The Centers for Disease Control released its annual Abortion Surveillance – United States, 2009 report last week.
First came the encouraging news that the number of abortions dropped in 2009 by 5% from 2008, to 784,507, “representing the largest single year decrease for the entire period of analysis,” this past decade.
While the death toll was still a staggering three-quarters of a million babies, nevertheless this was the lowest number of abortions reported since the CDC began using its current tracking model in 2000 (which excludes nonreporting states Alaska, California, Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, and West Virginia), the number on the right. Click to enlarge…
Comparing the current number of legal abortions with those in years past is difficult since states reporting have varied. For instance, between 1995-1999, states refusing to report were Alaska, California, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma. This is a fewer number of states than most recently, which would make the current number appear even more promising…
And for the sake of interest, here are the CDC stats from 1973 to 1998, when supposedly all states were reporting…
I’m no statistician, but it seems to me the best way to analyze what is really happening is by viewing the ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years) and the rate (number of abortions per 1,000 live births). We also have to bear in mind the U.S. population has increased by 1/3 since abortion was legalized, from 204 million in 1970 to 308 million in 2010. So here are the ratios and rates…
This would make it appear 2009 showed the lowest ratio and rate of abortion since it was made legal (discounting 1973, which excluded one month, and during which time there was a learning curve and certainly fewer abortion mills).
The CDC attributes the incidence of abortion to these factors:
… the availability of abortion providers; state regulations, such as mandatory waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and legal restrictions on abortion providers; increasing acceptance of nonmarital childbearing; shifts in the racial/ethnic composition of the U.S. population; and changes in the economy and the resulting impact on fertility preferences and access to health-care services, including contraception.
The CDC touts increasing the availability of contraceptives and “[r]emoving cost as one barrier,” i.e., the Obamacare trajectory of making birth control pills available free.
But this brings other woes, such as the increased risk of various forms of cancer, since the birth control pill is a Group I carcinogenic, in the same category as mustard gas, tobacco, and asbestos. And that’s just the tip of the unhealthy iceberg.
Then there is the growing epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases, which “startled” even a Daily Kos writer, and which the Pill only exacerbates.
That Daily Kos writer, DSC on the Plateau, decried parents “who want to keep their children STUPID and who would rather risk their lives than give them life saving information,” i.e., those of us promoting abstinence education.
But has DSC, a self-described “liberal feminist,” actually objectively studied the issue? It doesn’t sound like it. No one who has, particularly a feminist, could in good conscience recommend the birth control pill for women.
The abstinence/be faithful message is the only proven method to prevent all of the aforementioned woes – unwanted pregnancies, STDs, cancers, strokes – and even broken homes.