings of Foster\u2019s study, which were presented at the American Public Health Association conference last year, the group noted that the ill effects of abortion \u2014 future miscarriage, breast cancer, infertility \u2014 may become apparent only later. Reputable research does not support such claims.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This might true of those three effects listed, although a 2003 study<\/a> published in\u00a0Obstetrical\u00a0and Gynecological Survey <\/em>found that\u00a0\u201c<\/em>Previous abortion was a risk factor for placenta previa. Moreover, induced abortion increased the risks for both a subsequent preterm delivery and mood disorders substantial enough to provoke attempts of self-harm.\u201d As far as the question of whether women who\u2019ve had abortions are at greater risk for mental health problems, I honestly don\u2019t know what to think. The data swings this way<\/a> and that way<\/a>, from nays<\/a> to yays<\/a>, from the final answer<\/a> to other final answers<\/a>, from including post-abortion syndrome into psychological practices<\/a> to saying it doesn\u2019t exist<\/a>.<\/p>\n
But I think this is where those trafficking in sociological evidence \u2014 on both sides of the issue \u2014 miss the point. \u00a0Barring the times it is forced, abortion is not something that simply \u201chappens\u201d to you, an event for which we can then evaluate the \u201coutcomes.\u201d Abortion is a decision. It is a choice. And the measure of whether a person is at peace with his choice is not\u00a0<\/em>a combination of the objective consequences of his choice, even when these consequences are psychological or economical.<\/p>\n
For instance, I might choose to marry a woman with cancer. As a consequence, I might experience a decline in every objective standard of \u201cwellness.\u201d I\u2019d shoot below the poverty line with medical bills and far below the normal-anxiety line with worry. I\u2019d lose weight, I\u2019d lose sleep, I\u2019d lose time \u2014 and none of this would change whether I believed I made the right choice. The choice stands alone. The question no one is asking is \u201cWould you rather not have married her?\u201d \u2014 and yet my answer to this question is the only one that matters. Consequences can certainly influence<\/em> my view of the choices I make \u2014 they do not define my inherent value-judgment on those choices.<\/p>\n
So I\u2019d argue that we need to back up. The one question we\u2019re not asking women who\u2019ve been denied abortions is, to my mind, the first question I\u2019d ask: \u201cWould you rather have had an abortion?\u201d This cuts through the sociological back-and-forth, the endless study-rebuts-study game that\u00a0embarrasses\u00a0everyone, and asks the question that matters, the question that ultimately defines a persons well-being. It treats women like, well, people<\/em>.<\/p>\n
And as the article points out, when it comes to actually the question that matters, women overwhelmingly affirm the goodness of life over the difficulties of motherhood. Woman S. was denied an abortion.<\/p>\n
S. now says that Baby S. is the best thing that ever happened to her. \u201cShe is more than my best friend, more than the love of my life,\u201d S. told me, glowingly. There were white spit-up stains on her green top. \u201cShe is just my whole world.\u201d<\/p>\n
When I told Foster S.\u2019s story, she wasn\u2019t surprised that S. ended up bonding with her baby. \u201cThat would be consistent with our study,\u201d Foster said. \u201cAbout 5 percent of the women, after they have had the baby, still wish they hadn\u2019t. And the rest of them adjust.\u201d S.\u2019s experience is also consistent with one of the most striking statistics from Henry David\u2019s Czech study. David found that nine years after being denied abortions, 38 percent of women said they never sought one in the first place.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Which is really beautiful stuff. Granted, this fact will be ignored in favor of the general yodel that \u201cwomen denied abortions are less wealthy than the women who\u00a0receive\u00a0them\u201d \u2014 yes, it\u2019s called raising a child, now sit down \u2014 but I want to bring it up anyways: After giving birth, 95% of women denied abortions were glad that they did not have an abortion (and I imagine this percent grows over time).<\/p>\n
Now can it be said that 95% of women were glad they had their abortion? Actually, according to a criticism<\/a> of the presentation of the study, in just\u00a0one week<\/em> out, 3% of aborting women reported they had made the wrong decision, and a 2000 study<\/a> found that, by two years, that grew to 28%. I can only imagine that number grows at 5, 10, 20, and 50 years.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/80\/2013\/06\/156591_344287348997010_117221782_n.jpg\" "\\"156591_344287348997010_117221782_n\\"")
<\/a>happy about the fact, while a\u00a0sizable\u00a0portion of those who are not denied their abortion, in growing numbers over time, regret having one. And if you\u2019re thinking, \u201cWell duh, who would wish they\u2019d aborted their child 10 years into being a mother?\u201d then I\u2019m happy, because it is<\/em> rather obvious. The fact of motherhood \u2014 even unplanned motherhood, even initially undesired<\/em> motherhood, even unplanned-undesired-loaded-with-objective-sociological-markers-of-a-difficult-life motherhood \u2014 is beautiful, ultimately rendering even the most tempting abortion unthinkable, to the point that \u201cnine years after being denied abortions, 38 percent of women said they never sought one in the first place.\u201d The same cannot be said of abortion. Given the choice between the two, I\u2019d argue for motherhood, that love which seems to overwhelm even the most damning of objective, sociological markers, giving women something they wouldn\u2019t give up for the world.<\/p>\n