I really like that.

A woman isn't a box. You do realize that, right? Women are not objects; we're people.

Tp, it's an analogy (the box would be analogous to the womb, not the woman). No one thinks a woman is a box. The point is that if there is a chance that a baby exists inside of her, why would you take the chance of killing? Would you do it if babies were in boxes and not wombs?

Oops correction:
Would you crush the box if a baby was *possibly* in a box?

Would you crush the box if a baby was *possibly* in a box?

Bethany, depends on why the box should be crushed in the first place.

Doug

So what would be a good reason, in your opinion, Doug, to crush a box if you have knowledge that the box could hold a baby?

What would be a good reason for another person to crush a box that could possibly contain you?

Doug, so you're saying there are good reasons for crushing a box with a baby in it?

I personally like the box analogy...cause the box can never be restored to its original state after it has crushed the baby..it always looks crumpled in some way. Kind of like the women who are emotionally/physically damaged by abortions.

Elizabeth,
Excellent analogy!!!

:)

Hi Elizabeth,

Great point. Once you've aborted, you can't go back and change you're mind, or go back and have a re-do. Abortion in a final.

I find it interesting that none of the PCer's talk about the founding mother's of feminism, or that abortion split the feminist movement in the 1960's. They don't want anyone to know. Real Feminists are pro-life!

Here are some quotes:

Susan B. Anthony
In her publication The Revolution, was written:

"Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!"
Abortion was referred to as "child murder."
The Revolution, 4(1):4 July 8, 1869

Elizabeth Cady Stanton
She classified abortion as a form of "infanticide."
The Revolution, 1(5):1, February 5, 1868

"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."
Letter to Julia Ward Howe, October 16, 1873, recorded in Howe's diary at Harvard University Library

Emma Goldman
"The custom of procuring abortions has reached such appalling proportions in America as to be beyond belief...So great is the misery of the working classes that seventeen abortions are committed in every one hundred pregnancies."
Mother Earth, 1911

Mattie Brinkerhoff
"When a man steals to satisfy hunger, we may safely conclude that there is something wrong in society - so when a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is an evidence that either by education or circumstances she has been greatly wronged."
The Revolution, 4(9):138-9 September 2, 1869

Victoria Woodhull
The first female presidential candidate was a strong opponent of abortion.

"The rights of children as individuals begin while yet they remain the foetus."
Woodhull's and Claflin's Weekly 2(6):4 December 24, 1870

"Every woman knows that if she were free, she would never bear an unwished-for child, nor think of murdering one before its birth."
Wheeling, West Virginia Evening Standard, November 17, 1875

Sarah Norton
"Child murderers practice their profession without let or hindrance, and open infant butcheries unquestioned...Is there no remedy for all this ante-natal child murder?...Perhaps there will come a time when...an unmarried mother will not be despised because of her motherhood...and when the right of the unborn to be born will not be denied or interfered with."
Woodhull's and Claffin's Weekly, November 19, 1870

We need to re-educate our kids about real feminism, not pro-death, anti-male, nothing but woman power feminism. It is so destructive. Ultimately women will cause our own demise through abortion.

So what would be a good reason, in your opinion, Doug, to crush a box if you have knowledge that the box could hold a baby?

Bethany, none immediately comes to mind, and just how far does the hypothetical go? If it's just a "maybe" as far as a baby being there, and there's a guy holding a gun to a baby's head, then I'd pick the maybe over the sure thing. Farfetched, certainly, but the example is already far different from it being a pregnant woman rather than a box.
......

What would be a good reason for another person to crush a box that could possibly contain you?

You'd have to ask them - good question. Maybe I really made them mad on a message board?

Doug

"...depends on why the box should be crushed in the first place."

Doug

+++++++++++++++

That's pretty frigid, Doug.

Tara, thank you for an excellent post!

Bethany, none immediately comes to mind, and just how far does the hypothetical go? If it's just a "maybe" as far as a baby being there, and there's a guy holding a gun to a baby's head, then I'd pick the maybe over the sure thing. Farfetched, certainly, but the example is already far different from it being a pregnant woman rather than a box.

No, the hypothetical does not go that far, because there would already be an exception for the life of the mother if we were to make abortion illegal.

But, it is actually interesting to note that even in your own perception of the hypothetical situation, the only good enough reason to allow a possible baby to be crushed is in order to save another's life. Not because someone wants to use the box for something else, etc.

Why is that not the case with abortion?

So I ask again: What reason, in your opinion, is good enough to allow a baby, which might possibly be in a box, to be crushed inside that box?

but the example is already far different from it being a pregnant woman rather than a box.

The box is analogous to the womb, not the woman.

Starts out as a great message against domestic violence than takes a turn into a gobldy gook. If you think you might be pregnant, don't crush your uterous because if there is any chance that you are pregnant, there is baby in your 'box'? Whatever!

"...depends on why the box should be crushed in the first place."

Carder: That's pretty frigid, Doug.

So you say, but it's a straight answer to her question.

But, it is actually interesting to note that even in your own perception of the hypothetical situation, the only good enough reason to allow a possible baby to be crushed is in order to save another's life. Not because someone wants to use the box for something else, etc.

Bethany, I agree that it's interesting and it was a fair question. Somebody wanting to "use a box for something else," and I guess having to crush it for that, is a far cry from a pregnant woman. Do we really need to have the box crushed? Probably not. Do we really need to force the woman to remain pregnant against her will? I say of course not, and though you and others may disagree, at the least it's a much different situation.
......

Why is that not the case with abortion?

So I ask again: What reason, in your opinion, is good enough to allow a baby, which might possibly be in a box, to be crushed inside that box?

In the normal course of events (outside of extreme examples), I see no reasons that are good enough. The box does not have rights, cares, emotions, desires, etc., as do pregnant women.
......

