Suck it up honey, this Harvard study says you are fine!

Hello!

Thanks for the link recognition. I do want to say that I don't begrudge Mr. Heidelberger for his comment policy. His blog. His rules. He's let a few of my comments by, and so I thought that I might be able to contribute to that conversation.

What I wanted to suggest over there, though, was that common sense seems to dictate that women who are pregnant undergo massive hormone changes throughout pregnancy. Now, when that pregnancy ends - whether through birth, abortion, or miscarriage - a woman's body will begin to return to it's "normal" hormone balance. It seems strange to me that people want to say that women can be adversely affected by hormone and chemical levels if their pregnancies end with birth or miscarriage, but that women do not experience adverse affects if her pregnancy ends in abortion.

And while we're on the topic of abortion, I would like to ask which form of abortion Mr. Heidelberger and other pro-choicers would chose for their wives, daughters, or girlfriends? A suction aspiration? A dilation and curettage? A dilation and evacuation? A saline abortion? A partial birth abortion? Because when we talk about pro-choice, we're not talking about choosing between birth and abortion. We're talking about choosing between birth and a myriad of ways to artificially end a pregnancy. Pro-choicers should at least have the courage of their convictions to detail which abortion they'd choose for themselves or their friends and families.

Finally, there's an interesting bit of feminist critique that suggests the certain powerful, privileged voices determine what is legitimate and illegitimate female expression. That pattern  is repeated when it comes to post-abortion trauma. Legitimate female expression post abortion - as determined by privileged men in the medical community- is, well, that she's fine with the abortion. Illegitimate female expression - as determined by those folks - is that she's upset that her body was again violated and that she's upset about the life lost.

Sorry to take over your comment section.

Fastidious

I ask nothing of my commenters that I do not ask of myself. I identify myself by name in every post on my own blog as well as on every comment on other blogs. It's not that hard. It's just a request for civil discourse. Introduce yourself, then fire away.

As I mentioned in the comment… I'm not in anyway upset that my comments were deleted. It's no big deal; it's your blog, and you get to set the rules!

I only posted because some of my previous comments have been allowed. Thought I could sneak a few more in.

Fastidious
http://www.fastidious.wordpress.com

Cory, Steve, et al:

There are a myriad number of "abortion" studies out there; many paid for by Guttmacher, and hence by Planned Parenthood, as well as independent studies. A study in New Zealand, which was published in January 2006, found a definite, measurable, causal relationship between abortion and emotional problems; including chemical dependency, depression and suicide/suicidal ideation. (This puts Judge Schreier's rule in the questionable zone). This study was published in a pediatric medical journal and it was conducted by a team whose leader is pro-choice and who apparently set out to prove once and for all that there was NO relationship between abortion and post-abortive emotional difficulties. Instead, he proved to himself, and to the pediatric medical community, that there is a definite causal relationship. Hmmm.

Here is a synopsis of the study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16405636

Of course, you never hear an intelligent discourse on this study in pro-choice circles, and those of us who value all life get pooh-poohed when we bring these very legitimate scientific studies up.

By the way; who paid for the Harvard study, Cory? These studies are ALWAYS subsidized by an outside donor. Most of the time it is a drug company or group like Planned Parenthood (Guttmacher) which commissions the study.

Cory/Steve:
More scientific study related information. Site cited at bottom:

A study published in the Southern Medical Journal observed that there are higher death rates association with women who have abortion, and that these higher death rates persist over time and across socioeconomic boundaries.[38]

In England, the "Royal College of Psychiatrists says women should not be allowed to have an abortion until they are counselled on the possible risk to their mental health." The medical royal college warned that women who have abortions may be at risk of mental health problems.[39]

A New Zealand study found that abortion in young women may be associated with increased risks of mental health problems.[40] The researcher in this study, who was not pro-life, was shaken by the study and had to go to four journals before he could find one who would publish it. [41]

The study concludes with the following statement:
“ These findings are inconsistent with the current consensus on the psychological effects of abortion. In particular, in its 2005 statement on abortion, the American Psychological Association concluded that “well-designed studies of psychological responses following abortion have consistently shown that risk of psychological harm is low…the percentage of women who experience clinically relevant distress is small and appears to be no greater than in general samples of women of reproductive age” (American Psychological Association, 2005). This relatively strong conclusion about the absence of harm from abortion was based on a relatively small number of studies which had one or more of the following limitations: a) absence of comprehensive assessment of mental disorders; b) lack of comparison groups; and c) limited statistical controls. Furthermore, the statement appears to disregard the findings of a number of studies that had claimed to show negative effects for abortion (Cougle et al., 2003; Gissler et al., 1996; Reardon & Cougle, 2002). [42] ”

Professor David Fergusson, lead author of the New Zealand study stated:
“ It borders on scandalous that one of the most common surgical procedures performed on young women is so poorly researched and evaluated. If this were Prozac or Vioxx, reports of associated harm would be taken much more seriously with more careful research and monitoring procedures." [43] ”

Another study published in the OB/GYN Survey detailed long-term physical and psychological health consequences of induced abortions.[44]

Suicide rates among women who had abortions are six times higher than women who gave birth in the prior year.[45] Overall, deaths from suicide, homicide and accidents were 248% higher after an abortion, as found by a 13-year study in Finland of its entire population.[46]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Abortion

Amy, have you considered the possibility that maybe abortion causes emotional problems in New Zealand but not in USA? That's a joke. But as you said, there are always studies that get the wrong answer. If you looked hard enough you could find studies–good ones–that show smoking PREVENTS lung cancer. This is called statistical noise.

… the rest has been deleted  SH

I've been systematically aborting the comments from Zombie. He makes death threats and is to be ignored and marginalized. I thought to let a fragment of the above comment through because of his line "statistical noise."

There you have it - post-abortive women who report abortion hurt them are merely statistical noise.

[…] At some point in that argument, I jumped in.  (BTW, much of my comments here are cut from my response here.) […]