What is your stance on abortion?

Abortion saves lives.
In fact, it could have saved the lives of 6 million jews.

Not my body, not my business. Or yours.

I’m in favor of the availibity of legal, safe, abortion.

What does “Very often an abortion is not only the murder of one child, but of all the subsequent children as well, which is the real threat to demographic situation in the country and its future” mean? I rarely say that what someone writes is ridiculous, because I think it isn’t a nice thing to do, but I can’t find any other word but ridiculous to describe that statement. What are you talking about?

@JLeslie
I think she means the children that the aborted child would have had.

@ragingloli It sounds to me like the OP is saying if you get an abortion you are likely to not be able to have children when you want them. That of course is completely false.

As a Christian I can’t agree with abortion but I support the right of a woman to choose & have it be safe.

Abortion is…available at little or no cost.
Really? I thought it was hundreds of dollars.
My question is if this money should be out of pocket or not.

My stance, picture a frenchman, arms out wide, shoulders shrugged, upturned palms, bottom lip curled in a fashion that suggests indifference.

@dxs I think an abortion should only be covered by insurance when it’s medically necessary (the mother’s life/health is at risk, etc). Otherwise, it should be an out of pocket expense. If we’re going to cover abortions for women that simply don’t want a baby, why not cover cosmetic and other elective, unnecessary procedures? I’d like to say pregnancies that resulted from rape should be covered as well, but only if it’s more than likely that the rape actually occurred (rape kit, police report, etc). Some would say that stipulation puts extra pressure on rape victims, but it also prevents little girls that didn’t bother using protection from crying rape so they don’t have to come out of pocket for an abortion.

Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean it should be free.

”Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean it should be free.”
It is not free. They are paying monthly premiums.

@livelaughlove21 One argument could be because an abortion is cheap compared to the medical costs of pregnancy, delivery and taking care of the child. Devil’s advocate we might argue that people are more likely to not worry about getting pregnant if they know the abortions are free, but I don’t think most people will think that way. Plus, covered by insurance does not need to mean totally free.

I’ll go with @livelaughlove21‘s answer on this one.

Yesterday I heard Brian Fisher on AFR expounding on the economic effects that abortion has on society; mainly things like it eliminates the need to feed and clothe more people and that means less items are purchased and that means less items are produced and that means less jobs are created and that means the economy doesn’t get better. What a pile of crap.

He didn’t mention that we cannot even provide enough jobs for the people who or that we already overload the landfills with used baby diapers and other “disposable” products are here now or that we live on a planet with finite resources that are being used up at an alarming rate.

And it for sure as hell did not occur to him that the vast majority of those abortions keep from filling the world with people who would grow up to be at the least indifferent to his beliefs if not downright non-Christian or even anti-Christian.

So I guess it is now our patriotic duty to have more kids to help the US grow economically. Get to it folks.

Abortion will happen whether it is legal or not. Legal abortions = safe abortions, and I hope it stays that way. There have been many attempts to limit access to safe abortions recently, and it needs to stop.

Basically to deny a person’s right to abortion is to grant them less rights than a dead body. Your organs cannot be harvested after death without your permission. You should not be forced to carry a child to term if you do not want to.

Say for example that you have the right to free speech, except for when that infringes on someone else’s rights. You cannot abuse and harass someone just because you have the right to free speech. You could argue that the unborn baby has a right to live (though I don’t believe a clump of cells has rights), but what about the mother’s rights? You would be forcing someone to give up their bodily rights for at least 9 months.

I don’t know whether I would have an abortion if I had an unwanted pregnancy, but I do know that I want every person to have the right to their own body, and I want every person to be able to choose. If you don’t believe in abortion, don’t get one. You are able to choose to have a child. Someone else might choose not to. You don’t get to decide for them.

Here is an interesting statistic regarding the economic impact of abortion:

“The abortion rate among women living below the federal poverty level ($9,570.) is per women (below 100% of poverty) is nearly four times that of women above 200% of poverty (112 vs. 29 per 1000 women).”

If we continue on along the line of thinking Mr. Fisher has brought up then we have to take this into account and to me this means that by taking away the ability to abort unwanted pregnancies we are increasing the percentage of people who will stand a greater chance statistically of being in some type of government supported welfare program (that conservatives detest) and increase the national debt by having to increase the amount of funding that goes into said programs (which conservatives also detest) which means additional taxes will have to be attained from somewhere (which, again, is an anathema to conservatives) and that somewhere is the people (not corporations of course).

1). I am the best qualified to determine when and if I should bring a child into this world.

2). No one else should be able to force me to undergo the health risk (significant) and expense (extensive) of a pregnancy.

3). As long as women are penalized in the work force for having children, denying them the right to a safe abortion creates a second class citizen.

