Is There A Post-abortion Syndrome?

[Sojourner]

[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/21/magazine/21abortion.t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ref=magazine"]Link here[/url] ... I think you might have to register, but registration is free. It's long, but addresses some really important points. Here's one paragraph I found interesting:

[quote]While national groups like Focus on the Family, the National Right to Life Committee and Concerned Women for America warn about the dire effects of abortion on their Web sites and link to counseling ministries like Rachel’s Vineyard, they don’t finance abortion-recovery counseling. In part, that may be because the government and the Catholic Church do. But the lack of money may also reflect the strain of skepticism that Koop voiced. Francis Beckwith, a professor of church-state studies at Baylor University who is anti-abortion, has criticized abortion-recovery activists for their “questionable interpretation of social-science data” and for potentially undermining the absolutist moral argument against abortion. “For every woman who has suffered trauma as a result of an abortion, I bet you could find half a dozen who would say it was the best decision they ever made,” he told me. “And in any case, suffering isn’t the same as immorality.” Beckwith speaks at churches and colleges, and he says that most anti-abortion leaders don’t want the woman-protective argument to supersede the traditional fetus-centered focus, “because that’s where the real moral force is.”[/quote]

The article explores a number of angles on the abortion debate, but I find this particular issue really fascinating: what's the best way to go about convincing people that abortion is not a good idea? There is of course the moral argument that abortion is murder, the intentional taking of a human life, which is of course true, but I am interested in hearing what people think about addressing the effect abortion has on women.

My .02: I think when a woman goes to have an abortion, she is not thinking about the moral implications of what she is doing. She is thinking about the practical ramifications having a child will have on her life: financial, emotional, physical, social, etc. These are selfish considerations, no matter how much she spouts things like "but I wouldn't want to raise a child in (x) awful situation."

That's why I think groups like [url="http://www.feministsforlife.org/"]Feminists for Life[/url] have a fantastic way of approaching this issue, because they address the reasons that women have abortions, and provide alternative options and ways of thinking. This seems to me to be a reasonable way of going about things. Abortion is a selfish act, intended to avoid suffering, so show how it does not actually accomplish that end.

But I am interested in hearing what others think. The real question here is whether to focus on the harm abortion does to the woman, or the fact that abortion is killing a child. I don't think it's a question of exclusion -- if you focus on the harm to the woman you can also talk about the killing of the child and vice versa -- but it is a question of where to focus efforts. I'm also interested in hearing what people think about the moral implications of addressing the issue from the standpoint of harm to women.

[N/A Gone]

without reading your article, and only responding to the question. Yes

PPD or PSTD is often times far more severe in abortion cases.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-pardum_depression"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-pardum_depression[/url]

the source smells of elderberries, but im too lazy to type text books

[Sojourner]

OK ... so what relevance does it have to the abortion debate? How should that affect the dialogue about the morality of abortion?

[Lil Red]

i know Feminists for Life rocks

and i'd like to know the research that they did that says there is no ill after effects from having an abortion. i would encourage all to read the articles on [url="http://www.afterabortion.org/"]http://www.afterabortion.org/[/url]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1173137' date='Jan 22 2007, 10:23 AM']OK ... so what relevance does it have to the abortion debate? How should that affect the dialogue about the morality of abortion?[/quote]well, FFL puts it very well. (the following points are taken from their ads)

--why are we being forced to sacrifice our children for an education or career? lack of emotional/financial support is the real enemy - not our children.

--'Abortion rights activists promised us a world of equality and reduced poverty. Instead, child abuse has escalated and rather than shared responsibility for children, even more of the burden has shifted to women.'

i think FFL has a lot of great points - namely that abortion rights have not helped women advance but have put them down. women are being exploited now more than ever because of abortion. women are supposed to be able to have it all, right?

[Lil Red]

i also think that FFL has done a great thing with their college outreach program.
[url="http://www.feministsforlife.org/cop/index.htm"]http://www.feministsforlife.org/cop/index.htm[/url]

[quote]What's Wrong With This Picture?

When Feminists for Life speakers address college audiences, we ask, "Do you know anyone on campus who has become pregnant?" Audience members nod.

Then we ask, "Have you ever seen a visibly pregnant student on campus?" The nodding stops.

What's wrong with this picture? According to Planned Parenthood's research arm, the Alan Guttmacher Institute, 10% of all college-age women become pregnant each year. Where have all the pregnant women gone? One of two things happens:
[list]
[*]Women have abortions. Women seek help and support from counselors, friends, or family. What they hear is: Abortion is the answer. Don't give up your dreams. Make the "problem" go away. Women know deep down that it's not so simple, but what other choices do they have? [b]One of every five abortions is performed on a college woman.
[/b]
[*]Women quit school to have their baby. Women cannot find the practical or emotional support they need to be both parents and students, so they must leave school. They intend to return someday soon, but many never do.
[/list]
The numbers are chilling. Here's what happened in just one year, for example, at one university in the northeast, based on figures provided by the school's health center and a nearby pregnancy care center:

[b]Of 3,000 college women, 600 had pregnancy tests; 300 of these tests were positive; and 6 women had babies.[/b]

The math is pretty simple.

