ProWomanProLife

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

Not that there are any repercussions to abortion

January 29, 2009 by Andrea Mrozek 1 Comment

This article talks about an increase in pre-term births in Canada and made me think of other studies I’ve read linking abortion to subsequent pre-term delivery. It’s a link I’m sure you won’t hear about in the mainstream media, so I thought I should mention it on this site. A couple of articles on the link between abortion and pre-term delivery for your reading pleasure, here and here.

___________________________

Patricia adds: This is not directly on the same subject as Andrea’s post, but bear with me.

An Australian hospital’s pregnancy advisory service has released an analysis of reasons why women using its service are considering abortion.

Victoria’s Royal Women’s Hospital’s Pregnancy Advisory Service is the state’s largest public “pregnancy support service”. Women with an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy can contact the service about their options, including abortion and continuing the pregnancy. That said, it sounds like the greatest “service” the PAS provides is abortion referral: The Medical Journal of Australia reported recently that of the 5,462 women who contacted the service between October 2006 and October 2007, 90 per cent were seeking an abortion.

Of the 3,018 women surveyed on reasons for seeking abortion, 34 per cent listed their primary reason as “do not want children now” or “not the right time”. Another 547, or 18 per cent, said they already had enough children, 263, or 9 per cent, said they were caring for a young baby, and 339, or 11 per cent, said they were too young.

Financial, relationship or medical reasons together (together! I would have thought these were the major reasons) accounted for 19 per cent of cases. Rape accounted for 1 per cent.

Is it just me or, with the exception of the rape category (just 1 percent), do these reasons seem somewhat underwhelming? I realize that it’s hard to make statistics compelling but the rhetoric of the pro-choice movement always seemed pitched at the level of “women’s lives destroyed” if access to abortion is compromised in the slightest manner. But does it really seem to you that a woman’s life is “destroyed” if she has three children instead of two (as she had planned)? Or if she has a child a few years ahead of schedule?

I know that such an event can cause hardship and even suffering. But I’m just not sure that any of these reasons indicate that “women’s lives are at risk”.

And do any of these reasons seem compelling enough to risk the kind of repercussions associated with abortion – those mentioned in Andrea’s post and others?

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: Brent Rooney, preterm delivery

You’ve heard of this, no doubt

December 3, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek Leave a Comment

Well, you likely haven’t–heard of the connection between abortion and subsequent preterm delivery. I have, but I’m the first to admit I’m on one too many abortion-related list serves.

Here, Canadian researchers publish on the link between abortion and preterm delivery. This matters because preterm babies have higher risk of things like cerebral palsy.

The researchers look at the black community in the United States, who have a higher abortion rate and connect it to the subsequent higher risk of preterm delivery.

Interesting, also, is this:

Vacuum aspiration abortions (VAA) have never been shown to be safe in animal studies. Use of a procedure that has not been shown to be safe is a violation of the Nuremberg Code of ethics on human research and experimentation. At a minimum, consent forms for surgical abortions should inform patients of this risk.

Reminds me a bit of Barbara Seaman’s The Greatest Experiment Ever Performed On Women, which discusses how variants on the Pill weren’t adequately tested before being prescribed to women, sometimes with mortal side effects.

Women in Canada think there are no repercussions to having an abortion. It isn’t true, and I wish there was freedom of speech to discuss these things. Why do we (women) stand for being told abortion is our “right”–when not only is that not the case, but there may not even be sufficient medical testing?  

BTW, the study was published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. No doubt they are merely a mouthpiece for the pro-life movement.

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: Barbara Seaman, Brent Rooney, informed consent, The greatest experiment ever performed on women, vaccuum suction abortion

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 © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in