4). If you’re going to preach at me about having to go bring an unwanted child into this world, then you damn well better take care of all of the orphaned, abandoned, homeless, hungry, abused, and neglected children first. Otherwise, you are a big, fat, judgmental, holier-than-thou hypocrite.

So here’s a question: why are (most) of the same people who decry abortion also anti sex education? It’s not a theory. It’s been proven over and over again that in areas with sex education and access to birth control, abortion rates decline steeply. How is that not hypocritical? How is driving desperate women to seek unsafe illegal abortions the better choice than teaching and helping young adults to not have an unwanted pregnancy to begin with?

@rojo Not if they change policy and just let them starve to death. The US could start looking like Calcutta more and more. Oh, but that wiuld make us eugenists according to some right wingers.

The stat you gave can be a little misleading in that higher income may not be having more babies than the poor, they are just preventing pregnancy with birth control more effectively than the poor. I don’t know if that is the case, I am just thinking out liud about how the stats might be gathered and interpreted.

We could also cite Freaknomics take on abortion and how it has a positive correlation with significantly reducing crime.

Good point @JLeslie but it does not change the statistics. The poor are still having four times the number regardless of why. It just means that the poor have fewer choices available to them and have to resort to more extremes.

I can even understand the anti-abortion stance. What I fail to grasp is their continued efforts to limit the availability of “morning after” pills.

I mean when you consider that, according to what statistics I have been able to find on short notice, “only 30% to 50% of conceptions progress past the first trimester. The vast majority of those that do not progress are lost before the woman is aware of the conception, and many pregnancies are lost before medical practitioners can detect an embryo…” improving the availability of Plan B or other emergency contraceptive pills would probably be only an insignificant blip on the spontaneous abortion graph while greatly reducing the necessity of surgical abortions which is the stated goal of the anti-abortion crowd to begin with.

Another way to view those same statistics, if you are religiously inclined, is to say that God kills 50 – 70% of those conceived before birth (the rest of us he holds off on for a while) and surgical abortion, whether legal or illegal, is only a continuation of Gods Plan.

I would call it the “God spoke to me and told me to have an abortion because He did not get around to it and He is sorry about that and appreciates my help, at least that’s what He said to me last night” plan.

Having sexual intercourse can result in children. It seems like procreation is the biological intention for sex. By having abortions, does this mean that one basically loses responsibility of the outcome of their actions?
If you answer me, please don’t tear me to shreds on this. I have no opinion towards abortion yet and am just trying to get a better understanding.

@dxs The personal responsibility argument is a pretty common one, and it’s one that I have to fight not to ascribe to. My gut reaction to abortion in cases that in which rape did not occur is, “Well maybe if you were responsible and put a condom on your boyfriend before you had sex with him, then you wouldn’t need an abortion.” However, people have gotten pregnant even after taking the proper precautions (condoms and/or birth control of some sort). If they did what they were supposed to do and got pregnant anyway, can we really tell them to “take responsibility” for their actions? If they are a minor, do not want a child, cannot afford to have one, etc., then they should have the right to do whatever they want with their own bodies – simple. My personal opinion about certain people’s carelessness and lack of maturity does not mean they shouldn’t have the right to do so.

Also, sex may be the “biological intention” for sex (though I’m not convinced it is), but it’s not the intention most of us have whenever we engage in sex.

@dxs While sex is/can be for procreation it is also an enjoyable endeavor and people also engage in it as an expression of feelings and, it has to be acknowledged, for pleasure. Sometimes precautions fail. No, people do not have sexual intercourse with the intent of getting pregnant and having an abortion but it does happen. The last statistic I saw was that 54% of all abortions occur AFTER contraception has been used and failed to prevent the pregnancy.
In my opinion, aborting is not losing responsibility but taking responsibility for what has happened. You, I, whomever, may not agree with the way it is dealt with but we are not privy to the circumstances in which the choice is made.

@livelaughlove21 I got pregnant while on birth control pills and using condoms while married and nearly died from an ectopic rupture. This after literally years of asking my ob/gyn for surgical sterilization (tubal ligation) that he refused to perform because I “might change my mind”. He finally agreed since I had a significant statistical risk of another ectopic pregnancy. Even surgical sterilization has the same failure rate as condoms.

What @syz said! 100% pro choice.

@syz Wow, that’s crazy. Like I said, it happens. I think situations like that are the minority, though. Birth control and condoms work in most, but not all, cases. My husband and I always said that if I got pregnant when we use condoms and birth control, we’d just have the baby no matter what, because it must be divine intervention. A joke, obviously, and clearly not the same as your situation, but what you said reminded me of that.

No ovaries=No opinion

I think medical decisions should be made between the doctor and patient, and uninvolved parties should keep their moral disinclinations to themselves.

