Killing your baby is safer than having one. And way cheaper, too, while we’re at it! But that wasn’t the point of this study, which confines itself to the health benefits of offing your child.
Now here’s the thing. I’m concerned they didn’t include ALL the benefits of abortion. Did they, for example, add in the benefits, current and future, of scientific experimentation on the fetus? What about the masses who’ve been saved in vaccinations developed from fetal cell lines? I’m just trying to think of every angle.
Sometimes the abortion debate does lead to some pretty upside down, Orwellian moments.
by 
Obviously, this is an apple and oranges comparison report. What we really need here is a study comparing complications and mortality of induced abortion and normal pregnancy BUT corrected by gestational age e.g.: women at 7 weeks having an induced abortion with women with a normal pregnancy at 7 weeks, etc. I can tell you that it does not take a whole deal of medical evidence to show that a woman sitting at 12 weeks with a normal pregnancy will have much less risk of dying and complications than a similar woman who just had an abortion. Also, I bet late term abortions have similar, if not more dangereous, mortality and morbidity than normal childbirth. The comparison has to be with normal pregnancies because most of abortions are in “normal’ pregnancies prior to the induced abortion. This would be more apples and apples. Someone should get this data!
I’d be satisfied just to compare the mortality rate of an induced abortion at each month with the mortality rate for the end of any pregnancy from any reason other than induced abortion starting from the month of the induced abortion. For example, if the induced abortion is at 7 months gestation, you would compare that with the maternal mortality rate due to all childbirths, miscarriages and stillbirths that occur from 7 months on.
So for example:
Deaths from abortion at 2 months gestation – compared to deaths from all other ends of pregnancy at 2 months or later.
Deaths from abortion at 5 months gestation – compared to deaths from all other ends of pregnancy at 5 months or later.
Deaths from abortion at 8 months gestation – compared to deaths from all other ends of pregnancy at 8 months gestation or later.
I’d be willing to bet that an abortion in the third trimester is much more dangerous than a live birth or still birth in the third trimester, and that the younger the mother is, the more dangerous it is.
I would also guess that even in the second trimester, birth, stillbirth or miscarriage is still safer than induced abortion, or at least no more dangerous.
The only area where I would expect induced abortion to have a lower risk would be in the first trimester.
So who’s going to get that data for us?
From the Guttmacher Institute: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
• The risk of death associated with abortion increases with the length of pregnancy, from one death for every one million abortions at or before eight weeks to one per 29,000 at 16–20 weeks—and one per 11,000 at 21 or more weeks.[14]
Dr. Elizabeth Raymond from Gynuity Health Projects in New York City and Dr. David Grimes of the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, found that between 1998 and 2005, one woman died during childbirth for every 11,000 or so babies born.
So basically, according to the Guttmacher Institute, abortion is exactly as dangerous as childbirth at 21 or more weeks. I wonder how many Planned Parenthood clinics tell a woman contemplating a third trimester abortion that she’s just as likely to die from the abortion as from childbirth?
And I’m taking the Guttmacher Institute completely at face value, without questioning their figures at all.
So is someone going to explain why abortion for any reason other than to save the mother’s life is allowed in the third trimester?
Hmm, sorry to post again, but I just realized something else from the Guttmacher Institute’s figures.
First of all, in the second trimester, the maternal death rate is at 16 – 20 weeks is 1 per 29,000, which means abortion is only 2.6 times safer, rather than 14 times safer.
But they are comparing all abortions done during the 16-20 week period with all other pregnancies.
Most abortions done at 16-20 are done on healthy women, I presume.
I wonder what the figure would be if you compared the maternal death rate of abortions done on healthy women at 16-20 weeks of gestation with the maternal death rate in childbirth of all women who were healthy at 16-20 weeks of gestation.
Thank you Mary. I would say that it needs to be adjusted for different variables, the most important being gestational age.
For instance, at 21 weeks the mortality rate for induced abortion is 8.9 (Bartlett LA et al., Risk factors for legal induced abortion-related mortality in the United States, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2004, 103(4):729–737 ) which is the same rate as a full term pregnancy in the Grimes article (it is 8.8).
Now, 1.3% of the US abortions happen after 21 weeks (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6001.pdf )- note this is voluntary reporting like in Canada. However,what is hard to find is maternal mortality due to
pregnancy adjusted by gestational age.
We know is 8.8 at full term but likely is much less in the first trimester weeks and goes up as pregnancy advances. It is like removing a healthy tooth to a young person and saying that the rate of cavities will be less than when that person becomes 80. I know that a baby is not a tooth but it illustrates the ridiculous situation
Mary, don’t apologize for posting multiple times! Very interesting stuff. Thank you also rene l for your comments. It’s just this kind of thinking we need to read to understand exactly why this study is flawed. This is really important. And if the media weren’t in the back pocket of the pro-choice world, the first headlines would be reported less, and/or the counter ideas would be reported more.