Looking around most of today's college campuses, you would have no way of knowing that there are options other than abortion.

[b]Addressing the Real Problem[/b]

Feminists for Life asks the all-important question: What do women really want?

Most women do not want to have an abortion. Most women do not want to leave school. Pregnant and parenting students want, and deserve, other viable choices.

Feminists for Life's College Outreach Program is all about choices - the choices women truly want.

The College Outreach Program involves a unique range of stakeholders: college students, faculty, administrators, counselors, campus clinic staff and service providers across the ideological spectrum - pro-life activists, crisis pregnancy centers, and even abortion providers and advocates who agree that abortion is a tragedy and are willing to work with us to address the root causes that contribute to abortion.

Feminists for Life works with these partners on two levels of action.
[list]
[*]Providing practical resources for pregnant and parenting students, so they can complete their education.

[*]Challenging the assumptions that create this no-win situation for college women - and men.
[/list][/quote]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1173109' date='Jan 22 2007, 09:25 AM'] I think you might have to register, but registration is free. It's long, but addresses some really important points.[/quote]

[url="http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/archives/007657.php"]The Curt Jester[/url] brings up somethings about the writer of the article you cite.

[quote]The writer of the article Emily Bazelon, is a contributing editor of Legal Affairs, senior editor of Slate magazine, has written for Mother Jones, and featured by NPR.

Here is just a selection of some of the articles she has written in regards to abortion.
[list]
[*]The Front-Runners on Roe

[*]Alito v. O'Connor How the nominee tried to restrict Roe

[*]Suffragette City (Curt Jester notes: A unfavorable look at Feminists for Life which over and over again quotes Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice.)
[/list]
She is also is the granddaughter of pro-abortion judge David L. Bazelon and a relative of Betty Friedan (her grandmother was Betty's cousin). She has wrote favorably of Betty Friedan who wrote the Feminine Mystique and was one of the founders of NARAL.

Now the NYT containing an extremely biased articles is not exactly news but their having her write an article on this subject is like asking Rep. Tom Tancredo to write a balanced article on the border fence.[/quote]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1173138' date='Jan 22 2007, 10:38 AM']i think FFL has a lot of great points - namely that abortion rights have not helped women advance but have put them down. women are being exploited now more than ever because of abortion. women are supposed to be able to have it all, right?[/quote]

a quote left on Amy Welborn's blog about this article:
[quote]It's a woman's responsibility to get vaccinated against a certain kind of VD in her girlhood. It's a woman's responsibility to have sex often and outside marriage, as any mentally healthy woman must, with only the right kind of males. It's a woman's responsibility to make sure she takes birth control and has "protection". It's a woman's responsibility if the "protection" fails. It's a woman's responsibility to get an abortion and get through the recovery afterward. And now it's a woman's responsibility to feel totally positive about it at all times, no matter what.[/quote]where's the shared responsibility? where's the empowerment?

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1173146' date='Jan 22 2007, 12:04 PM']
[url="http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/archives/007657.php"]The Curt Jester[/url] brings up somethings about the writer of the article you cite.
[/quote]
Interesting ... it was pretty obvious from the article that she spent a significant amount of time with the woman she focuses on in the beginning, and I felt that she treated her pretty respectfully, even though the reporter may not have agreed with the subject's beliefs.

I still think the question of whether and where there is a place in the abortion debate to talk about the effect of abortion on women is an interesting one that's raised by the article. I agree with you (and FFL) that this is important, but other pro-lifers I know are more apt to focus on the immorality of the act itself rather than try to combat the reasons women seek abortions in the first place. If this was indeed an issue in South Dakota (as is stated in the article) then I think it's something that's pretty important to the movement as a whole.

[Lil Red]

if i could get a job at FFL i would.

[MichaelFilo]

Interesting topic. I go out to an abortion clinic every Saturday to pray and there are women (and sometimes a man or two) who will try dissuade those coming in form makin the decision. While surely in a classroom setting the protection of the foetus is the primary topic of debate (because it really is where the moral force lies), it is slightly different when talking to someone about to have the life inside of them destroyed.

It is true, women having abortions aren't considering the moral aspect, as opposed to the immediate effects, so often with a woman who will even consider an abortion as an option one can find a little self-centerdness. That is why one ought to point out the very real possible consequences of having an abortion on the woman (physical and mental (spiritual if it can be worked in)). Alongside that strategy is disseminating information in relation to monetary aid for raising the child or for adoption options which, if it is a moral issue for the woman, will counteract any faulty (but in times of dread/panic appealing) thoughts of "it would be wrong to raise my child in a poor condition".

I think there really is the risk of PAS, and it's the arguement that will stop a woman from going to get the abortion. However, I agree, the moral point is in the wrong of killing a child, but thats an argument best reserved for intellectual, not passionate, conversation.

God bless,
Mikey