Why does the pro-abortion movement want to deny studying the effects of abortion on women's health?

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/de_solenni200403090920.asp

Interesting article, Jolly. I disagree with the obstetrician regarding "no negative influence". There have been studies linking abortions to higher incidence of breast cancer. It is thought that hormonal milieu associated with pregnancy activates some progenitor to breast cancer, which under normal circumstances would then be "turned off" with a normal delivery. With termination of pregnancy, however, it is thought that the progenitor remains in its semi-activated state and then at a later date, the breast tissue is stimulated by estrogen to go on to become cancerous.
This article represents a refreshing perspective on abortions that most have never considered.

Haven't there also been some studies involving breast cancer, with child-brearing women vs. non child-bearing women, with a higher incidence in those women without children?

I will say from the beginning that my feelings about abortion differ from situation to situation. While I have spent a significant amount of time in feminist circles, I have never encountered mention of the "pro-abortion movement" that Jolly cites. Edify me, Jolly. Who are these people? Who thinks of abortion in such a nonconflictedly positive light?

Then, following his assertion that women who have had abortions encounter a hormonal hoopla that places them at higher risk of developing breast cancer, John applauds the article for providing a "refreshing perspective on abortions that some have never considered." John, I find your comments chilling.

The article quotes a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice saying that women "can learn from that experience" of abortion. My sense is that this comment was reported badly out of context. Women can learn from being in car accidents, too. Does this make either abortions or accidents anything less than regretable or, in some cases, tragic? I have a hard time imagining a woman so concrete that she would need to undergo an abortion to understand that her action was ending the possibility of a new life.

I was glad to read that the "pro-life" movement is reaching out to women who have had abortions. I fervently hope that this outreach confers the promise that women with unwanted pregnancies will receive fiscal and medical support to provide good lives for any future unplanned children, state of the art contraceptive counseling and, if indicated, professional psychotherapy to work through what must for many be the most traumatic experience of their lives.

Pro-abortion = Pro-choice.

If one advocates abortion, then I figure that makes one an advocate of the position.

However, Lucy, you made the same mistake as the people cited in the article. If abortion has a deleterious medical effect, shouldn't the patient be informed of that fact before the procedure?

When getting consent for any other procedure, we inform a patient about the problems that can occur, so why is abortion different?

Jolly,

Perhaps I've lived a sheltered life, but I do not know of one single person who "advocates" abortion across all circumstances! Additionally, why shouldn't a woman considering abortion or any other surgical procedure be informed of the risks? Does anyone believe that she shouldn't?

Go back and read the article, you are still missing the story.

There is a possibility, a distinct possibility, that having an abortion carries more medical risk than previously thought. The Senator wants to pursue that line of thinking with hard facts and research.

There are a group of people who do not wish for him to do so, for political reasons.

Now granted, the Senator is strongly pro-life, but does that negate his point?

"chilling"? Come on Lucy. Why is it chilling? Because I'm a doctor? What do you know about the medical procedure, "dilatation and curettage", anyway? How many have you assisted in?
Wouldn't you want to know that if you undergo an abortion, you may have an increase chance of developing breast cancer?
Jolly, you are correct. Here are some of the factors which INCREASE your chances of developing breast cancer:
Early menarche(menstruation)
late menopause
fewer/later pregnancies(after age 30)
NOT breast feeding
?number of abortions

Lucy, women who come into the office for "termination-of-pregnancy" counselling are not typically informed of the MEDICAL risks of such a procedure other than post-op bleeding, infection of the uterus(endometritis), and psychological trauma.
You are missing the point of the article.

THere is plenty of research about the effects of abortions on a woman's health. Senator Brownback's call for for more research was clearly politically motivated.

Good posts Lucy (who certainly DID get the point!)

You both are missing the point. Sure there is research on the effects of abortion, but is that information getting to the women who undergo abortions? I'll answer it for you, my dearest Kathy, NO, NO, NO, it is not!!

Senator Brownback is a republican. We elected him here in Kansas. He is definitely a politician and not extraordinarily conservative. To put things in perspective. Here in Kansas we have a lot of controversy surrounding a late term abortion clinic. I won't even go into it.

It certainly could be said his motivation was political. That's his job. Maybe he as a problem with the brain sucker. Who knows?

Quoting John Wayne in Bike Jake...."Not hardly...."

jf

All right, Johnny M, (small tweak intended) 'fess up. Your concerns about the risks of abortion reflect a wish, somewhere deep in your soul, that the government or some other power (like an M.D.) be required to scare the bejesus out of women undergoing abortions. I can respect your wish to curtail abortion as a means of contraception. But verbally informing a patient that she might be at some higher but unknown level of risk for breast cancer somewhere down the road is going to go in one ear and out the other. If the findings of robust research ever support your conjecture that abortion increases a woman's risk of developing breast cancer, that information (including the level of the risk) needs to be shared and appropriate counselling made available.

I have really respected some of your posts (like the one about car seats for kids) because they reflect your concern and experience as an emergency medicine physician. But in this thread you appear to be mixing values with pragmatics and I find that to be annoying and inefficacious.

thank you, doctor, for that load of b.s. women get pregnant all the time and then miscarry, often without even knowing it. from what you have written, they would therefore be at greater risk for breast cancer.

abortion may have risks, but the medical risks no where near approach the risks women face if they carry a baby to term. the pregnancy or the birth itself could kill them.

what you wrote is very disturbing, i agree with lucy, because, yes, it came from an MD, and it is irresponsibly out of context.

.....not as irresponsible as delegating that a populace be uninformed for political gain.

We have brains..

The point IS, we are quite well informed. There's plenty of research out there. The point IS, the thrust of this so-called call for researach is no doubt a thinly veiled attempt to find some data to show the detrimental effect of abortion to women, not in attempt to protect women, but rather to add a quiver to the anti-choice/anti-women crowd. WE (as in women) don't need some right-wing religious zealot from Kansas (ignore the man behind the curtain!) legislating on a federal level what ought and ought not be researched in this arena.

Tell that to the 14 year old girl who just discovered that she's pregnant. Tell her she should already be quite well informed and that you don't need to disclose any potential complications because she should simply know better.

While I personally have never had an abortion, (surprise surprise!) and so cannot say whether the doctor performing the procedure is informing his/her patients of potential complications, I find it impossible to believe that there is a doctor anywhere in the United States whose insurance company does not demand he inform his patients of such risks and requires them to sign some type of release form.

If this is not happening, all of the hoopla from the medical community and the medical insurance industry about unjustified malpractice lawsuits is nothing but hogwash. If these doctors are not even taking the most basic steps to protect themselves against unjustified lawsuits -- making sure the patient consents to and understands the potential risks of any medical procedure -- then they cannot be that worried about them.

But they are worried about them, which is why every person I know who has any sort of medical procedures, particularly an invasive one, signs a declaration that they have been advised and understand the possible risk.

It simply is not credible that this is not being done by doctors performing abortions.

There have been enough studies financed by the government on the effects of abortion on women. Hell, I have read such findings over and over again -- the physical risks, the emotional risks, the psychological risks. I also know of no one who would argue there are no such risks or there are no effects from this or any other medical procedure.

If the prolife movement wants more studies, then let them finance the studies themselves. I am tired of my tax monies being used for the same thing over and over again. This may be just a little thing, but I find pork barrel politics really annoying -- and that is all this is.

Zymtil, all I have to say to your comment is, have you experienced it?

Out of context I'd ask why would you ever vote Democratic JA... talk about tax burdens

In context re :"There have been enough studies financed by the government on the effects of abortion on women." Who are you to say JA?... You say you've read plenty on the subject but written by whom... from my vantage point you seem to only read liberal fodder.

The millions of women who have had abortions are still young... We have no idea whether Cancer will strike them in their golden years.

No, I've never had an abortion (it doesn't work that way). I don't know why you'd be mad about my comment, after all, it's all about full disclosure.

However, I have been involved (not sexually) with several women/younge girls who have considered an abortion. Let me tell you, it's a tough situation to be involved in. First off, primarily all I was able to do was to just "be there" for moral support. Second, I could offer a few considerations that needed to be taken into account. Under current law, it was never my responsiblity to tell someone what to do. But, when the medical community ignores potential health risks (under the guise that the procedure in question is common practice), then something needs to be done. It's all about full disclosure.

Let me take an example that "anti-lifers" like to use: a younge girl is raped in a dark alley, a few weeks later she discovers she is pregnant. What kind of condition is she in to be able to research potential health risks? Do you really think she will be in the mood to research possible complications?

I certainly wouldn't call Sam Brownback... - he'd have us on a fiscal diet of bread and water, not bread and wine.... a religious zealot. Maybe you're confusing him with Pat Roberts.

Zymtil,

It's a pretty weird place we've gotten ourselves into when kids like you are so knowledgable about the working of the world and the human heart and old foggies that should know better haven't got a clue about nothin'.

There's some real hope for the future here.

"The day before the abortion, my mom had to go to the clinic and sign some papers with me since she couldn't be there the day of. The nurses were very friendly, I suppose that's how they sell their abortions.

I was put in this room, and given a gown. The nurse coldly told me to put on the gown, and leave my socks on. Everyone was so nice to me the day before, why was everyone being so rude to me now? I knew I didn't want to go through with it. The room looked like an ordinary doctors office room. Except for all of the machines in the corner covered with sheets.

Soon, a nurse dressed in green scrubs, and an older doctor came into the room. He introduced himself quickly and rudely, and instructed me to place my feet in the stirrups. I can remember looking up at the ceiling on the ceiling there was a picture of a monkey, and next to the money the phrase, "An apple a day, keeps the doctor away". I couldn't believe that was up there! Next thing I knew - I was being injected with some form of anesthesia. I became groggy but was instantly awake as soon as the doctor began the procedure. I remember thinking that I was going to die.

I had never experienced so much pain in my life, and I just cried, begging him to stop. I started jerking, trying to get away from him, but the nurse kept telling me to calm down, or I would hurt myself. I laid there and cried."

---

"I found a place called The Door off of 14th Street near Union Square, and one of the counselors told me that in my situation, abortion would be the best way. I went by train to King's County Hospital in Brooklyn. They said I looked more than 24 weeks, but I said no, I was. When the doctor injected the saline near my belly button, I knew at that point that I had done something so terribly wrong. I was in so much pain I climbed over the railings of my bed, took the I.V. pole and went into the bathroom in the hall, where I had seen a steel bathtub. I somehow thought the pain might go away if I took a bath."

---

"As I walked into the abortion clinic in the Washington D.C. hospital, I was immediately given a valium to calm me and probably to keep me from backing out. My $750 was taken from me right away and I could not get it back no matter what. In the waiting room there were at least 20 other women. One was 8 months pregnant and said she waited this long to save up enough money.

I thought to myself that that was too late to have an abortion. I was convinced that at 16 weeks, it was only tissue right now. A sonogram was given, but I was not allowed to look at it. I then had to have a psychological evaluation to make sure I was in good mind to go through with it. It took 5 minutes and even though I was crying and shaking, they said I was okay. When they saw that I might back out, they were like salespeople trying to make a sale. Then, it was time.

I was given no anesthetic and was strapped down to the bed. I then went through the most traumatic and painful experience I have ever had. I screamed uncontrollably and the nurses were screaming at me to "shut-up". If I moved, my cervix and uterus would be destroyed. I could feel pools of warm blood oozing down my thighs and the suction was so powerful that it felt like my entire insides were being pulled out. When I begged them to stop and asked if it was over, they replied, "we have to make sure all the parts are here". Parts?

I thought this was "tissue"? I pushed a nurse out of the way and there I saw, my baby boy in pieces. There were body parts just tossed in a beaker. They quickly hid the evidence from me and sent me to recovery. The room had a few other girls and we were all in the fetal position, weeping."

---

"They [the women] are never allowed to look at the ultrasound because we knew that if they so much as heard the heart beat, they wouldn't want to have an abortion." Dr. Randall

---

"If a woman we were counseling expressed doubts about having an abortion, we would say whatever was necessary to persuade her to abort immediately." Judy W., former office manager of the second largest abortion clinic in El Paso, Texas

---

"In my facilities, I always gave option counseling. Of course you make the abortion the most appealing. I told them about adoption and about foster care and about [when there was welfare] assistance. The typical way it would go is, "Well, you know you can place your baby out for adoption." But then, in the second breath you would say, "That's an option available to you, but you also have to realize that there's going to be a baby of yours out here somewhere in the world you will never see again. At least with abortion you know what's happening. You can go on with your life...The longer I was in it, the less I cared, so I really didn't really care what my conscience said. My conscience was totally numb anyway. But what it did do was public relations-wise. You were able, when a reporter or TV crew came, to pull out a packet of information for the patients to read and they received it. So what can anybody say? Publicly it looked good -- in reality it was another tool that was used to force a woman into abortion. It's typical -- I would give them an option and then shoot it down. The only option you didn't shoot down, obviously, was abortion." Former clinic owner Eric Harrah

---

"We tried to avoid the women seeing them [the fetuses] They always wanted to know the sex, but we lied and said it was too early to tell. It's better for the women to think of the fetus as an 'it.'" Abortion clinic worker Norma Eidelman

---

"The counselor at our clinic would cry with the girls at the drop of a hat. She would find their weakness and work on it. The women were never given any alternatives. They were told how much trouble it is to have a baby." former abortion worker Debra Harry

---

There are thousands upon thousands of stories just like this and worse. It's apparent that full disclosure with respect to abortions is not necessarily the rule. This also speaks to pique's doubt as to the "pro-abortion" label.

another load of b.s. gryphon, where exactly did you find this stuff? it looks like it was written by a bunch of radical anti-abortion activists to me. it is fiction. i have accompanied friends to these clinics and their experiences were nothing like what you describe.

and it wasn't me who said anything about a "pro-abortion" label. though i do agree with whoever said it that nobody is pro-abortion.

So you are saying the things I reprinted above are lies?

Sorry about the pro-abortion thing. I thought it was you. You are right, it was lucy-in-the-sky. I apologize. My mistake.

I'll relate a quick story, one very close to my heart:
At one point in her life, my mother, was a nurse, one of those that come to your house and stay (work) for eight hours a day kind of nurses. One of her last patients was a baby girl (less than a year old). Her name was "Destiny". One may wonder how she aquired that name. I'll tell you how. Shortly after the mother became pregnant the doctor informed her that an abortion would be the only thing that would save her life[/b], and that the baby would die either way. The procedure took place but failed, that's right, it did not work. I'm not sure if they attempted the procedure again, between the first attempt and the attempt that was made when she went into labor.

When she went into labor, the doctors once again believed that the only way either of them would make it out alive would be to attempt another abortion. This second attempt was not successful. The baby was born, both the mother and baby survived. However, the baby was severly tramatized and unable to function correctly (hence the need for a hospice nurse). In the end, they sued the doctor, I'm not sure what the outcome of the case was/will be.

And you[/b] want to tell me that we don't need to investigate the potential problems?

Excuse me, but what medical school did you graduate from?