I think abortion should be legal. There are various arguments for this:
– I think the life of a fetus is nothing compared to the life of the mother. Of course this fetus could turn into a living human being, but it is not a living human being in the early stages of pregnancy in my opinion. Also, where do you draw the line? Are condoms and birth control also preventing life? What if a man and a woman choose not to have sex, is this also preventing life?
– Abortions will always occur. If it is not legal, it will still occur but under wore circumstances and cause a lot of harm.
– I think every woman has the right to decide what is going to happen to her own body.
– The argument that it is bad for the world to prevent births is not valid – the earth is already overpopulated and people are dying of hunger, there is not enough water for us all, people are living inhumanely in refugee camps.
– It pisses me of when men argument against abortion. That is really a free argument for them. They cannot become pregnant and therefore they will never face the trauma of having to go through an abortion or having to give birth to an unwanted child.

I’m all in favor for abortion since it stops crime and poverty. The demographics who are responsible for most of the crime and poverty are blacks and hispanics (around 70%), so if you take a look at abortion statistics, out of the 1.2 million abortions done each year, 60% (around 714,000) are of black and hispanic descent. This clearly helps relieve the burden on society since it is one less person to cage in prison and one less mouth to feed using tax dollars.

@eno That’s quite a leap…

Nah, check out freakonomics. They prove this point in detail.

@eno Based on what I’m reading, it seems Whites are the highest percentage of aborters in the United States.
http://kff.org/womens-health-policy/state-indicator/abortions-by-race/

According to this site link whites are only responsible for 34% while blacks and hispanics are 60%.

I found the problem with your link. There is no hispanic category. To avoid disrupting the harmony of race, a lot of statistical sites started putting hispanics under the category of white people. They do the same for crime reports on the FBI website.

@eno All the minorities I have known are much more likely to keep their babies than to abort based on religious beliefs. Either way, peace.

Yeah, but what you know is of limited experience. That is why we do statistics of the whole country. Yeah, here we go. Location White Black Other Total. They put the hispanics under whites. They’ve been doing this method for years now. Only on census, and certain statistical sites do they still split up hispanics from whites.

@eno This is interesting and disturbing.

With more than 79% of clinics in minority neighborhoods, and more than 1400 black abortions daily, these programs are doing precisely what our actor asked them to do. Planned Parenthood is (intentionally or not) exterminating the black community.

http://www.liveaction.org/the-planned-parenthood-racism-project/

@eno That website is quite obviously biased. It’s an anti-abortion website, hello! And it cites Fox News as one of its sources, – yikes. Yeah, what @KNOWITALL knows is of limited perspective, but the same can be said for you. All you know is what this anti-abortion conservative Christian Republican website wants you to know. Just because a website posts “statistics” doesn’t make them true. Even if they’re using the correct numbers (and I’m not convinced they are), they’re going to skew it to fit into their narrow point of view. Confirmation bias – look it up.

What you’re basically saying is that, “I’m for abortion because it gets rid of the Blacks and Hispanics that are going to grow up and become criminals.” Blatant racism that you’re trying to cover up by throwing numbers at us and making it seem like abortion is a way to make our streets safer. Awful…

@livelaughlove21 Well you know I’m christian and personally pro-life myself, but I do like to research all sides of any issue. I just don’t tend to see color and make anything a race issue unless it’s a last resort or very obvious.

Exterminating the black race is very disturbing though.

@KNOWITALL

I don’t find that disturbing at all. I think it is a good thing since the alternative is more crime and poverty at the burden of society and the tax dollars.

@livelaughlove21

The statistics are the same source as knowitalls—the census bureau. Don’t see how that is a confirmation bias…

I’m awful for wanting to prevent/lower crime and poverty? lol, I’m ok with that.

@eno No, you’re awful for being racist.

You’re saying that most criminals are a minority and most abortions occur within minorities, so abortion will lower the crime rate, but there’s no evidence of that last point.

@eno Where are you from so I can gain some character insight before reducing you to a ignorant racist (of which I am very familiar, I assure you.)

Do you guys not understand what statistical probability means or what? Has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the probability of crime/poverty/abortion and now with the advancements of genetic testing, we will be able to abort whatever we don’t desire. A higher degree of prevention.

Put stats out and you get called a racist. Typical argument ender. Anyway, we’re going in circles now, so peace.

@eno You’ve provided statistics on race and crime and you’ve provided statistics on race and abortion. However, that doesn’t “prove” that abortion will reduce crime rates. Are crime rates gown down now because of abortion? If so, I’d love you see your statistics on that.

It’s like saying that, since guns are involved in X% of murders, outlawing guns will decrease murders. I think we all know that it won’t, because most criminals don’t get their guns legally anyway. A + B doesn’t always equal C in that way you want it to.

The only thing “typical” here is yet another racist trying to convince others they are not racist by attempting to project themselves as some do-gooder or concerned citizen. It’s bullshit.