The box is analogous to the womb, not the woman.

Then outside of our wild and crazy examples, I see no reason why somebody else should crush the box, and I see no reason why somebody else should tell the woman what to do with her womb.

Doug

DOUG, ABORTION IS MURDER!!!!

Doug aka./broken record............A woman HAS control over her womb before sex. That's it!!!

A woman HAS control over her womb before sex. That's it!

No, Heather, afterwards as well.

No, Heather, afterwards as well.

Not if a hole is poked in it, or if her bowels are pulled through the hole...or if the cervix is weakened, or punctured, or if she becomes infertile as a result of her abortion. She isn't always in control.

P.S. The cervix is always weakened by abortion. There are variations as to how much it weakens the cervix, but there is always a weakening of some extent- the cervix isn't meant to be opened unnaturally like that.

(This is why instead of choosing to have a D & C when I found out I was going to miscarry, I chose natural miscarriage. I wanted to ensure that future pregnancies would have a chance)

I think the clip needs refinement. It draws an uneven parallel to abortion, but if they want to get some sort of message across, I suppose they're on the right track. It just doesn't seem like it strikes the right chord.

Heather, do you ever have anything constructive to say?

Carder: That's pretty frigid, Doug.

So you say, but it's a straight answer to her question.

**********

Which is why it makes it so frigid.

Great video.

"...depends on why the box should be crushed in the first place."

Carder: That's pretty frigid, Doug.

"So you say, but it's a straight answer to her question."

Which is why it makes it so frigid.

Well, it is not correct to say that circumstances and motivations have no meaning to people, and - heck, winter is coming anyway.

Well, thank goodnes abortion is legal so we don't have to worry about finding babies in cardboard boxes, dumpsters and garbage cans as often as we would if it was illegal!!

Besides, if I thought a baby might be in some box I would open the damn box and let the baby out!

Bethany, abortion does not cause risk to future pregnancies.

Also, Bethany, childbirth damages the cervix more than abortion does.

I can examine your cervix and make a pretty good estimate how many kids you've had by the residual damage to the cervix.

Bethany, abortion does not cause risk to future pregnancies.

Yes it can, SOMG.

"Extensive scarring of the uterus may occur after over-aggressive scraping during D & C, leading to a condition called Asherman's syndrome. The major symptoms of Asherman's syndrome are light or absent menstrual periods, infertility, and recurrent miscarriages. Scar tissue can be removed with surgery in most women, although approximately 20–30% of women will remain infertile after treatment. "
http://www.surgeryencyclopedia.com/Ce-Fi/Dilatation-and-Curettage.html

Asherman's Syndrome is an acquired uterine's related disease which characterized by the formation of adhesions (scar tissue) in the women's uterus. Asherman's syndrome is the presence of intrauterine adhesions that typically occur as a result of scar formation after uterine surgery, especially after a dilatation and curettage ( D&C ). The adhesions may cause amenorrhea and/or infertility.ashermans-syndrome stands for Dilatation and Curettage. This is a surgical procedure that involves dilating the cervical canal, by enlarging the opening of the uterus. Once the cervix is dilated, the surgeon uses a spoon shaped instrument – called a curette – to scrape the walls of the uterus.
Symptoms of Ashermans Syndrome

Ashermans-syndrome's patients have scanty or absent periods (amenorrhea) but some have normal periods. Some patients have no periods but feel pain at the time each month that their period would normally arrive. This pain may indicate that menstruation is occuring but the blood cannot exit the uterus because the cervix is blocked by adhesions. Recurrent miscarriage and infertility could also be considered as symptoms. Symptoms may be related to several conditions and are more likely to indicate Asherman's syndrome if they occur suddenly after a D&C or other uterine surgery.

* No menstrual flow (amenorrhea) or decreased menstrual flow
* Infertility
* Recurrent miscarriages

Causes of Ashermans Syndrome

Ashermans-syndrome may be more likely to happen after a pregnancy-related D&C or if an infection is present in the uterus during the time of the procedure. Asherman's syndrome can also occur after other types of uterine surgery. A severe pelvic infection unrelated to surgery may also lead to Asherman's syndrome.some causes are include:

* Surgical scraping.
* Cleaning of the uterine wall
* sporadic inflamation of mucous membranes lining the uterus.
* Endometritis caused by tuberculosis or certain other infectious disease.
http://www.women-health-guide.com/ashermans-syndrome.htm

The first menstrual period after a D&C may be lighter but generally periods become heavier again. Some women do find that a D&C helps but it is hard to know whether this is because of the operation or is a coincidence. General anesthetic carries some risks and with a D&C there is also a slight risk of perforation of the uterus (a chance of between 1 in a 100 and 1 in a 1000) and possible weakening of the cervix. Even though rare, these must be considered since there is doubt about the value of the D&C in treating heavy bleeding.
http://www.womenshealthlondon.org.uk/leaflets/bleeding/bleedingsurgery.html

Uterine perforation — Uterine perforation occurs when one of the surgical instruments makes a hole in the uterus. It is more common when the procedure is done during pregnancy due to softening of the uterine wall.
http://forums.obgyn.net/womens-health/WHF.9910/0144.html

Cervical injury — Injuries to the cervix can occur during dilation or from trauma related to the curettage. Lacerations (cuts) to the cervix are managed with pressure to the area, application of medications that help stop bleeding, or in some cases, stitches in the cervix
http://patients.uptodate.com/topic.asp?file=wom_issu/7381

* A hole in the wall of the uterus (uterine perforation, rare), which most commonly happens during cervical dilation. Bleeding is usually minimal, and no repair is necessary. If bleeding is a concern, a laparoscopy (a procedure that uses a lighted viewing instrument) can be used to see whether it has stopped.
* Constant, excessive bleeding.
* Tissue remaining in the uterus (retained products of conception), usually causing recurring cramping abdominal pain and bleeding within a week of the procedure. However, prolonged bleeding sometimes does not occur until several weeks later.
* Blood clots. If the uterus doesn't contract to pass all of the tissue, the cervical opening can become blocked, preventing blood from leaving the uterus. The uterus becomes enlarged and tender, often with abdominal pain, cramping, and nausea. A repeat vacuum aspiration and medicine to stop bleeding are used to treat retained products of conception or blood clots.

