ProWomanProLife

  • The Story
  • The Women
  • Notable Columns
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / Archives for Brenda Major

Major problem with APA report

August 13, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek Leave a Comment

That’s a major problem, as in big, but also major as in Brenda Major. I have taken a brief look at the APA report, released yesterday (this is about mental health after abortion), to note that Brenda Major sat on the taskforce. That’s Brenda Major of “Abortion-Causes-No-Harm-but-I-Lost-Fifty-Percent-Of-My-Sample” fame.

What are the chances that she is going to look back, reevaluate and in one, deeply significant eureka moment–a flash of brilliance that prior to this point has evaded her–say: “Hey! My science wasn’t very good. Plus, I drew large conclusions from underwhelming evidence. My goodness–how I’ve misled many.”

There were two possible solutions: Either have NONE of the authors of abortion-related research on the panel. Or have ALL the authors of abortion-related research on the panel. (“all”–rather a sampling from “both sides.” Don’t see David Fergusson, or Priscilla Coleman on that panel, as authors, one very much pro-choice, of psychological research that shows harm after abortion. Interesting.)

The APA calls for better research. I am against swearing in writing; I see it as a sign I can’t think of any other words–ie. sub-par intellect. But as kids we all used to say this: “No shit, Sherlock.” And I think that’s an appropriate response for the erudite members of the APA “taskforce” today.

In Unrelated News (but not really)–today may be the day to have a read of the 2005 book Destructive Trends in Mental Health —a very fine synopsis of what might be going wrong in psychology today–especially at the APA level.

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: American Psychological Association, Brenda Major, Cummings, David Fergusson, Destructive Trends in Mental Health, mental health after abortion, PRiscilla Coleman, Wright

Who’s mixing politics and science again?

July 31, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 1 Comment

The American Psychological Association (APA) has been reviewing their position on mental health after abortion for over a year. They are considering all the new research since 1990. There’s much for them to consider, all published in peer-reviewed journals.

Consistent Life has been writing letters to the APA to ask how it is that the APA can hold a clearly political stand, at the same time as they purport to act as unbiased arbiters of the research:

APA has held a position of abortion as being a civil right for women since 1969, and therefore has a clear political stand.

Meanwhile, pro-abortion psychologists bemoan those conniving pro-lifers who are, doggone it, getting published in peer-reviewed journals. Make’s ’em “seem credible”:

Since then, says Adler, anti-abortion advocates have become more world-wise. “They’re using scientific terminology,” she points out. They’re also gaining credibility by getting published in mainstream journals.

Oh the shame. Imagine that, research being reviewed and published–even when it suggests there are negative effects to having an abortion.

Let’s stop for a second–indicating there are negative repercussions, mental health or otherwise, is not a pro-life or a pro-choice thing to say. If it turns out a certain type of heart surgery is risky, no one declares the researcher to be against heart surgery. If a weatherman predicts rain, it doesn’t mean he’s against the sun. This is how crazy pro-abortion types get at the mere suggestion that their beloved “right” might not always be pain-free.

So they slam the research. Women who have abortions, they say, are not randomly selected. True. But neither are those who undergo heart surgery: There may be genetics, or health factors involved. We still study the thing. 

Slamming the research means one of two things: it’s either an admission that the peer review process is flawed  and I’d be open to that, having seen one study where fully fifty per cent of the study sample was lost and yet the authors still managed to declare abortion does not harm women–see Major et al, “Psychological Responses of Women After First-Trimester Abortion” for an example.

But more likely, it is a pro-abortion elite declaring their bias is AOK; a pro-life bias is not.

Before the APA undertook this, they ought to have dropped their anachronistic old-school statement, that abortion is a civil right. Abortion never was a right, not then, not now. And if they keep that sort of statement, it casts a pallour on their work regarding abortion and mental health.

Watch for the final APA report, which should come out this August.

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: American Psychological Association, APA, Brenda Major, Consistent Life, mental health after abortion, Nancy Adler, peer-review, post-abortion syndrome

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssby feather

Notable Columns

  • A pro-woman budget wouldn't tell me how to live my life
  • Bad medicine
  • Birth control pills have side effects
  • Canada Summer Jobs debacle–Can Trudeau call abortion a right?
  • Celebrate these Jubilee jailbirds
  • China has laws against sex selection. But not Canada. Why?
  • Family love is not a contract
  • Freedom to discuss the “choice”
  • Gender quotas don't help business or women
  • Ghomeshi case a wake-up call
  • Hidden cost of choice
  • Life at the heart of the matter
  • Life issues and the media
  • Need for rational abortion debate
  • New face of the abortion debate
  • People vs. kidneys
  • PET-P press release
  • Pro-life work is making me sick
  • Prolife doesn't mean anti-woman
  • Settle down or "lean in"
  • Sex education is all about values
  • Thank you, Camille Paglia
  • The new face of feminism
  • Today’s law worth discussing
  • When debate is shut down in Canada’s highest places
  • Whither feminism?

Categories

  • All Posts
  • Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia
  • Charitable
  • Ethics
  • Featured Media
  • Featured Posts
  • Feminism
  • Free Expression
  • International
  • Motherhood
  • Other
  • Political
  • Pregnancy Care Centres
  • Reproductive Technologies

All Posts

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2022 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in