Of course it has gone down. Here crime rate by year

@eno That’s not what I asked. I know it’s gone down – but show me how you know it’s gone down because abortions are wiping out Black and Hispanic criminals.

Let me guess, no such statistics exist. Shocker.

@livelaughlove21

Oh, I sourced you that earlier. Freakonomics. They did the research in detail. You’ll find all the data there.

@eno No, you mentioned Freakonomics (it sure sounds like a promising and reliable source~) but you did not post a link to this research. Even if they did research, correlation does not equal causation and one lonely research article doesn’t “prove” squat.

@KNOWITALL There are lots and lots of issues with the ‘exterminating the black race’ line (@eno‘s blatant trolling aside). First of which is to ask is it really ‘exterminating’ anything. The latest demographic data from the census bureau puts the fertility rate for African Americans at 1.899, the second highest in the nation (behind Hispanics). While this is below the replacement rate, this is not unusual for developed countries and a good thing, as the world as a whole is still highly overpopulated. Pew research puts it at 2.1, right at the replacement rate, and still the second highest behind Hispanics. African Americans are not being ‘exterminated’ by elective abortion.

Secondly is the question of why African Americans are getting abortions, and why Planned Parenthood chooses to open so many clinics in minority neighborhoods. @rojo‘s stats above gives some understanding of that: minorities are still far more likely to be lower class, resulting in both a lower access to contraception (which, along with reproductive health in general, makes up the vast majority of their services) and a higher need for abortion, as an unplanned pregnancy can devastate finances. Reproductive freedom has been highly correlated with raising social status, and part of this reason is that freely chosen and desired children have a much, much higher chance of success in life.

Planned Parenthood is not ‘exterminating’ African Americans. It’s giving them tools to a) avoid abortion, and b) create strong, healthy, happy families.

@eno Let’s say you’re right. You’re not, but let’s say you are. What’s the solution? Let abortion wipe out the “problem races” as a public service? Explain to me how that’s not a blatantly racist point of view.

@livelaughlove21

Cannot do that. Author wants you to buy the book…I can only tell you where to look which can be found in Chapter 4. Maybe if you search some scholarly index, you might find it online, for free.

@eno Ha! Yeah, okay, I’ll get right on that.

So don’t. I’m not insecure enough to care. Just sharing my input.

@KNOWITALL Controlling births helps women and society, not the opposite. We could argue the religious right wants to take away abortion options from the black community to keep them poor and down.

@syz Was your doctor Catholic? My girlfriend couldn’t get her tubal block done at the hospital closest to her, because the ethical and religious committeee at Catholic hospital would require she prove it was necessary and approve it. So, she went to the other hospital that was not as convenient. Luckily, she lives in a very populated area with several hospitals, and lucky the Catholics don’t own all of them.

@rojo About the morning after pill. If someone is against birth cintrol, they certainly are going to be against the morning after pill. The morning after pill ideally works by delaying possible ovulation, but I think most people believe it also can stop a pregancy even after conception. To be honest I thought that was part of the schtick with the morning after pill. That the hormones can help revent implantation.I honestly don’t know what the truth is about that. The truth would be immaterial to me, but I guess it would be good to know for this sort of conversation. I think some people against the morning pill want everyone to be virgins and they feel quite self righteous about punishing women who have been “irresponsible.” Live with their mistakes so to speak.

@eno @livelaughlove21 This is a good article on crime and class and who actually goes to jail as opposed to who commits crime.
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/(X(1)S(4j2m3e55y11wfs2jkvehqjyw))/displayArticle.aspx?articleid=6070&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

@JLeslie I posit that there is an equal chance of aborting a genius as a criminal.

A lot of this, in my personal opinion, is based on choice and personal responsiblity, nothing more or less.

@KNOWITALL This what? There’s no link to an article. I’m sure it’s nothing new to me – I just got through studying criminal justice, so I’m pretty up to date on numbers, but I wouldn’t mind reading an article.

@JLeslie If they’re against contraception, yes, it is contraception. But it is not abortion. The ‘preventing implantation’ was floated as a possible mode of action before scientists determined the exact mode of action. It has since been shown that the morning after pill has no real effect on the chance of implantation. This hasn’t stopped people saying that it does, but the science on the matter is not controversial any longer.

FWIW – I have Freakonomics, and it does mention that there was a significant drop in crime in urban areas 18 years after Roe V. Wade.

@livelaughlove21 Sorry, I thought I copied it in. Basically, it’s a theory that crime statistics are flawed when it comes to race. Here’s a sample:

The unspoken reality is that in America today there exists two systems of criminal justice. One for the wealthy, which includes kid-glove investigations, lackluster prosecutions, drug treatment, light sentences and easy, if any, prison time. The other, for the poor, is one of paramilitary policing, aggressive prosecution, harsh mandatory sentences and hard time. Wealth, and the political connec tions inherent to wealth, not race, is the determining factor in deciding which system one gets. This is most obvious when wealthy hip-hop artists and athletes, many of them black, are charged with serious crimes. Class trumps race every time, even if the wealth is new found.

@Seek_Kolinahr Too bad there are way to many confounding variables for that to mean anything at all.

@KNOWITALL Ah yes, the power of the almighty dollar.

@livelaughlove21

I’m pretty sure you’re just butthurt over the reality of the situation, hence, the accusations of racism. Author must be racist too, right? He is disrupting the fantasy? the harmony?

@BhacSsylan Ok, if that is true, then I am going to go with the manufacturer wanted to sell more pills and it has backfired. Was it the actual manufacturer who suggested even after conception the morning after pill might help prevent implantation? That would mean someone like me who knows when I ovulate, might take it even if I had ovulated the day I had sex and the condom broke. If I know that pill does nothing, I’m not going to buy it.

@eno I’m not butthurt over anything. I’m white – what do I have to be butthurt about when it comes to racism? But I know an ignorant racist comment when I read one.

@JLeslie No, this was the science, it was a legitimate possibility and not hearsay (they could have drummed it up at the time, but they wouldn’t have been going against the science), it has just since come out that it doesn’t work that way. If you are sure of when you ovulate, then no, it wouldn’t work in that case. Can you be sure of the ovulation though? I have heard that it usually occurs in a range of possible days. Also, the particular insemination usually occurs several days prior to the inseminated ovulation, anyway (hence the reason the pill usually works); it takes quite a while for sperm to work their way to it.

@eno I second that, we are both white but racism hurts us all. Southern girls like us know this.

@ucme LOL that was pretty well described, could see it in my head right away.

I’m pro choice, and I’m not getting into it any further than that. Just wanted to comment on the Frenchman thing, really.

@BhacSsylan Now that I am okder I don’t always feel it, but for many years I did. I felt it and then a perfect 14 days later I got my period. My cycle varied between 26 and 28 days, but I always knew the exact day I would get my period, because I just counted from ovulation. Right before my exploratory surgery I told my doctor I was ovulating, and he said he saw it, that it was really cool. I guess he saw the follicle pop? Or having had popped? Not sure. I spent two years not getting pregnant by not having sex a couple days before possible ovulation, and not during or a couple days later. We had very little sex because I had some other problems. The first month I tried to get pregnant I did. I did also the second and third time. The fourth time it took a couple of months. The fifth time it happened first try again. A few of those I had just one time that month. I just couldn’t carry the pregnancies and had an ectopic (possibly two, only one was confirmed). So, yeah, I’m very sure, or I was for a good 15 years of my life. It would have been more, but I was on the pill for a long time. When I went off the pill I felt the ping of ovulation furst month after stopping, and went right back to my “normal” cycle.

My first pregnancy I told my friend I am late. She asked how late, and I said several hours. She thought I was crazy.

Heh, interesting. Well then yes, you’d be right, if you felt it and then took the pill you’d be no better off than if you didn’t take it. Another confounding factor that you reminded me of, though, is that most fertilizations fail ‘naturally’ (for reasons such as you mentioned), so it can be hard to tell the difference between ‘never ovulated’ and ‘ovulated and failed to implant’. Well, with people not gifted with your skilled ovaries :-p. Just one reason why it used to be unsure.

@Symbeline Ha, not that I wanna patronise the french, oh dear me no, but they are such a visually descriptive bunch.

@BhacSsylan Two of my pregnancies lasted less than a week after the missed period. One I literally started to bleed 3 days after the missed period, so probably it would be considered a chemical pregnancy. It must have implanted to cause the missed period I would think? I don’t know the medical science well on that. But, implantation happens day 3–5 after fertilization I think. I would doubt the HCG would go up if implantation didn’t happen at all. I think a lot of women would just have passed off those very short pregnancies as stress related late periods, not a pregnancy. The other pregnancies lasted longer.

Every month I know when I am fertile, or should be, and having fertility problems is a torture. I am never unaware. Never can just sort of leave it to chance. It is the negative of being so in tune. If I had had the children I wanted it would be a great thing. After my surgery I never was able to get pregnant again. Long story.

I think a lot of people can feel the ping, but are oblivious, because most women know so little about their cycles. Mine alternated left side right side and everything.

@ucme Haha, if anything, I pictured your French guy with a cigarette butt hanging out of his mouth as the bottom lip curled lol.

he looked like a mime in that striped shirt

Wearing an onion necklace & a beret at a kinky angle.

I used to be able to feel ovulation. Haven’t since falling pregnant with my son.