Having two or more D&C abortions could create enough scar tissue to affect your future ability to become pregnant (infertility), as well as your risk of pregnancy complications. Such complications include implantation of a fertilized egg outside of the uterus (ectopic pregnancy), miscarriage, or growth of the placenta over the cervix (placenta previa).3
http://women.webmd.com/dilation-and-sharp-curettage-dc-for-abortion

Conclusions: Endomyometrial injury is frequent at termination or dilatation and curettage after miscarriage, but the relation to subsequent placenta accreta remains unclear. Women requiring a manual removal of the placenta were likely to have had a past history of termination and/or miscarriage.
http://jcp.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/58/3/273?ck=nck

Bethany, here's an exercise for you: Find out how common Asherman's Syndrome is after D&C.

Answer: Rare.

Find an exact number, Somg. Rare could mean 1 in 100, like the article specified above.

I notice you didn't comment on the perforation of the uterus, recurrant miscarriages in subsequent pregnancies, ectopic pregnancy, placenta previa, placenta accreta, etc ...

The following information was compiled by a pro-life site, but the references are valid. I have them noted the relevant ones at the bottom of this post.
http://www.nurturingnetwork.org/healthrisks.html

"Cervical damage is another leading cause of long term complications following abortion. According to one hospital study, 12.5% of first trimester abortions required stitching for cervical lacerations. (9) Another study found that lacerations occurred in 22% of aborted women. (10) And women under the age of 17 have been found to face twice the normal risk of suffering cervical damage. (11)
"Whether microscopic or macroscopic in nature, the cervical damage which results during abortion frequently results in a permanent weakening of the cervix. This weakening may result in an “incompetent cervix”, a serious medical condition in any pregnancy that often results in miscarriage or premature birth. According to one study, symptoms related to cervical incompetence were found among 75% of women who undergo forced dilation for abortion. (12)

To put this risk in context, cervical damage from previously induced abortions significantly increases the risk of miscarriage, premature birth and complications of labor during later pregnancies by 300 to 500%! (13) The reproductive risks of abortion are especially acute for women who abort their first pregnancy. A major study of first pregnancy abortions found that almost half, or 48%, of women experienced abortion-related complications in later pregnancies. Women in this group experienced 2.3 miscarriages for every one live birth. (14) And another researcher found that among teenagers who aborted their first pregnancies, 66% subsequently experienced miscarriages or premature birth of their second pregnancy. (15)

11. Schulz, et. Al., “Measures to Prevent Cervical Injury During Suction Curettage Abortion”, The Lancet (May 28, 1983),pp 1182-1184. 12. Wren, “Cervical Incompetence—Aetiology and Management”, Medical Journal of Australia (December 29, 1973), vol 60. 13. Harlap and Davies, “Late Sequelae of Induced Abortion: Complications and Outcome of Pregnancy and Labor”, American Journal of Epidemiology (1975). Vol 102, no.3; Hogue, “Impact of Abortion on Subsequent Fecundity”, Clinics in Obstetrics and Gynecology (March 1986), col.13,no.1. 14. Lembrych, “Fertility Problems Following Aborted First Pregnancy”, eds. Hilgers, et al., New Perspectives on Human Abortion (Frederick, MD.: University Publications of America, 1981). 15. Russel, “Sexual Activity and Its Consequences in the Teenager”,

Oops, forgot reference for 10. “Abortion in Hawaii”, Family Planning Perspectives (Winter 1973) 5(1): Table 8.

"While the actual occurrence rate is hard to determine, Copperman says, "Any time there's a surgical procedure performed inside the uterus, there's a chance for scarring to occur." It typically results from common surgeries such as D&C following miscarriage or birth, as well as intrauterine procedures for fibroid removal, to correct structural abnormalities of the uterus, or cesarean section. Additionally, inflammation and infection from any foreign object within the uterus, such as an IUD (intrauterine device for contraception), may result in Asherman's."

Why is the actual occurance rate hard to determine, SOMG?

Oops, that was from this link:
http://www.integramed.com/inmdweb/content/cons/conceptions/ashermans.jsp

If having more births causes more cervical damage, then why are Michelle Duggar and Wendy Deub not infertile by now? Since they are definitely having plenty of births, you would think they would have so much damage to their cervix's that they would never be able to have a child again.

Michelle just delivered her 17th baby recently, and Wendy delivered her 14th.

SOMG, tell me this. Does having multiple abortions increase your risk for infertility or other issues with the cervix? Is it unsafe to have repeated abortions?

No risk to future pregnancies, eh?

Induced abortion: a risk factor for placenta previa.
Barrett JM, Boehm FH, Killam AP.

A threefold increase in the incidence of placenta previa, from one in 318 deliveries (0.3%) in 1972-1974 to one in 109 deliveries (0.9%) in the twelve-month period ending June 30, 1980, was noted at Vanderbilt University Hospital. Two large groups of patients not present in 1972-1974 were found to be responsible for this increased incidence of placenta previa: one-way maternal transports and women who had had induced first trimester abortions. The frequency of maternal transports having placenta previa was 3.3% (p less than 0.0001), and the frequency of placenta previa in women after an induced first trimester abortion was 3.8% (p less than 0.0001). When correction for maternal transports was made, the endogenous induced first trimester abortion population had a frequency of placenta previa of 2.1% (p less than 0.004), whereas the remainder of the endogenous population had an incidence of placenta previa similar to that found in the years 1972-1974. Induced first trimester abortion is seen as a significant factor predisposing to placenta previa.

