Good news? (Abortions)

lumbingmi

lumbingmi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
4,370
Reaction score
6
WASHINGTON - The number of abortions being performed in the United States has dropped to 1.2 million a year - the lowest level since 1976, according to a new report.

more stories like thisThe drop was driven by a decline in the overall rate at which women of childbearing age are getting abortions, which fell about 9 percent between 2000 and 2005, according to a nationwide survey. At the same time, the long decline in the number of abortion providers appears to be stabilizing, at least in part because of the availability of the controversial abortion pill RU 486, the report found.

The report did not identify reasons for the drop in abortions, but the researchers said it could be a combination of factors.

"It could be more women using contraception and not having as many unintended pregnancies. It could be more restrictions on abortions, making it more difficult for women to obtain abortion services. It could be a combination of these and other dynamics," said Rachel Jones of the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-health research organization publishing the report in the March issue of the journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.

Whatever the reasons, the trend was welcomed by both antiabortion and abortion rights advocates.

"This study shows that prevention works, and that's what we provide in our health centers every day," said Cecile Richard of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "At the end of the day, Americans of all stripes believe that we need to do more to prevent unintended pregnancy and make healthcare affordable and accessible."

"It's still a massive number, but it's moving in the right direction," said Randall O'Bannon of the National Right to Life Committee. He said that at least some of the drop may reflect changing attitudes.

"Even look at Hollywood," said O'Bannon, citing the hit movie, "Juno," about a pregnant teenager who decides against abortion. "More and more people are starting to reconsider their positions."

Suzanne Poppema of Physicians for Reproductive Health and Choice speculated that wider availability of the so-called morning-after pill also might be playing a role.

"I would like to say that it's at least partially due to increased availability of emergency contraception, which is a really good addition to reproductive healthcare in this country," Poppema said. The emergency contraceptive, a high dose of standard birth control pills, can prevent pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of having unprotected sex.

The report was based on a survey of all known abortion providers the Guttmacher Institute has been conducting regularly since 1974, and is considered one of the most authoritative sources of data on abortions in the United States. The latest survey, of 1,787 providers, was conducted in 2005 and was the first since 2000.Continued..
Click to expand...

Number of abortions lowest in decades in US, survey finds - The Boston Globe
 
The total number of abortions among women ages 15 to 44 declined from 1.3 million in 2000 to 1.2 million in 2005, an 8 percent drop that continued a trend that began in 1990, when the number of abortions peaked at more than 1.6 million, the survey found. The last time the number of abortions was that low was 1976, when slightly fewer than 1.2 million were performed.

more stories like thisThe abortion rate fell from 21.3 per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 in 2000 to 19.4 in 2005, a 9 percent decline. That's the lowest since 1974, when the rate was 19.3, and far below the 1981 peak of 29.3.

The abortion rate varies widely around the country, tending to be higher in the Northeast and lower in the South and Midwest.

The fall occurred amid a continued decline in the number of abortion providers. It slipped 2 percent since the last survey, but that drop was much smaller than in previous years.

Jones noted the introduction of the French abortion pill RU 486, now more commonly known as mifepristone. The drug, which was approved in 2000, allows women to terminate their pregnancies without the need for a surgical procedure.

"We found that there were providers who previously didn't offer surgical abortions and are now only providing early medical abortions," Jones said. "If it wasn't for those providers, the number of providers would have declined by far more."

By 2005, 57 percent of abortion providers were offering the drug, accounting for 13 percent of abortions, the report found.

That trend was disturbing to O'Bannon of the National Right to Life Committee, who questioned the safety of the drug. "It disturbs me that there are clinics that may not have been doing abortions before and are doing them now and that there are doctors who may not have been doing abortions before but are now," he said.

But advocates were encouraged by the increased availability of mifepristone, which they said has been shown to be both highly effective and safe.

"One of the objections to the abortion pill was that it was going to cause the abortion rate to go sky high. But this shows that didn't happen," Poppema said.

Nevertheless, 87 percent of US counties, accounting for 35 percent of women ages 15 to 44, do not have an abortion provider, the report found.

"We remain alarmed that, 35 years after Roe v. Wade, so many abortion providers continue to be out of reach to many American women, especially those in rural and underserved communities," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, an abortion rights organization.
Click to expand...

(10 characters)
 
The only good news to me is that the numbers of abortions had declined, but 1.2 millions are too many..
 
"We remain alarmed that, 35 years after Roe v. Wade, so many abortion providers continue to be out of reach to many American women, especially those in rural and underserved communities," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, an abortion rights organization.
Click to expand...

Alarmed that abortion providers are out of reach for the pregnant women? Give me a break, people need to start taking responsibilities for their actions and grow up. If the father isn't willing to get involved, nail him to the wall for child support, or give up the child for adoption.

Way, way too many people rely on abortions to solve their problems.
 
Banjo said:
Alarmed that abortion providers are out of reach for the pregnant women? Give me a break, people need to start taking responsibilities for their actions and grow up. If the father isn't willing to get involved, nail him to the wall for child support, or give up the child for adoption.

Way, way too many people rely on abortions to solve their problems.
Click to expand...

:gpost:
 
Banjo said:
Alarmed that abortion providers are out of reach for the pregnant women? Give me a break, people need to start taking responsibilities for their actions and grow up. If the father isn't willing to get involved, nail him to the wall for child support, or give up the child for adoption.

Way, way too many people rely on abortions to solve their problems.
Click to expand...

In some situations abortion is absolutely necessary. No mother wants to have a child from rapists.
 
lumbingmi said:
In some situations abortion is absolutely necessary. No mother wants to have a child from rapists.
Click to expand...

How do you justify killing a baby simply because it's the child of a rapist?

Life begins at conception, so by aborting it... you are killing it. It's not any different from homicide. The only way to possibly justify an abortion is if the mother's life is in danger, but in the end, it's still killing.

Really, think about it. Why punish the baby for something it didn't do?
 
Banjo said:
How do you justify killing a baby simply because it's the child of a rapist?

Life begins at conception, so by aborting it... you are killing it. It's not any different from homicide. The only way to possibly justify an abortion is if the mother's life is in danger, but in the end, it's still killing.

Really, think about it. Why punish the baby for something it didn't do?
Click to expand...

Why punish the woman for carrying something that wasn't intended for her?
 
Byrdie714 said:
Why punish the woman for carrying something that wasn't intended for her?
Click to expand...

Nobody said life was fair. As much as I sympathize with rape victims, but that's not the issue here. By aborting a baby, that's when the baby becomes a victim. Can you truly say that you are above the rapist by killing a living being within your womb?

Killing is killing. Can't get any simpler than that.
 
Banjo said:
Nobody said life was fair. As much as I sympathize with rape victims, but that's not the issue here. By aborting a baby, that's when the baby becomes a victim. Can you truly say that you are above the rapist by killing a living being within your womb?

Killing is killing. Can't get any simpler than that.
Click to expand...

Good that you feel that way but science doesn't look at it that way...

First it's an embryo, then a fetus, and then when its purged from the female, a human being.
 
lumbingmi said:
In some situations abortion is absolutely necessary. No mother wants to have a child from rapists.
Click to expand...

Well there is some of mothers don't see the child as her problem with a rapist, some mothers see a child who was fathered by a rapist have nothing to do with the rape situation.

Byrdie714 said:
Why punish the woman for carrying something that wasn't intended for her?
Click to expand...

Because she feel that a child have nothing to do with her rape situation.

Byrdie714 said:
Good that you feel that way but science doesn't look at it that way...

First it's an embryo, then a fetus, and then when its purged from the female, a human being.
Click to expand...

How would you feel if you were a embryo or a fetus, someone stopped you from developing to be a human and trash you in garbage?
 
You know.....why are guys involved in this decision of allowing a woman to abort or not?

First of all....it's NOT your body.