@Seek_Kolinahr I wonder why it changes? Like I said above it happened to me too. I still sometimes feels it, but not consistantly like I did when I was younger. I went for a few years I didn’t feel it at all. It was odd to be sort of out of touch, but I still find of knew when I was around the time because of the other symptoms.

I don’t know. My whole system changed after having him. I’m not even allergic to bananas anymore.

I wonder if it happened after one of my pregnancies? I don’t remember the chronology well enough.

Although this conversation is out of my comfort zone, I think you ladies are right in that pregnancies tend to change that, I still am very attuned to my body in that aspect (no kids here.)

I am pro choice, but I hope that choice would be No.

Woah woah woah. Sorry to backtrack, but I was thinking about this conversation on the way home from work and something just didn’t add up. @Seek_Kolinahr, you said that the article @eno referenced stated there was a steep decrease in crime 18 years after Roe v Wade. Well that would be 1991. Violent crime rates spiked in the 90’s in the US, according to just about every source I’ve encountered. It certainly didn’t decrease. And yes, I saw that you said “urban areas,” but crime rates in urban areas are always higher so I seriously doubt crime in rural areas got so bad it made the overall rate spike while the urban areas, with less violent minorities running around thanks to abortions (according to @eno), experienced a drop. It’s just not feasible. I still haven’t bothered searching for the article, but that makes no sense.

Hold on, I might have spoken incorrectly. I have to move furniture to access the bookshelf with Freakonomics on it, so I tried to do it from memory. BRB.

OK, the chapter entitled “Where Have All the Criminals Gone?” begins on page 115 of the paperback edition of Freakonomics.

I was going to cite the book itself, but the writer is a little verbose and I’ve been drinking. So no transcription tonight. Let’s look online.

http://users.ipfw.edu/dilts/E%20306%20Readings/Further%20Evidence%20that%20Legalized%20Abortion%20Lowered%20Crime.pdf

This appears to be the original article that Levitt paraphrased for nonexpert readers in the Freakonomics text. Levitt is the original author of the article, along with John J. Donohue III

Below is an excerpt from the introduction to the article.

First, the five states that legalized abortion in roughly 1970 (as opposed to the national legalization resulting from the January 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade) experienced a somewhat earlier drop in crime.

Second, higher abortion states (based on the rates of legal abortion in the 1970s) showed much greater drops in crime during the 1985–97 period. In contrast, the crime trends in high and low abortion states were similar over the period from 1973–85, when the children born after legalization were too young to be influencing crime rates.

Third, this relationship between more legal abortions in the 1970s and lower crime over the period 1985–97 persisted in panel data regression models that controlled for prisoners and police per capita, state economic conditions, and state and year fixed effects. This result was also robust to controls for cross-state mobility, the effects of immigration, and various deletions of potentially idiosyncratic states (including New York and California).

Fourth, the link between abortion and crime was only present for those born after legalization (roughly those younger than age 25 when our arrest data ends in 1998), and not for those older than 25 as of 1998 (and therefore born prior to Roe v. Wade). Figure 1 shows that, for the period 1985–98, arrest rates for those younger than 25 fell more (or rose less) as one moves from the states with the lowest abortion rates to those with the middle level of abortion rates to those with the highest level of abortions. Figure 2 reveals, however, that the link between higher rates of abortion and lower rates of crime is not observed in these groupings if one limits the focus to those older than age 25, who were overwhelmingly born at a time when abortion was illegal. In this second figure, there is no discernible relationship between the rate of abortion and changes in arrests.

Fifth, the pattern of lower rates of crime in states with higher rates of abortion held true when we linked the abortion rates in a particular state in a particular year with the crime committed by the cohort born in that year, even controlling for state-year specific interactions.

I’m not an economist, the book is my husband’s and I’ve paged through it a few times. I have no real opinion on the matter, as crime rates and their relation to abortion have no bearing on my pro-choice philosophy. I am just providing information, since neither side involved in the debate appears to be willing to do so

@Seek_Kolinahr “since neither side involved in the debate appears to be willing to do so”

Why exactly would I have to provide any information? @eno posted the ludicrous statement – I was simply saying the “proof” he or she claimed to have wasn’t proof of anything. It’s not on me to prove that abortion doesn’t cause crime rates to drop, it was on him or her to show evidence that it does.

As for the excerpt you provided, it seems the author is referencing the drop in crime rates in the late 90s, so more than 18 years after Roe v Wade. There are so many confounding variables going on that asserting abortion caused the drop is just ridiculous. For instance, prison population spiked dramatically during this time. It was a “get tough on crime” era where policing was beefed up and conviction rates soared. Additionally, an aging population – baby boomers contributed to the crime spike in the 60s and 70s but, since most people commit their crimes in their teens and early 20s, their prime was over by the late 90s. Technology and the influx of cell phones may have also had an effect. I’d love to know how they controlled all of these variables for their research.