PIP: Risk factors associated with the development of placenta previa, a significant complication of pregnancy, are multiparity, advancing age, multifetal gestation, cigarette smoking, and a history of previous abortion. Vanderbilt University Hospital experienced a 3-fold increase in the prevalence of placenta previa, from 1 out of 318 deliveries (0.3%) in 1972-1974 to 1 out of 109 deliveries (o.9%) in the 12-month period ending June 30, 1981. This study retrospectively evaluated the causes for this increase in the frequency of placenta previa. Total number of deliveries, prevalence of placenta previa, maternal age, parity, race, and abortion history were evaluated during the periods 1972-1974 and July 1, 1979 to June 30, 1980. In all cases of placenta previa, the diagnosis was confirmed at the time of Cesarian section. Poisson distribution was used to determine the probability of placenta previa occuring in the various risk groups during 1979-1980, while Chi-square analysis was used to compare frequencies of placenta previa, spontaneous abortion, and induced abortion during the 2 periods. The increased incidence of placenta previa was attributed to 2 large groups of patients not present in 1972-1974: 1-way maternal transports and women who had had induced first trimester abortions. Of 332 maternal transports, 11 (3.3%) had placenta previa (p0.001). Of 210 patients with a history of induced first trimester abortions, 8 (3.8%) had placenta previa (p0.0001). 150 were in their first pregnancy since the induced first trimester abortion, with 7 (4.6%) having placenta previa (p0.001). 4 (2.1%) of 195 nontransport patients who had undergone induced first trimester abortion had placenta previa (p0.0004). Suction curettage was the abortion method performed in 6 of 8 women with placenta previa. Mean time interval between induced first trimester abortion and termination of pregnancy complicated by placenta previa was 42.25 months. Average age and parity of patients was 28.6 years and 1.95 respectively, significantly higher than that of the general population (p0.001). Endometrial curettage may play a role in the increased incidence of placenta previa subsequent to induced first trimester abortion. Limitation of this study is the relatively small sample size. Further research should be done to elucidate the potential risks of induced first trimester abortion.

Induced abortion doesn't cause any problems for future pregnancies, eh.....???

History of induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth in European countries: results of the EUROPOP survey
Pierre-Yves Ancel1,3, Nathalie Lelong1, Emile Papiernik2, Marie-Josèphe Saurel-Cubizolles1 and Monique Kaminski1

1 Epidemiological Research Unit on Perinatal and Women’s Health, INSERM U149-IFR69, 16 avenue Paul Vaillant-Couturier, 94807 Villejuif Cedex and 2 Université René Descartes (Paris V), Maternité Port-Royal, 123 bd de Port Royal 75679, Paris cedex 14

3 To whom correspondence should be addressed. e-mail: ancel@vjf.inserm.fr

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between history of induced abortion and preterm delivery in various parts of Europe, and according to the main cause of preterm birth. METHODS: We used data from a case–control survey, the EUROPOP study; 2938 preterm births and 4781 controls at term from ten European countries were included. Based on national statistics, we distinguished three groups of countries with high, intermediate and low rates of induced abortion. RESULTS: Previous induced abortions were significantly associated with preterm delivery and the risk of preterm birth increased with the number of abortions. Odds ratios did not differ significantly between the three groups of countries. The extent of association with previous induced abortion varied according to the cause of preterm delivery. Previous induced abortions significantly increased the risk of preterm delivery after idiopathic preterm labour, preterm premature rupture of membranes and ante-partum haemorrhage, but not preterm delivery after maternal hypertension. The strength of the association increased with decreasing gestational age at birth. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying subgroups of preterm births on the basis of the complications involved in delivery increases our understanding of the mechanisms by which previous induced abortion affects subsequent pregnancy outcomes.
http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/734

Bethany,
I did tell you how elated I am to see you back on the blog track, didn't I?

Lest I didn't , I'll say it again: "I'm thrilled to pieces you're back defending life. Grill'em."

Carder, that means a lot to me!

Bethany, you can grill me anytime.

hehe that's what I'm here for, doug. ;)

Bethany, that's an interesting study.

One point the article makes is that parity is itself a risk factor for preterm delivery. So I wonder which increases the risk more: abortion or childbirth.

It's also small. Three thousand premature births, how many of them had abortions? Less than half, anyway. So that's at most 1500 abortion patients in the case group of the study.

SOMG, is that all you are going to address? Really?

Hmm, and where's your study, SOMG? You know, the one with more than 1500 abortion patients...

SOMG, this below I gleaned from the Physicians For Life site. It contains objective references:

Pre-term Delivery Increases After Abortion, French Study (BJOG,4/05)
http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/717/26/

Women with Abortion History Are at Increased Risk of Delivering Very Preterm Babies in Subsequent Pregnancies -- [study published in 4/05 issue, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Reuters Health]. Abstract:

Previous induced abortions and the risk of very preterm delivery: results of the EPIPAGE study. BJOG. 2005 Apr;112(4):430-7.
Moreau C, Kaminski M, Ancel PY, Bouyer J, Escande B, Thiriez G, Boulot P, Fresson J, Arnaud C, Subtil D, Marpeau L, Roze JC, Maillard F, Larroque B; EPIPAGE Group.