Second of all.. it's a women's issue and I am believe that women should have the right to decide for themselves if they want to have an abortion or not. How would you like a member of the opposite sex telling you to have a vasectomy when you don't want one?

If a woman is raped, she has the right to have an abortion, keep it, or give it up for adoption.

Men who go around telling women to keep a baby because they were raped ought to be :rl:
 
Byrdie714 said:
Good that you feel that way but science doesn't look at it that way...

First it's an embryo, then a fetus, and then when its purged from the female, a human being.
Click to expand...

Once it is born, it is an infant, then a toddler, then a child, adolescent, adult, senior and such. What I'm saying is that all of these are stages a human being will go through its life-cycle.

An embryo is an unborn human baby. Human life does begin at conception. The DNA is there to start with, then they develop organs and you will detect heartbeats after a few weeks. Many scientists share different views on this subject but you may be surprised to learn that many do believe that human life begins at conception.
 
Banjo, yes it's killing, but its more.......a nessary evil. Sure it's horrible that abortion has to exist, but illegalizing it, is just going to drive it underground and make it very unsafe.
Don't like abortion? Good. Support good birth control, the morning after pill etc.
Also, abortion isn't always about "killing" a baby. Sometimes the baby might have profound birth defects(ie have a medical condtion that would put them in a persistant vegetative state) or have died in utereo.
 
deafdyke said:
Don't like abortion? Good. Support good birth control, the morning after pill etc. Also, abortion isn't always about "killing" a baby. Sometimes the baby might have profound birth defects(ie have a medical condtion that would put them in a persistant vegetative state) or have died in utereo.
Click to expand...

Eugenics is a dangerous practice and is easily abused. If it's going to die, it will die. Death will always be a part of our lifecycles. If a baby is going to die young, it will. If a person in its 30 is doing to die, that person will die. The only difference is that it would be you who is the cause of death, not the disease, birth defects or a car and such.
 
Banjo, I know that eugenics is a slippary slope. However, just allowing abortions for VERY profound conditions, really is not eugenics. Profound means totally 100% incompatible with life conditions, like profound holoprescencephaly (aka cyclops) or anacephely (no brain) I do think that parents need better counseling on those types of conditions. Sometimes they are told that babies with those things are always born dead, when in fact some have lived for a few hours or even days. With those types of condtions, an abortion is pretty much like turning off life support on someone with VERY profound brain damage.
Also, if a baby has died in utero, there's gotta be some way of getting the baby out. The body doesn't always expell the baby. You gotta get it out, otherwise it could kill the mom.
 
Byrdie714 said:
You know.....why are guys involved in this decision of allowing a woman to abort or not?

First of all....it's NOT your body.

Second of all.. it's a women's issue and I am believe that women should have the right to decide for themselves if they want to have an abortion or not. How would you like a member of the opposite sex telling you to have a vasectomy when you don't want one?

If a woman is raped, she has the right to have an abortion, keep it, or give it up for adoption.

Men who go around telling women to keep a baby because they were raped ought to be :rl:
Click to expand...

Well, we, the Men, were born by the females. Plus, we, the Men, are the one who gave the women the sperm cause them pregnanted.

That's why I rather to have BOTH couple, boyfriend/husband and girlfriend/wife discuss about abortion TOGETHER.

But... Rape... well, that's different story...
 
Interesting because I was reading newspaper today and it states that there is highest baby being born this year than last 45 years or something.

They think it got something to do with Hispanic population having more babies and of course other groups too. And also that it's probably harder for people to have access to abortion than before or something.

I don't know if that's a good news or not. Last thing we need is a generation that is in poverty and trouble because of lack of a good start and more.

Abortion is one interesting solution because most Americans don't want responsibility of raising unwanted children.

There are still a lot of children in foster care or agencies because no one want them. And yet if one are against abortion, then in the end children still got to pay the price. After all it's much easier for one to say no to abortion than to accept the responsibility taking care of unwanted child from parent who can't even take care of it AT ALL.
 
Back
Top