Once again, it’s just another racist trying to make their bigotry sound noble.

Did you read the excerpt I posted, before commenting on things that were addressed and taken into account in the study?

@Seek_Kolinahr Yes, I did read it, which is why I said I’d love to know how they controlled those variables.

Well, the full article is linked, 22 pages long, with a 2 page list of references. If you’re interested, knock yourself out. Too many numbers for my brain. Haha.

@Seek_Kolinahr Your link didn’t work for me. Don’t sweat it, though, I don’t think I care enough about that particular article to read 22 pages of crazy talk. There’s a reason it’d probably be really hard to find this study replicated elsewhere.

Now, if @eno had said that legalized abortion contributes to the declining crime rate, without bring race into it, I never would’ve said anything about it. It’s not much of a stretch to say that abortion prevents a number of children from growing up poor or with parents that do not want them. And since crime is more prevalent among the lower class and in people with traumatic childhoods, I’m sure abortion does play a role. But saying it’s because all the black and Hispanic mothers are aborting future criminals? No. Like someone else here said, class (not race) rules.

I agree. And if I remember correctly, @eno may be mentally crossing the abortion chapter with the crack gang chapter. The specific gang studied in the reference materials for Freakonomics did not allow white members. Oddly enough, that chapter was about how similar a crack gang’s financial system is to a white-collar corporation’s.

The study by Levitt didn’t take into account race, it’s specifically discussing a drop in crime rates by those born in the years following the legalization of abortion.

FWIW: other sources of that article:

http://qje.oxfordjournals.org/content/116/2/379.abstract
http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf

there’s even a Fox News three part video “debunking” of the article, because there’s no way abortion could be shown to be positive: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/07/07/myth-about-abortion-and-crime/

Not my business. Women should be able to receive a medical procedure that allows them to live the life they choose. Don’t like it? Don’t have one.

Women are not incubators.

You know, the religious right makes a big deal of their second amendment right to own guns for, I believe they word it, self protection and self preservation. Seems to me the same arguments, self-protection and self-preservation, could be made by women.

Just my perspective.

@JLeslie Ha, no, I live in the deep south.

@rojo Sometimes I feel like you criticize people like me for everything we hold dear, that’s a real shame as I sometimes admire your other standpoints.
Using God as an abortion proponent and protecting adults from babies in utero are ludicrous to me. :(

Okay, you guys wanna talk about economics?

When a survey was taken of women who had had abortions, 73% said they couldn’t afford a baby at that time. And yet, ‘the money spent on March for Life alone could pay for prenatal care for around 6,000 women, or prenatal vitamins for around 250,000.’

A study by the University of California ‘showed that women who sought an abortion and were turned away… were three times as likely to fall into poverty than women who attained an abortion.’

‘A woman’s decision to have an abortion often stems from a very real and legitimate fear that she will not be able to care for a child. Pro-life supporters and activists spend incredibly large sums to take away that decision, but do not provide the equivalent practical support women need to have a baby. Is that really a fight for life? Or just a fight for a long sought-after political goal? It’s time the pro-life movement focuses its resources more on helping women and babies, not gaining legislative power that ultimately will do little to protect the unborn.’

x x x

@KNOWITALL is it really any more preposterous than using God to justify opposing abortion or using God to justify going to war or using God to justify slavery or racism or, well, pretty near anything? I don’t think so.

@shrubbery If think a lot of pro-life people focus on how the person should not be pregnant in the first place and now that girl needs to live with the consequences. Like a punishment or learning lesson. My dad used to think like that. I would never call him a pro-life person, even back when he thought that way, but he has come around in the last ten years or so to be more in favor of abortion.

I think if their frame of mind is “suck it up and live with what you did,” there isn’t much focus on helping them. Plus, there is that whole overall idea by the people suually pro-life that they are anti-taxation and social services in general.

I’m late to this discussion, but I think abortion should remain legal, and I would be willing to walk on Washington or participate in whatever in order to help it remain so. I don’t vote for candidates who are “pro life.” I think people who are pro life should first adopt some foster children.

This is an issue where I disagree with many MRA’s. It is the women’s body, and she is the one who will have to endure the pain of labor, not to mention being the likely one taking care of the kid. From what I’ve read about the topic the fetus does not become sentient until about 26 weeks into the pregnancy.

I’m not enthusiastic about abortion, and it is such a shame that men and women aren’t more responsible when having sex. Sex comes with a great deal of responsibility, and bringing a baby into the world that may not be properly cared for is something that more people should think about rather than simply thinking about themselves and their pleasure, whether it’s the man or woman. In cases of rape and incest I especially support abortion rights.

@livelaughlove21 @rojo Well put.
I was well aware that the first thing that comes to mind when two people get at it isn’t always “Let’s have children!”. I was just using that to ask the question.

