Abortion Hurts Women (Not To Mention Babies)

Given the horrors of abortion, it is not surprising that it is surrounded with so many entrenched myths. Those who seek to justify this ghoulish trade will use all sorts of euphemisms, half-truths, and patently weak and false arguments to promote abortion. Two of the most notorious myths going around about abortion are these:

-Abortion must remain legal to prevent backyard abortions and harm to women.
-Abortion is a safe and harmless procedure for women.

The truth is, abortion is extremely harmful to women, and legalising abortion has done nothing to make it safer. Indeed, it seems on a regular basis that we hear media reports of women being harmed and even killed as part of the abortion procedure. Many of these injuries and fatalities of course are never even reported or made public.

There would be innumerable cases of such harm and hurt to women. But simply consider just one local abortion mill, and its gruesome record. It is in the news yet again this week, as it has been so many times previously. As the Melbourne Age reports:

“A 42-year-old woman died days after attending a controversial abortion clinic in Croydon last week. Authorities have confirmed that the woman was taken to the Box Hill Hospital where she died on Sunday, after earlier having ‘a procedure at a private Croydon clinic’.

“A spokeswoman for the Coroners Court of Victoria said yesterday that the ‘unexpected’ death of the woman, from Sunshine, would be investigated. It is the fourth investigation involving the clinic in six years. Anaesthetist James Latham Peters allegedly infected more than 50 women with hepatitis C at the same clinic in 2008 and 2009. Peters, who was bailed on a $200,000 surety, will return to court in May for the remainder of the committal hearing.

“The surgery’s owner, Dr Mark Schulberg, was in 2009 found guilty of unprofessional conduct for failing to gain legal consent to perform a late-term abortion on an intellectually disabled woman. And earlier this year it was revealed that a 40-year-old woman was left fighting for her life in the Box Hill Hospital after Dr Schulberg performed a late-term abortion surgery on her.”

Multiply all this by abortion mills around the country, and around the world. Just how many cases of injury and death occur each year? But the pro-aborts keep peddling their myths and falsehoods. The pro-abortion camp is fond of speaking about rusty coat-hanger abortions and other horror stories associated with illegal abortions. But there are a number of mistruths and deceptions going on here.

First, legalising abortion did not make abortion safer. It was made safer in the 1940s and onwards with the availability of antibiotics. As one doctor reports, “Death rates from infections and all types of surgeries, including illegal abortions, had already fallen precipitously after World War II, when antibiotics finally became available to the general public.”

Second, the majority of abortions performed before legalisation was done in doctor’s offices, something even the pro-abortion Planned Parenthood has admitted. So this whole idea of women having abortions at home or in their backyards or wherever is mainly the stuff of myth.

Third, the claim that thousands of women died each year in America before the 1973 decision to legalise abortion is simply not true. Bernard Nathanson ought to know. He was a leading abortionist during this period – having performed 60,000 abortions – and helped to make up this figure of 5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year: “I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the ‘morality’ of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics? The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason that had to be done was permissible”.

Nathanson goes on to describe the real figures: “In 1967 … the federal government listed only 160 deaths from illegal abortion. In the last year before [Roe v Wade], 1972, the total was only 39 deaths”. While 39 is too many, the figure must be held up to the 1.5 million babies killed each year since 1973.

Fourth, women are still dying from abortions, even though they are now legal. The Melbourne case which I just cited is only the tip of the iceberg here. Yet pro-abortion advocates argue that we must have legal abortion in order to keep the procedure safe and harmless. But the truth is quite the opposite.

There are a number of serious physical problems associated with abortion – even when it is legalised. Death is the worst complication. Former US abortionist Carol Everett recounts a number of cases where botched (and legal) abortion led to the death of the mother. How many women die as a result of abortion is not known, but the figure must be quite high.

There are many other physical complications. Internal bleeding, for example, is normal after an abortion. Not uncommon are perforated uteruses. Pelvic Inflammatory Disease is an infection which occurs with abortion and may occur in as much as 30 per cent of all cases. And women who have had an abortion are two to four times more likely to experience an ectopic pregnancy.

Then there is the growing scientific consensus on the relationship between abortion and breast cancer. One American expert, Dr Joel Brind, an Endocrinology Professor, has said that “the single most avoidable risk factor for breast cancer is induced abortion.”

Fifth, this argument begs the question. It can only be an effective argument if we assume that the unborn are not fully human. If they are not, then, as Francis Beckwith argues, “the abortion-rights advocate has a legitimate concern, as one would have in overturning a law forbidding appendectomies if countless people were needlessly dying of both appendicitis and illegal operations. But, if the unborn are fully human, this abortion-choice argument is tantamount to saying that because people die or are harmed while killing other people (i.e., unborn people), the state should make it safe for them to do so.”

The recent tragedy in Melbourne is a far too common occurrence at the abortion mills. It is time we started challenging the lies of the pro-death camp. And it clearly is time for our politicians to get some moral backbone and start undoing our horrendous abortion laws which allow the death of not only so many unborn babies, but of so many women as well.


[1086 words]

25 Replies to “Abortion Hurts Women (Not To Mention Babies)”

  1. I find it ironic that Australian politicians plead so passionately against the Indonesians executing convicted drug dealers and terrorists yet permit the womb to be a latter day kiling field.

    The unborn child has committed no crime, been permitted no legal counsel, no right of appeal yet is executed by lethal injection, dissection or chemical burning. Try doing that to a criminal and the UN, actorvists etc would be hysterical.

    Smiling Bali bomber Amrozi is shot after length legal proceedings and we’re told ‘that makes us just as bad as them.’ An innocent defenceless unborn baby is executed without trial for convenience and that’s ‘pro-choice’.

    Abortion on demand turns our women’s wombs into the killing fields.

    Doug Holland

  2. Bill as a registered nurse I use to work with a O&G who had come from Britain in protest at the punitive aspects of the Abortion Act over there. He did abortions, was a Christian, I think Baptist. At a Nurses Christian fellowship meeting 30 years ago I heard him refer to the abortion act, then said he takes each case on its merits and did refuse to do some. He was followed by a physician who specialised in palliative care and who very nicely and succinctly made mince meat of the previous speaker’s position.
    Wayne Pelling

  3. There’s also growing evidence that abortion causes mental health issues http://www.cmf.org.uk/publications/content.asp?context=article&id=25722 but there’s no evidence that it causes mental health benefits. Abortion is nothing but pure evil.

    I had a discussion with my brother about this yesterday. He was shocked when he realised that he was doing exactly what Nazis do, and redefining a human being as not one—as a “foetus”. And when I pointed out adoption is a very possible option for people like him, who simply couldn’t support a child, he realised he had nowhere to run: but, he thought, he couldn’t give up having sex. (No contraceptive is reliable, and hormonal “contraceptives” like the Pill actually kill human beings often enough.)

    I think a big part of winning this war will be reintroducing a culture of early and stable marriages. Surely too many people think like my brother—that they can’t give up having sex.

    This isn’t about “women’s rights”, or “women’s health”. It’s about whether you think it’s okay to kill an innocent, defenseless human being.

    Felix Alexander

  4. For people who claim the abortion is a woman’s right, I suggest a reading of the book by Melinda Tankard Reist by the name of “Giving Sorrow Words”. The testimonies of these post-abortive women is gut-wrenching. The sheer scale of mental anguish that these women endure is horrifying, even more so when the lies of the pro-aborts are that abortion is “easy”, a “right”, a “procedure” and not a word is spoken about grief and loss and subsequent mental illness.
    Lucy Zubova

  5. Not so surprisingly is that the abortion mill where this woman died had only recently changed its name from Croydon Day Surgery (of Marie Stopes International) to Maroondah Surgery. This was obviously due to a string of similar incidents that resulted in bad media publicity for the clinic. I wonder what they are going to call it now?
    Trevor Grace

  6. “I find it ironic that Australian politicians plead so passionately against the Indonesians executing convicted drug dealers and terrorists yet permit the womb to be a latter day kiling field.” Ironic, but not at all surprising, Doug. These are simply the inverted values of the pro-death lobby. And they have all the power. What an evil world!
    John Thomas, UK

  7. I saw this bumper sticker the other day “abort73.com”. Contains detailed photos. Have you reviewed or seen this site Bill.
    Ian Brinkworth

  8. In the course of my studies I stumbled on the work of Eric Olson who makes a case for the ‘animalist’ understanding of personal identity (The Human Animal, “Was I Ever a Fetus?”). He argues against psychological accounts of personhood because they have a ‘fetus problem’. Thus if psychological identity is an essential condition of our persistence across time then it precludes any of us having existed as fetuses. But it is commonsensical that we once existed as a fetus (as opposed to something that was not me, i.e. just a cluster of cells).

    I don’t bring this up to endorse Olson’s views (though I think he get some things right). It was just interesting that this philosopher assumes that our existence as a fetus is a datum that needs explanation (Paul Snowdon makes similar arguments).

    Damien Spillane

  9. When the embryologists are allowed to create chimeras (hybrid animal human embryos) only so long as their Frankenstein creations are destroyed after 14 days one wonders if this is done for humane reasons. If it is; these chimeras are credited with more human rights (the right not be born into a nightmarish situation) than a healthy embryo which is not regarded as human until 22 or 24 weeks!

    David Skinner, UK

  10. Bill, just in relation to the link between abortion and breast cancer, I think some caution may be advised in terms of the “growing scientific consensus”.

    A scientific review paper in the Lancet in 2004 (2004 Mar 27;363(9414):1007-16), consisting of a re-analysis of data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 83,000 women from 16 countries, found that pregnancies that end as a spontaneous or induced abortion do not increase a woman’s subsequent risk of developing breast cancer.

    Another two review studies (Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2003 Jan;58(1):67-79) and (Int J Fertil Womens Med. 2005 Nov-Dec;50(6):267-71) suggested that the evidence for a link between elective abortions and breast cancer is “less clear” and “remains uncertain”.

    Peter Baade

  11. Thanks Peter

    Actually the medical and scientific links are very clear indeed. I am just out and about now so I will have to get back to you on this. But there are many dozens of peer-reviewed papers in the literature making this linkage.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  12. Have you read “Heaven is for Real”? Colton Burpo went to heaven after suffering a serious illness and met his sister who was a miscarried 2 month pregnancy. Goes to prove the soul is fused to the cells at conception. Right to Life has been fighting against this terrible legislation and we need more supporters to write to their parliamentarians. Thank you for your work Bill have a restful, peaceful and family orientated Christmas. God bless.
    Lorraine Twentyman

  13. Hi Bill – thanks for those additional references. I was merely advising caution with your use of the word “consensus”. Maybe “growing scientific evidence” would have been a better choice of phrase.
    Peter Baade

  14. David many abortions are done for “compassionate” reasons because of fetal abnormalities, to stop the baby being born into poverty, or an unloving or abusing home. Many people state the babies are better off dead.

    The human rights response to these situations is to better the situation not to kill the child in the situation.

    Kylie Anderson

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *