On September 17, Amie Newman, managing editor of the pro-abortion site RH Reality Check, wrote a piece focusing on an underdiscussed pregnancy complication: bed rest.

Newman never went there, but I suspect her underlying interest in writing such a piece was to reinforce the pro-abort notion that pregnancy is problematic. On that note Newman did quote a source stating, “having a baby is currently a leading cause of ‘poverty spells’ in this country.'”

Newman’s solution was for the federal government to force employers to offer paid maternity leave. Currently the Family & Medical Leave Act mandates that companies with 50+ employees allow “12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave per year.”

Financial times in America being as they are, I pointed out in a comment that a better focus of Newman’s article would have been prevention.

In fact, preventing the need for bed rest while pregnant would be good in all regards, no? – not only for the pregnant mother but also her husband, children, employer, family, friends, neighbors, hospital, and most of all baby.

Newman listed 3 reasons pregnant mothers are placed on bed rest: “premature labor, premature rupture of membranes and elevated blood pressure.” Specifically, according to the Cleveland Clinic, these are the pregnancy complications that most often result in the recommendation of bed rest:

  • Preeclampsia—a potentially dangerous condition that includes swelling, increased blood pressure, and protein in the urine
  • Vaginal bleeding—may be due to placenta previa (low-lying placenta) or abruption placenta (premature separation of the placenta)
  • Premature labor—labor that begins before the baby is considered full term
  • Incompetent cervix—a weak cervix that may open prematurely
  • Cervical effacement—thinning of the cervix
  • Multiple pregnancy—carrying two or more babies
  • Previous pregnancy complications—can include fetal loss, stillbirth, or premature birth
  • Poor fetal development
  • A test or procedure that indicates a medical complication]

I have highlighted the complications where abortion is implicated.

About premature labor/incompetent cervix/thinning cervix I linked in my comment to Amie the August American Journal of Obstetricians and Gynecologists article citing abortion as a risk of preterm birth.  That article cited a British Journal of Obstetricians and Gynecologists study concluding 1 induced abortion increases this risk by 36% and more than 1 increases the risk by 60-90%.

I wrote that aside from studies and statistics it is only logical to conclude forcibly dilating the cervix for an abortion may weaken it for the next go-around. It does not just snap back into place.

I commended Amie for her concern for low-income pregnant mothers who are put on bed rest, reminding her that according to Guttmacher a disproportionate number of poor women abort:

In addition, I wrote, a disproportionate number of African-American women experience preterm labor (2x whites) – because a disproportionate number of African-American women get abortions (5x whites).

Abortion and promiscuous sex are also implicated in the rising number of mothers pregnant with multiples, another reason for bed rest. This phenomenon is due to the increase in fertility treatments, which is often due to a history of STDs, Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, and abortion.  Ways to prevent these would be to practice abstinence/fidelity and avoid abortions.

I didn’t write this but found the risk of placental abruption increases 2x with a history of medical abortions.

I knew my comment would be unwelcome. They always are at RH. But I post for any with ears to hear. And I appreciate that despite our differences RH doesn’t censor me.

But anyway, despite the fact I was careful to substantiate my comments with links to sources pro-aborts would respect, next came this comment from Jodi Jacobson, RH’s editor-in-chief:

A note about Jill Stanek


The Editors note that Ms. Stanek’s claims and her misuse of data are regularly contested and refuted by well-recognized medical and public health associations, experts in the field, individual clinicians, and research findings.

Just two examples here are her misuse and misrepresentation of data on the accessibility of reproductive health services in low-income areas, and associations between a past abortion and the need for bed rest for reasons she is attempting to present above.  There is no valid relationship between having had an abortion and the risk of or need for bed rest in a subsequent pregnancy.

As I said, I expect these sorts of blow-offs from RH.  But I still think it’s important that we engage. We can only pray that what we say sinks in with someone, even Amie and Jodi eventually.

[Top photo via Baby Zone]

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...