CDC: 2009 abortion rate and ratio the lowest ever
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.
Have I mentioned the Pill decreases libido and chemically alters a woman’s brain so she picks the wrong mate?
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.

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).
I think you have it backwards. The denominator for ratio is thousands of live births, and vice versa.
CDC leaves out five states from this figure, including CALIFORNIA. This has been the case since 2000.
Also the CDC number is about 65-69 percent of the Alan Guttmacher Institute number.
ALSO………. the home abortion drugs are causing “miscarriages” which we finish up at the hospitals. Two of these are Cytotec and accumulated doses of Ella. Those “miscarriages” are not able to be counted in the abortion statistics.
Unfortunately, I don’t really think we can trust any abortion numbers without mandatory reporting. It’s a case of garbage in, garbage out.
In fact, it’s because pro-choicers aren’t shouting for mandatory reporting of abortions and adverse outcomes that I know they are not really interested in women’s health and safety. If you cared about women, why would you not want accurate information about the safety of one of the most common women’s procedures?
Plan B, an over-the-counter, oral-contraceptive and also a class one carcinogen, states it prevents fertilization, but in reality, prevents implantation, and this lie is very much repeated and “common-knowledge.” It’s use is on the rise and is going to be more-and-more popular and I think these statistics may reflect this.
The epidemic is accelerating.
The ratio is probably the best measure of our effectiveness, since a society with 10000 abortions and a million citizens is generally more prolife than one with 5000 abortions and 100,000 citizens. But of course the raw numbers are not just data points but each represents a precious, irreplaceable life, horribly abused in the womb for the supposed benefit of those living.
Abortion is decreasing because people are acting more responsibly and either abstaining or using effective contraceptives. It may also be decreasing because of Crisis Pregnancy Centers and sonograms.
Hi Navi, I just quoted the CDC’s definition of rate and ratio for abortion. If anything’s backward, it’s the CDC… which we all know… :)
Might have been a typo or inconsistency somewhere in the report then. This is what I keep getting:
Some people appear oddly resistant to good news. A 5% drop is something to celebrate. It is also not overly difficult to understand why such a drop would happen. Crisis Pregnancy Centers, sonograms, an increasing movement toward abstinence and other things could figure into this drop.
What about the rate for Morning After Pills? Obama is pushing Plan B. Emergency Oral contraceptives RAISE the abortion rate, not lower them. When a woman takes the Morning after pill she may be aborting her baby without her knowledge.
Why did the abortion rate drop, exactly? are more women taking birth control pills (abortifacients), or is smarter sex timing involved, or is abstinence on the rise?
Someone should ask the HARD questions.
The American Association of Pediatrics wants Morning After Pills prescribed to ALL TEENAGE GIRLS at annual checkup.
THE HORROR! D:
I recall some people predicting that if Obama was elected in 2008 that the number of abortions would be less than if McCain was elected. I recall a prominent Catholic justifying his vote for Obama partially on that basis. I shall sit quietly and await an apology for all the nasty things said about him here.
Which of Obama’s unique policies (that is, things McCain wouldn’t have supported if he had become president) do you attribute the abortion decline to? Do you have a link to the peer-reviewed study that backs up your claims?
Appointing two anti-Roe justices also could have reduced abortions, probably by more than 5%.
“I recall some people predicting that if Obama was elected in 2008 that the number of abortions would be less than if McCain was elected. I recall a prominent Catholic justifying his vote for Obama partially on that basis. I shall sit quietly and await an apology for all the nasty things said about him here.”
We’ve had record years of life-friendly legislation passed on the state level. But Obama did kill bin Laden.
In reference to what Pharma mentioned above how abortion stats are never going to be truly accurate since they don’t include ‘home made’ abortions: when I was in high school (and I know I’ve mentioned this here before) I knew would overhear girls talking about how their birth control pill was too much of a hassle to take every day or they didn’t like the side effects so they’d just fill the script and then take several at a time the day after they had sex, a homemade ‘plan b’. I even heard one girl saying how she just took “a bunch” the day before her period was supposed to start to ‘make sure it started on time’.
“Why did the abortion rate drop, exactly? are more women taking birth control pills (abortifacients), or is smarter sex timing involved, or is abstinence on the rise? Someone should ask the HARD questions.”
Looks like someone just answered.
“We’ve had record years of life-friendly legislation passed on the state level.”
So, on a state by state basis, can we see a correlation of drop in rate in those states that passed some kind of pro-life legislation?
”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.”
Well, really that amount of increase is 50% because 50% of 200 is 100, and the population increased from approximately 200 to 300, an increase of 100.
Also, much of the increase is among older people who would be too old to have abortions. People live longer by about 7 years or 10%. Anyway a population that has 40% more women of childbearing age would have 40% more abortions if they have the same average behavior pattern. I don’t know how consistent those CDC stats are with respect to number of states reporting. I seem to recall that some states used to report and are included in the earlier numbers but not later. Is that right?
Okay, hypothesis on the trend. What comes to my mind is that a certain psychological profile tends to want fewer kids. So, after a few generations, there are fewer of those people because now they can absolutely avoid having children if they choose not to, so we end up with fewer who don’t want kids. Nature provides that those with the highest sex drive will have the most kids and further those with the best care taking impulses will have the best survival rates. Birth control adds another selection criteria, the human will. With the introduction of absolute control, we see a rapid transition towards only those who want kids having them, rather than simply those who have sex have kids. Consider the effect when only those who want kids have them and their kids on average want kids too. That is a much different world. It is a world with ever fewer child free types. That means the rebound could be incredibly robust. It would be interesting to compare our experience to what happens in Russia because they have had a very long span of very high abortion rates.
It is a world with ever fewer child free types.
Don’t want none-a-them types, nosiree.
Well, on the whole, they’re just obnoxious, spoiled, tantrum-throwing adult-children themselves. Have you ever read any posts from “childfree” communities on various forums? *shudder*
There are always the exceptions to the rule, of course. I’ve known a few child-free people who have been respectful of the choices of others and who didn’t act like children were demonic alien chest-bursters who only exist to intentionally ruin your life and everything you love. Those people are great, and I can get along fine with them.
This might a stupid question, but why are the CDC’s numbers so much lower than Guttmacher’s? Guttmacher estimates 1.21 million for 2008. That’s 47% more than the CDC estimates. What gives?
Andrew, the CDC excludes states where reporting isn’t mandatory (Alaska, California, Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, and West Virginia). California alone is a very populous state, accounting for 17.7% of abortions.