Skip to content

Restricting Abortion Does Not Cut Abortion Rate

October 13, 2009

Though this type of data has been reported on before,  it is important to underscore the latest such evidence that stricter abortion regulations does not mean fewer abortions.  In other words there needs to be more thinking ‘outside the box’ if society wants to reduce the number of abortions.  Ranting about the need for more regulations, or implementing harsher restrictions will not provide fewer abortions.  Even ‘pro-life’ voices are starting to recognize that fact.  That can be called progress on this issue that has raged for far too long.  Now let us provide more access to contraception, and have it paid for by the government.   If conservatives are serious about working to lower the abortion rates, then they have to attach themselves to ideas that work.  Providing  free contraception with health plans makes so much sense in a world that is over-crowded.  Granted this idea of free contraceptives runs counter to many in the conservative movement that wishes to stigmatize sex.  But if they go down that road of less access to contraceptives they create the need for more abortions…oh what does a right-winger do?

Restricting the availability of legal abortion does not appear to reduce the number of women trying to end unwanted pregnancies, a major report suggests.

The Guttmacher Institute’s survey found abortion occurs at roughly equal rates in regions where it is legal and regions where it is highly restricted.

It did note that improved access to contraception had cut the overall abortion rate over the last decade.

But unsafe abortions, primarily illegal, have remained almost static.

The survey of 197 countries carried out by the Guttmacher Institute – a pro-choice reproductive think tank – found there were 41.6m abortions in 2003, compared with 45.5 in 1995 – a drop which occurred despite population increases.

Nineteen countries had liberalised their abortion laws over the ten years studied, compared with tighter restrictions in just three.

But despite the general trend towards liberalisation, some 40% of the world’s women live amid tight restrictions.

Josephine Quintavalle of the pro-life Comment on Reproductive Ethics said stopping women falling pregnant in the first place was an area where minds could meet.

“Abortion – back street or front street – is not the answer. Ensuring women have the means to end their pregnancies is not liberating them – they should be able to make real choices before they fall pregnant in the first place,” she said.

“But that shouldn’t necessarily mean taking pills everyday. There will always be problems with access and cost, particularly in countries where people struggle just to buy food.

“What we need is to better understand our fertility – if there are just 24 fertile hours in a month, we need to work out a cheap, effective way for women to know when they can fall pregnant. That would be freedom, and that’s what we should aim for.”

One Comment
  1. Angelo Garcia permalink
    November 8, 2009 12:21 PM

    Very logical and excellent artical stating what should be obvious to any rational mind. However in the words of George Orwell:
    In a time of deceit
    Telling the truth is a revolutionary act!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: