Abortion

[cantstopdancin9]

Post-Abortion Issues

Many people are interested in learning about the possible effects of abortion on women's emotional well-being, and several hundred studies have been conducted on this issue since the late 1970s. Unfortunately, much of the research on women's psychological responses to abortion can be confusing. Nonetheless, mainstream medical opinions, like that of the American Psychological Association, agree there is no such thing as "post-abortion syndrome."

A Summary of the Scientific Research

Since the early 1980s, groups opposed to abortion have attempted to document the existence of "post-abortion syndrome," which they claim has traits similar to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) demonstrated by some war veterans. In 1989, the American Psychological Association (APA) convened a panel of psychologists with extensive experience in this field to review the data. They reported that the studies with the most scientifically rigorous research designs consistently found no trace of "post-abortion syndrome" and furthermore, no such syndrome is scientifically or medically recognized.1

The panel concluded that "research with diverse samples, different measures of response, and different times of assessment have come to similar conclusions. The time of greatest distress is likely to be before the abortion. Severe negative reactions after abortions are rare and can best be understood in the framework of coping with normal life stress."2 While some women may experience sensations of regret, sadness or guilt after an abortion, the overwhelming responses are relief and happiness.3

In another study, researchers surveyed a national sample of 5,295 women, not all of whom had had abortions, and many of whom had abortions between 1979 and 1987, the time they were involved in the study. The researchers were able to learn about women's emotional well-being both before and after they had abortions. They concluded at the end of the eight-year study that the most important predictor of emotional well-being in post-abortion women was their well-being before the abortion. Women who had high self-esteem before an abortion would be most likely to have high self-esteem after an abortion, regardless of how many years passed since the abortion.4

Psychological responses to abortion must also be considered in comparison to the psychological impact of alternatives for resolving an unwanted pregnancy (adoption or becoming a parent). While there has been little scientific research about the psychological consequences of adoption, researchers speculate that it is likely "that the psychological risks for adoption are higher for women than those for abortion because they reflect different types of stress. Stress associated with abortion is acute stress, typically ending with the procedure. With adoption, as with unwanted childbearing, however, the stress may be chronic for women who continue to worry about the fate of the child."5

What the Experts Say

In a commentary in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Nada Stotland, M.D., former president of the Association of Women Psychiatrists, stated:

"Significant psychiatric sequelae after abortion are rare, as documented in numerous methodologically sound prospective studies in the United States and in European countries. Comprehensive reviews of this literature have recently been performed and confirm this conclusion. The incidence of diagnosed psychiatric illness and hospitalization is considerably lower following abortion than following childbirth…Significant psychiatric illness following abortion occurs most commonly in women who were psychiatrically ill before pregnancy, in those who decided to undergo abortion under external pressure, and in those who underwent abortion in aversive circumstances, for example, abandonment."6

Henry P. David, PhD, an internationally known scholar in this area of research, reported the following at an international conference.

"Severe psychological reactions after abortion are infrequent…[T]he number of such cases is very small, and has been characterized by former U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop as 'miniscule from a public health perspective'…For the vast majority of women, an abortion will be followed by a mixture of emotions, with a predominance of positive feelings. This holds immediately after abortion and for some time afterward…[T]he positive picture reported up to eight years after abortion makes it unlikely that more negative responses will emerge later."7

Russo and Dabul reported their conclusions of an eight-year study in Professional Psychology:

"Although an intensive examination of the data was conducted, controlling for numerous variables and including comparisons of Black women versus White women, Catholic women versus non-Catholic women, and women who had abortions versus other women, the findings are consistent: The experience of having an abortion plays a negligible, if any, independent role in women's well-being over time, regardless of race or religion. The major predictor of a woman's well-being after an abortion, regardless of race or religion, is level of well-being before becoming pregnant…Our findings are congruent with those of others, including the National Academy of Sciences (1975), and the conclusion is worth repeating. Despite a concerted effort to convince the public of the existence of a widespread and severe postabortion trauma, there is no scientific evidence for the existence of such trauma, even though abortion occurs in the highly stressful context of an unwanted pregnancy."8 (emphasis added)

The Impact of Anti-Choice Activities

Russo and Dabul8 point out that when women in their study were interviewed from 1979 to 1987, anti-choice efforts to stigmatize abortion had not yet reached prominent levels. Today, anti-choice groups regularly harass clinic staff, intimidate patients at clinics, and use graphic language designed to punish women (e.g. "abortion is murder," "women are baby-killers"). Additionally, the past few years have revealed a new anti-choice strategy of offering "counseling" services to women. Rather than exploring the roots of a woman's psychological distress and providing non-biased therapy, anti-choice counselors tend to direct her anger towards the abortion provider by claiming that women are misinformed about the psychological trauma that abortion inflicts. Due to the political bias of these counselors and their misuse of psychological services, women can be left feeling angry and betrayed.

Russo and Dabul8 concluded that practitioners should acknowledge the detrimental effects of the social ostracism felt by abortion patients. Some post-abortion difficulties may result from a lack of social support because women are expected to bear the brunt of unplanned and unwanted childbearing. The researchers encouraged all practitioners to continue to provide accurate information since many women have been misled by anti-choice sources which may contribute to concerns if they choose abortion. Further, women who have concerns after an abortion should be encouraged to see a professional psychologist or join a support group supervised by a professional mental health provider, rather than one sponsored by any anti-choice organization.

I got this from ProChoice.org

I don't understand some of it, how can they say that the woman won't have medical problems after having and abortion or that she might not regret it or feel bad about it?

Edited July 13, 2003 by cantstopdancin9

[ironmonk]

They're evil and greedy. They kill innocent babies and know it, what makes you think that lying is below them?

Visit: http://www.prolifeaction.org/providers/

Read some of their stories.

If the Church OK'd it, I would be the first inline at the gun store to take back our country from the killers of the innocent.

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary

ironmonk

[cantstopdancin9]

Yea I know what you mean, those punks. But it's not like science hasn't proven that abortion IS harmful, and everyone knows it too. So really, what is the point of lying?

[Guest Hope]

They're evil and greedy.

I can never understand calling someone evil - even Hitler - to be completely rhetorical. Sure the act is evil, but do you know the personal history of the people committing these acts? Surely someone must come from a background of struggle/hurt/detachment in order to commit an evil act...

The opposite of love is not hate. it's fear.

[mulls]

If the Church OK'd it, I would be the first inline at the gun store to take back our country from the killers of the innocent.

I'm second in line, no matter if the Churck ok'd or not....but of course the guns would have to be filled with pellots or rubber bullets. I'm not about to kill anyone, but I'm not opposed to inflicting harm of some sort.

Ooohhh how I wish I could physcially take out my aggression on this matter on someone who deserves it. I'm all pent up now.

[Winchester]

The opposite of love is not hate. it's fear.

Could you provide your argument for this?

Since the strict definition of love is the desire to see someone in heaven (and thence, exercising it being the actions to lead someone thence by all your powers), and hate is the desire for someone to suffer Hell, I find them quite opposite.

Also, "fear" of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, in your paradigm being the opposite of love rather violates much of our theology.

I can never understand calling someone evil - even Hitler - to be completely rhetorical. Sure the act is evil, but do you know the personal history of the people committing these acts?

Evil in this sense is a judgment of the act. Hitler was evil. Whether or not he was culpable for his evil is another matter, entirely.

Surely someone must come from a background of struggle/hurt/detachment in order to commit an evil act...

Which includes every person on the face of the planet. Surely no privileged person commits evil acts.

According to Catholic theology, man is sinful by nature, hence the need for Baptism. Were man by his nature good, no one would be suffering these things which according to you propel them along the path of evil.

[Anna]

These closing remarks are very telling!

They feel that pro-lifers disseminating info on fetal development cause post-abortion women to feel guilty...(unnecessarily guilty, of course).

And they discourage post-aborted women from joining pro-life support groups that would help them grieve the loss of their baby! I think they know that women who attend such support groups as project Rachel become actively pro-life, rather than repeat customers!

Also, the claim that the majority of women find their abortions to be a positive experience...their immediate response is relief, etc. Stop and pray in front of an abortion mill sometime. Look into the faces of the women exitting the building. Most are in tears. Not tears of relief, tears of regret.

Jesus said that Satan was a liar and a murderer from the beginning...I think murder and lying must go hand in hand...I'm quite certain it does in the baby-killing industry!

Pax Christi. <><

[God Conquers]

The opposite of love is not hate. it's fear.

Actually, the opposite of love is indifference. You can hate and fear someone or something and still love it. You can never be indifferent and love.

[Winchester]

Man is quite able to hold contradictory positions on the same subject. Indifference is the absence of any love, not the presence of something in contradiction of it.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

Prayer to Defeat the Work of Satan

O Divine Eternal Father, in union with your Divine Son and the Holy Spirit, and through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg You to destroy the Power of your greatest enemy - the evil spirits.

Cast them into the deepest recesses of hell and chain them there forever! Take possession of Your Kingdom which You have created and which is rightfully Yours.

Heavenly Father, give us the reign of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

I repeat this prayer our of pure love for You with every beat of my heart and with every breath I take. Amen.

- Imprimatur, March 1973, +Richard H. Ackerman, Bishop of Covington

[FreeSoul]

I disagree that Hitler was evil, I agree he did things that were evil, but failing to see the good in him (and there was) makes me think that God creates bad stuff (and he doesn't). Or does he?

We are more than good/bad deeds. I think our souls figure into the equation as well.

"the strict definition of love is the desire to see someone in heaven"

I could understand that...because God is love...therefore uniting someone with God = an act of love. But I don't see how that's the 'strict' def'n of it.

Also, "fear" of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, in your paradigm being the opposite of love rather violates much of our theology.

I fear Tsunamis, Earthquakes, and Ax Murderers.

I don't fear God, I fear being away from God, and respect above all things the power of God's love. And because I love God I want to know more about God all the time, and check myself daily. Why fear love?

"Which includes every person on the face of the planet. Surely no privileged person commits evil acts."

That's exactly right! Isn't that why Jesus calls me to be compassionate!?! Aren't we called to journey together?

[Jake Huether]

"The opposite of love is not hate. it's fear."

I just thought that this was kind of funny... No offence.

I heard a talk on "True Love", and excellent talk I must add, and the guy giving the talk said: "The opposite of love is not hate. It's selfishness."

So, now we have, fear, indifference, hate, and selfishness.

I agree that True Love is wanting to get the other person to Heaven. That would necessitate the opposite of Love to mean wanting someone to go to hell. I think that can be accomplished a lot of ways... Fear, indifference, hate, selfishness, only being a few.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

I disagree that Hitler was evil, I agree he did things that were evil, but failing to see the good in him (and there was) makes me think that God creates bad stuff (and he doesn't). Or does he?

When God created Hitler, He left it up to Hitler to choose between good and bad. Hitler chose poorly. God does not create bad things.

[FreeSoul]

I agree Kilroy, but I don't believe that it makes Hitler evil, it makes Hitler a person who chose evil things.

We are sinful in nature, not evil in nature, I don't even believe that we become evil by choice...because I don't think it likely (if even possible) that one could COMPLETELY shut out God while on this earth...perhaps after the judgement...but then that would be Hell.

yeah, and Jake, I have to say I have resigned myself to that argument....cause I just don't know...it did get me thinking...I guess all these things are opposed to love......

[ironmonk]

What makes someone good or evil is their intention and action.

Hitler was evil.

People who are evil can change. Just like people who are good can change to evil.

To choose more evil things over good things is to be evil.

In everyone there is good, in everyone there is evil. Anything that goes against God or His Church, is evil.

People do choose evil. Greed, power, riches, fear of punishment, etc... many things can be catalysts in why a man chooses evil.

To believe that people do not choose evil is a lack of understanding of evil. The world is full of evil. The world is full of good. Evil is real. There is a hell. There is a satan. There are men that choose evil, not because of a mental illness, but because of their free will. This is a fact of life.

God calls all men to holiness, even hitler, binladen, manson, etc... but some of those men are evil, and choose evil.

The area I live in is one of the richest places in America (in the top ten every year), yet it is also one of the highest areas of satanic activity. I'm not talking about some metal head kids messing around either... I'm talking about Lawyers, Doctors, businessmen, etc... Educated men... choosing evil, with a desire to be evil. Orgies that make sodom and gamora look like disneyworld, drugs, and even sacrifices.

These are facts... you might find a few non-fiction books on cults and similar quite enlightening. Do some real study into it, you'll see the evil that men can be.