Epidemiological Research Unit on Perinatal and Women's Health, INSERM U149, Villejuif, France.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the risk of very preterm birth (22-32 weeks of gestation) associated with previous induced abortion according to the complications leading to very preterm delivery in singletons.
DESIGN: Multicentre, case-control study (the French EPIPAGE study).
SETTING: Regionally defined population of births in France.
SAMPLE: The sample consisted of 1943 very preterm live-born singletons ( METHODS: Data from the EPIPAGE study were analysed using polytomous logistic regression models to control for social and demographic characteristics, lifestyle habits during pregnancy and obstetric history. The main mechanisms of preterm delivery were classified as gestational hypertension, antepartum haemorrhage, fetal growth restriction, premature rupture of membranes, idiopathic preterm labor and other causes.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Odds ratios for very preterm birth by gestational age and by pregnancy complications leading to preterm delivery associated with a history of induced abortion. RESULTS: Women with a history of induced abortion were at higher risk of very preterm delivery than those with no such history (OR + 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.0); the risk was even higher for extremely preterm deliveries (

CONCLUSION: Previous induced abortion was associated with an increased risk of very preterm delivery. The strength of the association increased with decreasing gestational age.
PMID: 15777440 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Report on the Study:

Dr. Caroline Moreau et al [Epidemiological Research Unit, Perinatal/Women's Health, Hopital de Bicetre, France] examined records for 1,943 very preterm infants born before 33 weeks gestation, 276 moderately preterm infants born 33-34 weeks gestation, and 618 full-term infants born 39-40 weeks gestation.

Dr. Caroline Moreau et al concluded that women with a history of abortion were 1.5 times more likely to give birth very prematurely (under 33 weeks gestation), and 1.7 times more likely to have a baby born extremely preterm (under 28 weeks gestation). Their findings were reported in the April issue of the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Women who reported having had at least one induced abortion had a 50% higher risk of having a very preterm delivery than women who had never had an abortion. In addition, women who reported having previous abortions had a 70% higher risk of delivering an infant before 28 weeks gestation, compared with women who had never had an abortion.

Abortion increases a woman’s risk of delivering future children prematurely; the risk of very preterm delivery (less than 33 weeks) increases even more dramatically.

The researchers said that previous abortion was associated with an increased risk of very preterm delivery because of premature rupture of the membranes, unexplained spontaneous preterm labor and bleeding not associated with maternal hypertension (high blood pressure) [Reuters Health].

Researchers found no association between previous abortion and very preterm delivery because of maternal hypertension.

Conclusion: induced abortion "increases the risk of preterm births, particularly extremely preterm deliveries;" more research is needed "to assess the differences in the level of risk according to the technique used for abortion".

Preterm and very preterm births have been linked to health and developmental problems in infants, including cerebral palsy.

Previous research, also conducted in Paris, revealed that the odds of a woman delivering prematurely increase with the number of abortions in her history, with the likelihood doubled in women who have had two or more abortions. Other research corroborated these findings, reporting that “the risk of preterm birth increased with the number of abortions,” according to a 2004 study.

Reduce Preterm Risk Coalition researcher Brent Rooney and Dr. Byron Calhoun revealed in 2003 that, in women with a history of four or more abortions, the risk of a future extremely early premature birth (less than 28 weeks gestation) is increased by eight times. In addition, Rooney relates German research that revealed that a history of two abortions caused a five-fold increase in tendency to very premature babies, while three or more abortions increased the incidence to eight times the norm. This massive 1998 study followed women in the German state of Bavaria.

Using data from a 1998 study of German women, Rooney contends that 35 percent of early preemies are in excess of what the total would be if no women had prior elective abortions. All this math means about 27,608 additional babies are born 'early pre-term' yearly to U.S. women, based on the estimate that 11 percent of U.S. women have had one abortion, and nine percent have had two or more abortions.

Of these 27,608 pre-term babies, roughly four percent will be born with cerebral palsy, Rooney argues. This translates to an extra 1,100 cases of children born with cerebral palsy in the U.S. annually.

Pre-term pregnancies contribute to a host of problems, including an increased risk of infant death, and as mentioned above, a significant increase in the tendency for the baby to develop cerebral palsy.

Rooney cites statistics indicating, “The cerebral palsy risk in extremely early premature birth babies is about 38 times higher than in the overall population of newborns.”

Rooney warns that the vast bulk of American women are never warned about the higher future risk of premature deliveries resulting from prior induced abortions. The only state Rooney is aware of that gives full informed consent by warning women of this danger is Texas.

See the Texas Department of Health's Women's Right to Know booklet at: http://www.tdh.state.tx.us/wrtk
Read a full PDF version of the above including references at: http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf
[from 1,100 Excess Brain Damaged Babies are Born

At least 49 studies have demonstrated a statistically significant
increase in premature births (PB) or low birth weight (LBW) risk in
women with prior induced abortions (IAs). This paper will focus on
the risk of early premature births (EPBs) ( and extremely early premature births (XPBs) ( tion). Large studies have reported a doubling of EPB risk from two
prior IAs. Women who had four or more IAs experienced, on aver-
age, nine times the risk of XPB, an increase of 800 percent.
These results suggest that women contemplating IA should be
informed of this potential risk to subsequent pregnancies, and that
physicians should be aware of the potential liability and possible
need for intensified prenatal care.

Studies that showed a statistically
significant increase in preterm birth after induced abortion

*Ancel P-V, Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, Renzo GCD,
Papiernik E, Breart G. Very and moderate
preterm births: are the risk factors different?
1999;106:1162-1170.

Barsy G, Sarkany J. Impact of induced abortion
on the birth rate and infant mortality.
1963;6:427-467.

Berkowitz GS. An epidemiologic study of
preterm
delivery.
1981;113:81-92.

BognarZ,CzeizelA.Mortalityandmorbidityasso-
ciated with legal abortions in Hungary, 1960-
1973.
1976;66:568-575.

CzeizelA, Bognar Z, Tusnady G, et al. Changesin
mean birth weight and proportion of low-
weight births in Hungary
1970;24:146-153.

Drac P, Nekvasilova Z. Premature termination of
pregnancy after previous interruption of preg-
nancy.
1970;35:332-333.

Furusawa Y, Koya Y. The influence of artificial
abortion on delivery. In: Koya Y, ed.
Tokyo: Family
PlanningFederationofJapan;1966:74-83.

Br
JObstetGynaecol
Demografia
Am J Epidemiol
AmJPublicHealth
. Br J Prev Soc Med
CeskGynekol
Harmful
Effects of Induced Abortion.
48

Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 8 Number 2
Summer 2003

Hogue CJ, Cates W Jr., Tietze C. Impact of vacuum aspiration on future
childbearing:areview.
1983;15:119-126.

Lumley J. The association between prior spontaneous abortion, prior in-
duced abortion and preterm birth in first singleton births.
1998;3:21-24.

Martius JA, Steck T, Oehler MK, Wulf K-H. Risk factors associated with
preterm ( and multi-variate analysis of 106,345 singleton births from 1994 statewide
perinatal survey of Bavaria.
1998;80:183-189.

Zhou W, Sorenson HT, Olsen J. Induced Abortion and subsequent preg-
nancyduration.
1999;94:948-953.

Berkowitz GS, Papiernik E. Epidemiology of preterm birth.
1993;15:414-443.

Muhlemann K, Germain M, Krohn M. Does an abortion increase the risk of
intrapartuminfectioninthefollowingpregnancy?
1996;7:194-198.

Daling JR, Krohn MA, Miscarriage or termination in the immediately pre-
ceding pregnancy increases the risk of intraamniotic infection in the fol-
lowingpregnancy
1992;136:1013SERAbstracts.

Picard E, Robertson G.
.Scarsborough,Ontario:Carswell;1996:264-265.

Zimmerman R, Oster C. Assigning liability: insurers' missteps helped pro-
vokemalpractice�crisis.�
2002;June24:A1.
Luke B.
.
NewYork,N.Y.:TimesBooks;1995.
Ring-Cassidy E, Gentles I.
Toronto,
Ontario:deVeberInstitute;2002.

Smith WS, Camfield C, Camfield P. Living with cerebral palsy and tube
feeding:apopulation-basedfollow-upstudy.
1999;135:307-310.

Thorp JM, Hartmann KE, Shadigian E. Physical and psychological health
consequences of induced abortion: review of the evidence.
2003;58(1):66-79.

Legal Liabilities of Doctors and Hospitals in
Canada
WallStJ

Every Pregnant Woman's Guide to Preventing Premature Birth
Woman's Health after Abortion.
JPediatr
Obstet
GynecolSurvey

Grindel B, Lubinski H, Voigt M. Induced abortion
in primigravidae and subsequent pregnancy,
with particular attention of underweight.
1979;101:1009-1114.

Harlap S, Davies AM. Late sequelae of induced
abortion: complications and outcome of preg-
nancy and labor.
1975;102:219-224.

Henriet L, Kaminski M. Impact of induced abor-
tions on subsequent pregnancy outcome: the
1995 French national perinatal survey.
2001;108:1036-1042.

*Hillier SL, Nugent RP, Eschenbach DA, Krohn
MA, et al. Association between bacterial
vaginosis and preterm delivery of a low-
birth-weight infant.
1995;333:
1737-1742.

Hungarian Central Statistical Office.
Perinatalishalazons. Budapest: Hungarian
CentralStatisticalOffice;1972.
Koller O, Eikhom SN. Late sequelae of induced
abortion in primigravidae.
1977;56:311-317.

Kreibich H, Ludwig A. Early and late complica-
tions of abortion in juvenile primigravidae (in-
cluding recommended measures).
(Jena)1980;74:311-316.

Lang JM, Lieberman E, Cohen A. A Comparison
of Risk Factors for Preterm Labor and Term
Small-for-Gestational-Age Birth.
1996;7:369-376.

Lean TH, Hogue CJR, Wood J. Low birth weight
after induced abortion in Singapore. Presented
at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American
Public Health Association, Washington D.C.,
Oct.31,1977.

Legrillo V. Quickenton P, Therriault GD, et al.
Effect of induced abortion on subsequent re-
productive function. Final report to NICHD.
Albany, N.Y.: New York State Health
Department;1980.

Lerner RC, Varma AO. Prospective study of the
outcome of pregnancy subsequent to previous
induced abortion. Final report, Contract no.
(N01-HD-62803). New York: Downstate
MedicalCenter,SUNY,January1981.

Levin A, Schoenbaum S, Monson R, Stubblefield
P, Ryan K. Association of abortion with subse-
quent pregnancy loss.
1980;243(24):
2495-2499.

Lieberman E, Ryan KJ, Monson RR,
Schoenbaum SC. Risk factors accounting for
racial differences in the rate of premature birth.
1987;317:743-748.

Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 8 Number 2
Summer 2003

Lumley J. Very low birth-weight (less than 1500g)
and previous induced abortion: Victoria 1982-
1983
1986;26:268-272.

Lumley J. The epidemiology of preterm birth.
1993;7(3):477-498.

Lumley J. The association between prior sponta-
neous abortion, prior induced abortion and
preterm birth in first singleton births.
1998;3:21-24.

MartiusJA,SteckT,OehlerMK,WulfK-H.Riskfac-
tors associated with preterm ( and early preterm ( and multivariate analysis of 106 345 singleton
births from 1994 statewide perinatal survey of
Bavaria.
1998;80:183-189.

Meirik O, Bergstrom R. Outcome of delivery sub-
sequent to vacuum aspiration abortion in
nulliparous women.
1982;61:415-429.

*Michielutte R, Ernest JM, Moore ML, Meis PJ,
Sharp PC, Wells HB, Buescher PA. A
Comparison of Risk Assessment Models for
Term and Preterm Low Birthweight.
1992;21:98-109.

Miltenyi K. On the effects of induced abortion
1964;7:73-87.

Mocsary P, Csapo AI. Effect of menstrual induc-
tion on prematurity rate.
1978;1:1159-
1160.

Mueller-Heubach E, Guzick DS. Evaluation of
risk scoring in a preterm birth prevention study
of indigent patients.
1989;160:829-837.

Obel E, et al. Pregnancy complications following
legally induced abortion with special reference
to abortion technique.
1979;58:147-152.

Pantelakis SN, Papadimitriou GC, Doxiadis SA.
Influence of induced and spontaneous abor-
tions on the outcome of subsequent pregnan-
cies.
1973;116:799-805.

Grindel B, Lubinski H, Voigt M. Induced abortion
in primigravidae and subsequent pregnancy,
with particular attention of underweight.
1979;101:1009-1114.

Harlap S, Davies AM. Late sequelae of induced
abortion: complications and outcome of preg-
nancy and labor.
1975;102:219-224.

Henriet L, Kaminski M. Impact of induced abor-
tions on subsequent pregnancy outcome: the
1995 French national perinatal survey.
2001;108:1036-1042.

*Hillier SL, Nugent RP, Eschenbach DA, Krohn
MA, et al. Association between bacterial
vaginosis and preterm delivery of a low-
birth-weight infant.
1995;333:
1737-1742.

Hungarian Central Statistical Office.
Perinatalishalazons. Budapest: Hungarian
CentralStatisticalOffice;1972.
Koller O, Eikhom SN. Late sequelae of induced
abortion in primigravidae.
1977;56:311-317.

Kreibich H, Ludwig A. Early and late complica-
tions of abortion in juvenile primigravidae (in-
cluding recommended measures).
(Jena)1980;74:311-316.

Papaevangelou G, Vrettos AS, Papadatos D,
Alexiou C. The effect of spontaneous and in-
duced abortion on prematurity and
birthweight.
.1973;80(May):418-422.

Pickering RM, Forbes J. Risk of preterm delivery
and small-for-gestational age infants following
abortion: a population study.
1985;92:1106-1112.

Pickering RM, Deeks JJ. Risks of Delivery during
20th to the 36th Week of Gestation.
1991;20:456-466.

Puyenbroek J, Stolte L. The relationship between
spontaneous and induced abortions and the
occurrenceofsecond-trimesterabortioninsub-
sequent pregnancies
1983;14:299-309.[This is the only
study in this complete list that uses second-
trimesterabortionasasurrogateforPTB.]

Ratten G et al. Effect of abortion on maturity of
subsequent pregnancy.
1979(
:479-480.

Richardson JA, Dixon G. Effect of legal termina-
tion on subsequent pregnancy.
1976;1:1303-1304.

Roht LH, Aoyama H, Leinen GE, et al. The associ-
ation of multiple induced abortions with subse-
quent prematurity and spontaneous abortion.
1976;23:140-145

SchoenbaumLS,MonsonRR.Noassociationbe-
tween coffee consumption and adverse out-
comes of pregnancy.
1982;306:141-145.

Seidman DS, Ever-Hadani P, Slater PE, Harlap S,
etal.Child-bearingafterinducedabortion:reas-
sessment of risk.
1988;42:294-298.

Shiono PH, Lebanoff MA. Ethnic differences and
very preterm delivery.
1986;76:1317-1321.

Lang JM, Lieberman E, Cohen A. A Comparison
of Risk Factors for Preterm Labor and Term
Small-for-Gestational-Age Birth.
1996;7:369-376.

Lean TH, Hogue CJR, Wood J. Low birth weight
after induced abortion in Singapore. Presented
at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American
Public Health Association, Washington D.C.,
Oct.31,1977.

Legrillo V. Quickenton P, Therriault GD, et al.
Effect of induced abortion on subsequent re-
productive function. Final report to NICHD.
Albany, N.Y.: New York State Health
Department;1980.

Lerner RC, Varma AO. Prospective study of the
outcome of pregnancy subsequent to previous
induced abortion. Final report, Contract no.
(N01-HD-62803). New York: Downstate
MedicalCenter,SUNY,January1981.

Levin A, Schoenbaum S, Monson R, Stubblefield
P, Ryan K. Association of abortion with subse-
quent pregnancy loss.
1980;243(24):
2495-2499.

Lieberman E, Ryan KJ, Monson RR,
Schoenbaum SC. Risk factors accounting for
racial differences in the rate of premature birth.
1987;317:743-748.

SlaterPE,DaviesAM,HarlapS.Theeffectofabor-
tion method on the outcome of subsequent
pregnancy.
1981;28:123-128.

Van der Slikke JW, Treffers PE. Influence of in-
duced abortion on gestational duration in sub-
sequentpregnancies.
1978;1:270-272.

Vasso L-K, Chryssa T-B, Golding J. Previous ob-
stetric history and subsequent preterm deliv-
ery in Greece.
1990;37:99-109.

World Health Organization. Special Programme
of Research, Development and Research
Training in Human Reproduction: Seventh
AnnualReport,Geneva,Nov.1978.
World Health Organization Task Force on the
Sequelae of Abortion. Gestation, birthweight
and spontaneous abortion.
1979;1:142-145.

*Zhang J, Savitz DA. Preterm birth subtypes
among blacks and whites.
1992;3:428-433.

Zwahr C, Voigt M, Kunz L, et al. Relationships be-
tween interruption abortion, and premature
birth and low birth weight.
1980;102:738-747.

Zhou W, Sorenson HT, Olsen J. Induced abortion
and subsequent pregnancy duration.
col1999;94:948-953.