@JLeslie It’s a needless trauma for both the baby and the mother, so prevention is the best-case scenario which is why the father-children promises, rings, etc…are so popular.

I know jellies tend to downplay the negative affects of abortion so I won’t get into all that again, but they exist.

@KNOWITALL Ask our jellies who have had abortions if it was a trauma? Most jellies sailed through the whole thing and were relieved afterwards. I do have a friend who very much regrets the abortion she had, but she never wanted to do the abortion, but was basically forced by her parents. She wasn’t a minor, but they just pushed her into it. Still, the procedure was reatively easy.

I hate the promise rings, but I know some people think they are a great thing. I think it is pretty icky to promise my father my virginity, and it sets up children to not talk about sex with their parents if it does happen before marriage. It sets up a dissapproving environment between the child and parent in my opinion, where the child loses the people s/he can trust most for guidance, real information, and advice.

@JLeslie I know there are women who have ‘good’ experience with abortion, some even go back again and again. I get it, and I knew you’d downplay the negatives, again.

If you think promise rings and what they stand for are ‘icky’, you will never understand the pov from people like me.

@KNOWITALL I agree that POV is beyond me on that particular subject, except to say that I believe the people who think it is a good thing are genuine in their strong feelings of why they think it is a good idea.

I wonder if it is true that girls with promise rings are less likely to talk to their parents about sex? Or, less likely to seek out information from trustworthy sources like their doctors or planned parenthood. It would be interesting to know. If it was shown that girls who promise are more likely to be at risk for STD’s and unwanted pregnancy would it change your mind? Like I said I don’t know if that is true or not, but I wonder if that sort of data would be compelling to you?

There was something on one of the news magazines (20/20 or something like that) about promise rings. The did a study that showed that girls who did the promise ring thing were more likely to engage in oral or anal sex because they think of sex as being vaginal sex. So to them, they were not breaking the promise by doing anal or oral.

Oh, good. Throw another layer of shame on a girl’s first time. That will ensure she gets all of her questions about birth control, STDs and emotional weight taken care of before she makes her choice whether to sleep with that cute boy in Marching Band.

@JLeslie I thought so, it’s really more a religious thing than secular.
I can’t find statistics either unfortunately. Sure, I’d look at that, but it’s not really me who is your target audience since I have no kids and am 41 yrs old- lol

@Seek_Kolinahr Like sleeping with the boy and getting pregnant will reduce her shame? This is the internet age, she can look up anything she wants and find all the answers.

That is idiotic.

If her parents were parents, instead of preachers, they could teach the girl about the responsibilities of sex, instead of just shaming her into shutting up about it.

@KNOWITALL that the internet exists as a source of information does not make it a good source, or at all ensure that teens can find their way to actual good sources that exist on it.

@all This is going nowhere and I’m bored with it. I don’t have kids by choice and lots of people are trending towards that now, so it’s really not rocket-science. Peace out and good luck.

According to the CDC statistics reported on their website, 227 are terminated for every 1,000 live births, which is around 18.5% (of 1,227 pregnancies).
I’d say there are enough babies in the world. Why add 18.5% more babies that aren’t wanted that will not have equal opportunity? There was a reason they weren’t wanted in the first place. That reason will no doubt be a heavy contributing factor to his/her growth and development, whether the reason was financial, disease prevention, hatred between the parents, age at time of pregnancy, whatever. Any couple that chooses abortion knows why it is the best thing to do. Stay out of it. Your religion doesn’t make you right when there are hundreds of religions.
As far as sex education goes, well, I’m in my 30s. I cannot think of one sexual partner I’ve had, EVER, that hasn’t wanted to skip the condom at some point, and we’re all educated about the reasons why. That’s why it’s called passion. The heat of the moment. The bigger lesson to drive home is WILLPOWER.

@eno @livelaughlove21 @Seek_Kolinahr Any person fighting illegal immigration or welfare knows Hispanics and blacks don’t have abortions. All reports are inaccurate.

I am TOTALLY kidding, but my inner wanna-be stand up comedian couldn’t be controlled. Your conversation got pretty deep.

@GloPro Even though I am pro abortion that statistic is staggering to me. Although, we do need to consider that your stat is based on live births, which is completely different than if the stat as a ratio to total pregnancies since so many pregnancies miscarry anyway.

@JLeslie Good point, and I actually decided not to get that technical. The research also guesstimated that 50% of ALL pregnancies resulted in ‘spontaneous abortion,’ or miscarriage. In my % calculation it stated 227 abortions to every 1000 live births, not in 1000, so I added 227 an 1000 to get 1,227 pregnancies together before tallying the % of abortions. Very simple math would give me an actual intentional abortion rate of around 9.25%.

The highest category was teens aged 15–19 years, and the lowest was women in their 30s.