I read this article which cites a study that suggests places where abortions are illegal actually have more abortions performed (and those abortions are unsafe and dangerous).
From the link above:
So, for those here opposed to abortion, isn’t the rational choice to legalize it? Admittedly it is counter-intuitive but seems more babies would be saved not to mention women would not die seeking unsafe abortions.
If this study is true then perversely the anti-abortion movement is killing more babies (not to mention the mothers who die from unsafe abortions) than those who want abortion to be legal.
I haven’t read the article, but I would guess this is a correlation to low usage of birth control, either because it isn’t legal or because it’s expensive or culturally frowned upon.
I can see a mechanism in the US for an uptick in the abortion rate should abortion be made illegal, though. Right now, it is legal but can be quite difficult to get. If it were made illegal but underground access to RU486 were increased, abortion could end up increasing in frequency AND being more dangerous while illegal.
The fact that the Guttmacher Institute seems to be the driver suggests a particular axe to grind, so I’d wait for some peer review of their conclusions. But if the countries in question likewise have restrictive laws relative to birth control, as has been pointed out, then you’re confusing cause and effect, IMO.
What countries were included in the study? Most countries where abortion is illegal are not 1st world, developed countries. This is probably an apples to oranges comparison.
If you oppose abortion morally then no utilitarian argument would support legalizing it. I suspect that since most countries where abortion is outright illegal are third world/developing world countries where birth control is not widely practiced and people don’t really tend to engage in any formal “family planning” that the legality of abortion probably isn’t the driver for the high numbers of abortion.
I’d also guess correlation - countries with restrictive abortion policies are likely to also have restrictive contraception policies, and it’s the latter that leads to unwanted (and aborted) pregnancies.
Try comparing stats to pre-1989 East Block countries. I understand East Germany in particular had a high (by western standards) abortion rate (and the procedure was legal and medically routine) but little access to contraceptives.
The USSR as well, IIRC. I read in a book called What About the Russians - and Nuclear War? that the average Russian woman had six abortions over her lifetime. They thought it was because the Russkies couldn’t make a decent condom, and things like pills and IUDs were too hard to get.
I would also expect them to be abusive toward women and children in general, and unwilling to help support poor women their policies are trying to force children on. So I’d expect that some women who would otherwise not get an abortion will get one for economic reasons. Or just using the logic “why bring a child into this hell?”
The OP and the link uses the term unsafe abortions. What is unsafe, how are they using that term?
Is anything except a abortion done in a certified clinic considered unsafe? Are clinically performed abortions that result in the death or serious injury to the mother considered safe abortions?
The Faroe Islands, a semi-autonomous part of Denmark, has much more restrictive abortion laws than the rest of Denmark, but otherwise the standard of living and other factors are very similar. The Faroe Islands has an abortion ratio of about 1/4 of the Danish. To this should be added a few Faroese women that have abortions made in Denmark, but the numbers will still fall considerable below the Danish.
Unsafe abortion has a history in the U.S. See WHEN ABORTION WAS A CRIME by Leslie Reagan/ University of CA press.
Woman, especially poor and of color, have higher risks of death, due to unsafe, illegal abortions. Usually these are from complications like infection or hemorrhage which go untreated and unreported- due to the secret nature involved when abortion is illegal, or hard to get.
For example, self induced abortions-- like ingesting poisons, inserting toxic substances or tools (knitting needles, crochet hooks coat hangers) into the vagina, or throwing oneself from a high place or down a flight of stairs.
Illegal and “back alley” abortionists, fearing their own legal risks ,will often perform the abortion without offering follow up care, or worse yet–abandon a woman to bleed to death, after botching a procedure. Statistics of deaths are reported from the years all the way back to the 1920’s in the Leslie Reagan book, and they are surprisingly high. Keep abortion safe and legal.
From SiXSwordS post unsafe abortions refer to something not meeting accepted medical standards, in yours is it more towards it’s illegal status and therefor mandatory secrecy of having the procedure done.
In your definition an abortion would tend to be safe if conducted in 3rd world countries by tribal medicine men (people) as long as it is acceptable to have an abortion.
Aside from your -what if- scenario, and maybe looking down on the practices of tribal medicine people…many women will find a way to have an abortion (wherever they live), if they do not want to carry a pregnancy to term. Any possible way to bring safety into that reality is what is paramount to me.
The short answer is no. Even if the numbers are true.
I can’t imag or imagine anyone lgalising rape, murder, or spousal abuse if they new the numbers would get “better”.
What are you are comparing rape, murder, and spousal abuse to ? Can you be more clear, numbers getting better, meaning ? Sorry, I had trouble understanding what you meant.