*Studies that included spontaneous and in-
duced abortions but did not report PTB/LBW
riskseparatelyforeach

Here is my reference link:
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:pujuow2q7wAJ:www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf+Previous+induced+abortions+and+the+risk+of+very+preterm+delivery&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&client=firefox-a

SOMG, Top that.

One point the article makes is that parity is itself a risk factor for preterm delivery. So I wonder which increases the risk more: abortion or childbirth.

I guess we know now.

Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1990 Jun;4(2):391-405. The effect of pregnancy termination on future reproduction.Atrash HK, Hogue CJ.
A variety of conditions have been anecdotally ascribed to induced abortion, including subsequent reproductive complications. Since most women obtaining induced abortions are at the beginning of their reproductive life, the effect of induced abortion on subsequent reproduction becomes a very significant one. Our review of the literature confirms findings reported previously. First, except in the case where an infection complicates induced abortion, there is no evidence of an association between induced abortion and secondary infertility or ectopic pregnancy. Second, the risk of midtrimester abortion, premature delivery and low birthweight in women whose first pregnancy is terminated by vacuum aspiration is not higher than that in women in their first pregnancy or women in their second pregnancy whose first pregnancy was carried to term. However, the risk of having a premature delivery or a low birthweight baby tends to be higher (but not significantly) among women whose first pregnancy is terminated by induced abortion when compared with women in their second pregnancy than when compared with women in their first pregnancy. This suggests that an induced abortion does not protect a women against the known risk of low birthweight for first-born offspring. Finally, women whose pregnancy is terminated by dilatation and evacuation may have an increased risk of subsequent premature delivery and a low birthweight baby. Very little has been published and no conclusions can be made regarding the effects of instillation procedures and repeat abortions on future reproduction. In conclusion, except for the association between pregnancies following dilatation and evacuation procedures and premature delivery and low birthweight, no significantly increased risk of adverse reproductive health has been observed following induced abortion.

Also, Bethany, the review you cited was published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, a well-known pay-to-publish rag. If the results are meaningful, why didn't they publish in a real journal?

The authors of all 49 studies listed are biased, SOMG?
Or just one you cherry picked?

Well without links I cannot determine the size of any of the 49 studies. My bet: small.

Oh SOMG, use Google, it's great!

LOL I picked one at random, and here's what it said:

Abstract

To assess epidemiologic risk factors for preterm birth subcategories in an urban population, we undertook a study of 31,107 singleton livebirths that took place at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City between 1986 and 1994. We subdivided the preterm births into preterm premature rupture of the membranes, preterm labor, and medically induced births. We obtained information regarding the preterm subtypes and their epidemiologic risk factors from a computerized perinatal database. Adjusted odds ratios showed an increased risk for all three preterm birth subtypes in women who were black (1.9 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 2.1 for preterm labor, and 1.7 for medically induced births) or Hispanic (1.7 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 1.9 for preterm labor, and 1.6 for medically induced births), those who had had a previous preterm birth (3.2 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 4.5 for preterm labor, and 3.3 for medically induced births), those who began prenatal care after the first trimester (1.4 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 1.3 for preterm labor, and 1.3 for medically induced births), women who had been exposed to diethylstilbestrol in utero (3.1 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 4.1 for preterm labor, and 3.7 for medically induced births), patients with preexisting diabetes mellitus (2.2 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 2.4 for preterm labor, and 9.5 for medically induced births), and those with antepartum bleeding (2.8 for preterm premature rupture of membranes, 3.6 for preterm labor, and 3.7 for medically induced births). Other sociodemographic, constitutional, life-style, and obstetrical characteristics differed across the groups. Variation in some of the risk factors among the preterm subtypes implies that epidemiologic assessment of the more specific outcomes would be advisable.

That's an interesting abstract, Bethany. Do you notice something about the risk factors for pre-term birth? The risk factors listed are Blacks, Hispanics, previous pre-term birth, DES exposure, diabetes, and antepartum bleeding; previous induced abortion is NOT listed as a risk factor.

LOL, indeed.

SOMG, oops with the bold. It went all over the place.

So Bethany, why didn't they include previous induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth?

They listed the risk factors right there in the abstract, and abortion isn't one of them.

SOMG that wasn't the whole thing, that wasn't the part I meant to paste there. Darn.

That may be but my question still stands: Why didn't they list previous abortion as one of the risk factors?

I don't know, SOMG. I must have made a mistake in posting that link, thinking it pertained to our discussion and it did not.

But I would love it if you could respond to the rest of the articles I posted before I even got into the long list of references. Premature subsequent birth is only the tip of the iceburg.

BTW, mistakes like that are common for me. I've always been a little bit of a scatterbrain. lol

Hmmmm.... The American Pregnancy Association lists "multiple first-trimester abortions or one second- or third-trimester abortion" as a medical risk factor for premature delivery. They do not give an odds ratio, though. It could be a small effect.

What I'd like to see would be a study like the Danish Abortion-Breast Cancer study by Melbye et al.

In other words, follow the entire population of Denmark for three decades and really get some good numbers.

There's no reason this couldn't be done with already existing data.

Conclusion: induced abortion "increases the risk of preterm births, particularly extremely preterm deliveries;" more research is needed "to assess the differences in the level of risk according to the technique used for abortion".

Bethany, even if this is true, what is it to a woman wanting to end a pregnancy, necessarily?

If she does not want to have kids in the first place, then it's a moot point.

Even if she does, she may well want to accept the risk, no different from accepting the risk that continuing pregnancies and giving birth presents.

Doug

SOMG, sorry that I got a little cocky earlier today. I have not had the best day. Hope that you are having a good evening. We'll continue these discussions on another topic I guess, since this one is unfortunately bumped down.

Bethany, here's hoping that all your days are good.